Seventy-Three Percent

It's just as I feared. I feel so rotten. I'm halfway through Bioshock now and the enthusiasm is waning. It's just not grabbing me in ways that this acclaimed darling of 2007 should be. I glance around apologetically as reviewers tut and call me a charlatan. I'm sorry!

I can admire its brilliance. The stylised art deco aesthetic decaying into madness. A history told in scenery not cutscenes. The clunk and sizzle of messy, brutal combat for survival.

I can't quite stomach the scavenger hunt for items. Every drawer and corpse rifled through for a round of bullets isn't quite my style. Nor is the transparent linearity of the story. Each new location you arrive in predictably locks the exit to the next then puts you on a quest equivalent of killing ten boars, or so it seems to me. I never experienced that artificiality in System Shock or Ultima Underworld, so I wonder why now.

Those design choices are forgivable in the context of the second paragraph, however. No, perhaps the fault lies with me. You see, this being a much talked about game, there are twists in the plot that have provoked much discussion. Me being me, I've tried to avoid them as much as possible, and while I've closed my eyes and covered my ears information has slipped through. I've never heard directly what happens in the end, but so much has been inferred that I can pretty much put the pieces together and know it. It was tragically inevitable, so it appears.

It shouldn't be like that, I should still be able to savour the journey, not the destination. Yet just knowing sullies the experience somewhat, like stumbling upon your Christmas presents and having to act surprised come the day. It's just not the same, is it?.

On the subject of spoilers, the gaming community as a whole has been pretty good in keeping things quiet for those who don't want to hear. Bioshock's an exception, really, probably because it's got a story that deserves being discussed - not something that happens often. As long as you're prepared to keep out of official discussion, you're pretty safe. I mean, can you believe I managed to get around to playing Metal Gear Solid 2 about three years after release without knowing what goes down in that game? That's crazy. I even tend to stop reading previews, sometimes the meat of reviews a few months before release to come into a game pleasantly surprised, just as I do movies. I always like to come into a game fresh. A risk seeing as I'm the type of guy who likes to wait six months for a game's price to come tumbling down. Considering I've heard the final part of Bioshock may be the worst, I'll be interested to see what my reaction is come that time. More on this later.
 

Warning: May contain a few spoilers, but I'll try to keep them vague.)

It's been a month or so since I finished Grand Theft Auto IV, so it's about time I wrote down some overall thoughts about the game. Biggest question, first. Does it deserve the hype? Does it deserve those perfect tens? It's easy to be cynical, yet there are times when GTAIV dazzles and amazes, when the world immerses you completely and your actions inside of it enthrall. Rockstar North have built a complimentary world that at times towers above its rivals.

Then again, it's easy to be lost in the hype, and there are times when the game fails to live up to expectations and you can see the flaws and you feel a little shameful for rating it so highly.

It's largely dependent on how you play it. I went through it twice consecutively, something I hardly ever do with games. Two reasons for that: one for the Achievement to complete the game in under thirty hours, and two, rather less ashamedly, to make different story choices than those I'd made. I was interested in going back and trying again, changing my mind over who I would kill or not kill as the game demands at certain points. As you quickly discover, however, there's no ultimate result to making those decisions in the game and no pointers on how you should play it. It's just a gut feeling. Saving someone doesn't necessarily mean any consequences beyond a bonus cut-scene or two later down the line. It's also marred by the fact that the effect is diluted by the surrounding missions where Niko Bellic has no qualms in killing dozens of people to fulfill a goal. You feel like the game's trying to placate you as was Ralph Fiennes' Nazi character in Schindler's List, implored by Oskar Schindler that forgiveness can be just as powerful as execution; an ultimately futile gesture in a sadistic world.

The two most significant assassination choices give you access to a little more power or events but they're never necessarily the 'right' answer. Nor are they of consequence story-wise. No sooner have you executed your decision than it takes any significance to the main story away. It means nothing to you as a person. All the way up to the ending, nothing of how you've acted informs the ultimate decision and nothing can foreshadow what happens either way. Playing through twice and you can see that it's damned if you do, damned if you don't. Emotionally, that's the intent, but as a whole it doesn't rely on the player's investment in morality, more's the pity.

Incidentally, there's something I like with how the game doesn't end after the credits roll. It literally picks up right where you stood and took your final revenge. Your phone rings and friends console you with kind words before leaving you alone to contemplate your now directionless life in a quiet park. Before you decide to steal a forklift and ride it into the river, but that's beside the point.

Anyway, I wanted to talk about I played the game, and playing once for fun, twice for speed, it's easy to see how the game falls apart a little under duress. Rockstar North clearly had a vision of how the player should progress. If you do all it wants - go on dates, follow the suggestions of your contacts as and when they come - the game world works. It feels like living a day to day existence as much as a GTA could in the midst of its many limitations. Ignore all that however, and the cracks really show. Besides the one or two mission-critical events, the social events don't have to be touched at all, again making no consequence to the plot and without those the game begins to feel empty as you grind away on missions.

It's a shame where dates are concerned, actually, because while the minigame activities are almost all terrible, simplistic or repetitious, the actual act is worth going through to hear what the characters say. Every few times you meet up, a dialogue will spring up discussing their thoughts and feelings, fleshing out the characters a bit more. That's what made it worth while, not wasting time on an easy game of darts when I could be somewhere else.

Taking all that away, all the diversions and side quests and fooling around, the second play through wasn't as interesting as the first. GTAIV only works as a coherent whole. It's not hard to see that a lot of its constituent parts are underdeveloped or uninteresting, yet they're set in a world that just begs to be explored and exploited. Sadly, it's not always rewarding. There are some glimpses: one of my favourite goals off the beaten path was finding vehicles by consulting pictures and location clues sent to you on your phone. I found that a far better treasure hunt than the lengthy search for pigeons. You feel like you're doing your own work rather than allowing for the handholding that the game insists on too much. A lot more of that could have gone a long way towards setting the game on the pedestal it doesn't quite deserve.

I've said quite a lot, so I'll save other comments for around the time of the downloadable content. I should mention the combat briefly, though. A much needed improvement, but still prone to sticking you against cover when you don't want it to. It felt brilliantly tactical on the first play through. A shame it lost some of it charm when you realise that most battles can be won by cutting straight through the middle with an automatic weapon and auto targeting.

Grand Theft Auto IV's world is a stunning visual and aesthetic achievement, though at times perhaps too awesome to accommodate the interactivity you'd truly desire. The GTA series comes with a lot of baggage and the 'fourth' game has to bear this weight on top of its own innovations. It can only really improve and iterate it seems. So while we get all the best parts of a much respected series, it also comes with some of the more archaic, needless bits (only saving at safehouses, no replaying completed missions, etc.). The improvements are all well and good, but the series is already becoming too set in its ways. Perhaps next time we need a true shake-up of the foundations as well. I don't think that'll happen, though. Do you?

Crackdown spoiled it for me. A vast open area with the same size and scope of Liberty City begging to be explored and the power to go where you want. I don't think I've experienced quite the giddy exhilaration of agility and movement  your super-powered hero offers as he leaps and bounds from tall building to tall building with gravity-defying speed and grace as I have when playing Crackdown. It's a great feeling.

In comparison, Niko Bellic's more traditional perambulatory nature is too slow, too frustrating. It's not like Crackdown. Not at all.

Of course, you could excuse his nature by saying that the vehicle empowers the player - as opposed to Crackdown, which made the vehicles the least appealing mode of transport - were it not for the fact that going on foot is an essential requirement to fully explore the nook and crannies, parks, alleys, piers rooftops and subways of this magnificent city.

Now, I'm aware of falling victim to hyperbole now we're on the post-release critical backlash part of the GTAIV experience ride, but I can say in my heart that I think this is the best representation of a city I've ever played in. The attention to detail is astonishing, the diversity of character in the different districts overwhelming. There's an overload of information in every block and a distinct lack of repetition. Stand at any junction and you're rewarded with a unique viewpoint encompassing all that a city should be. Naturally, it's a condensed experience; once you get in the air you realise the city doesn't quite match the scale of its real world inspiration of New York, but when you're back down, immersed in the busy streets staring at the hustle and bustle of city life,  there's not much else that matches what it accomplishes.

A place like that, where every location has its own identity just begs to be explored. I turned off the waypoint feature pretty early on. I wanted to find my way through the city on my own terms and to navigate by landmarks rather than led by the nose by a guiding line on a radar (impressive as it is, and I still rely on the radar way too much; there's really no way around it). I want to learn this city, to make it my own. I want to know all the shortcuts and what's round that corner and on top of that building. I've always been a fan of exploring for exploring's sake and the best game worlds, from Oblivion to Thief encourage that desire in me. Here in Liberty City it's no different: each alley seems pregnant with possibility that there's something down there I've never seen before, a little special something that made the trip there worthwhile. Nothing amazing, just a mural on a wall, an interesting piece of architecture or a throwaway gag is enough. Something that makes me think the designers cared that somebody would make the effort to come down this way.

There doesn't really need to be a gaming reason to see what lies there, although I'll admit it does help. Where Crackdown had its orbs, and previous GTAs had their packages (not to mention the dreaded underwater shells in San Andreas), GTAIV has its pigeons. Two hundred of the buggers to seek out and eliminate and only a little red glow and a quiet coo-ing to indicate their presence. Then again, I've only found ten in the thirty or so hours I've played the game. And the reason for that? Crackdown spoiled it for me.

I want to explore, to see everything I can't see by car, but it justs feels so slow and awkward. I want to see it all and yet I'm restricted in my speed. Of all the little disappointments with GTAIV the one I put to the forefront is the baffling decision to make walking the default speed. It's not even a brisk walk, it's a saunter, maybe even a stroll designed to make Niko look good rather than designed to help the gamer move about. Holding the run button speeds things up, but it's not enough. The fastest you can get is sprinting by constantly tapping the run button instead. That's a little more like it but hardly practical for the fingers. And that's not to mention veritcality and how, while the climbing animation is great, Niko's mired in a world where Prince of Persia acrobatics have no place and thus no way to make scaling tall buildings a fun reality beyond a convenient set of stairs or a helicopter.

It's a shame that pigeon hunting, even exploring in general is more of a chore than it should be, then. It's not the central focus of the game, it's just a relatively small thing in a title that still mightily impresses me despite exposing its flaws very quickly, yet how much better it could have been had we been given agility on par with Realtime World's noble effort to take the open world city in a new direction. My one hope from now is that someone knocks up a mod that unlocks this ability in the forthcoming PC release. Do so and I'll praise you to high heaven.

Hello again. Writing about videogames for a hundred days, which is what this blog was once used for, can take a lot out of you, let me tell you. No wonder I haven't come back here for so long. I've dipped my toe into the blogging waters since then, with a short tenure on WiiWii.tv, a Nintendo blog, but I've been a bit quiet on that front.

Still, right now I've got a hankering to write again. Partly because I've got things to talk about, partly because the best advice people can give you to improve your writing skills is to, y'know, write. So I want to talk about the recent games I've played, and sometimes other stuff. What I don't want to do, though, is go off and write long, befuddling review texts. That's what put me off in the first place. Instead, I want to focus on short pieces about certain aspects of games I've been playing, or general overviews. They might not be about up-front new releases or anything groundbreaking, but this blog's as much about me shaping my opinions as it is people reading it.

Anyway, without further ado, a quick word on Grand Theft Auto IV, my game du jour:

Yes, I pay the toll. Sometimes. As the cars of Liberty City queue to deposit their coins at the bridges' toll booths, I'll nudge my way to the front and toss $5 away in order to open the barrier and drive through safely. It's not because I don't desire the police attention, that's nothing to worry about - the one star wanted level is a very minor irritation that passes almost as soon as you're off the other end of the bridge. It's less do to with the greater good, either. It's just sometimes it feels good to follow the rules, even if life's normal rules don't necessarily apply in this game.

Morality's a funny thing in Liberty City. It's twisted round in a way you wouldn't recognise and in a world of extremes, the line you draw can be very far out. I don't really like pulling my gun out and shooting innocent bystanders but I've got no qualms in running a few of them over in my car. I'm not deliberately doing so, mind you. I'm just saying that if I'm driving through the park and there's one between me and an immovable wall sometimes it's easier to let them tumble over my bonnet than stop and let them past. Hey, I'll sometimes beep my horn.

Of course, there's no real consequence to your actions, so why not? Your morals are only in your mind and if you're playing an embittered sociopath, why not? Would Niko Bellic do the same, controlling his own character out in the wider world if he knew he wouldn't get caught?

In terms of story, Niko has his morals. As rare as they are, those moments where you choose to let a character live or die show some form of right and wrong, as corrupt as the whole thing is. For the most part, though, he's a loyal puppet ready to roll over for whoever pays him. Early on, his story appears to be about revenge, then gets lost somewhere along the way. More than twenty-four hours in, so tell me, is Niko's distraction in working for drug dealers and assorted criminals for nothing but cash a satire on how money corrupts the American dream and the best intentions or just filler material?

So it's up to the game to provide the moral code. As far as it appears, Niko only kills bad people. There's no mission to slaughter innocents that I remember. Of course, everybody's corrupt in Liberty City in some way, but some more than others.

That said, there's one particular moment in which I felt slightly uneasy. Early on, there's a random mission you encounter in which you have to drive a rich kid to buy drugs. It didn't feel right. The game makes a point of making Niko refuse any substance offered to him to give him the moral high ground. So to actively take someone along to do this felt a little hypocritical. Here's an 'innocent' who asks you to do him a favour - help him score crack - and you just do it. No choice in the matter.

So why does that make me feel worse than running someone over and zooming away from the scene of the crime? He was an addict. He would have done it anyway. No, it's the fact that you're the one helping him on the downward spiral for cash that feels uncomfortable. You're closer to the consequences and you feel more responsible when the choice to refuse is taken away.

Later on, you'll meet the same guy, and he's all cleaned up, so it all ends up fine (as far as his character could be, I guess). Really, though, GTA IV makes a point in showing that morality doesn't always lie in the players hands, as you cruise through the streets, sometimes you don't get to make a decision. Not if you want to get a hundred percent, of course.

Gosh, is that the time already. By jove, I've made it. One hundred days of games. No mean feat, I tell you. I took on this project on a whim, thinking I'd muddle along on the few ideas I had and make up the rest. That was the general idea, and one that led to far too many days up until the crack of dawn wondering what the hell I should be writing about. It's even made me late for work twice - and that's surprising considering I don't start until midday. I said I wanted to use this blog to improve myself somehow, and let me tell you, my procrastinations skills have shot right up. Every cloud, etc.

So, by my own standards, a few filler days, a few days I really liked and everything in between. I at least hope I got a good mixture of topics in there and didn't go on about how expensive games are and how I want to play Xenosaga (they are and I still haven't). Even if I have been stuck for ideas on occasion, there are a few things I never got round to, like my intended praise for PC Gamer, why I like Tim Rogers (and Action Button), an inarticulate article on how old PC graphical styles like SVGA never seem to get fondly remembered, and that bitter, definitive expose on the wholesale corruption behind the scenes of the games industry, but never mind, eh?
 

What, then, can I take from these hundred days? Well, way back at the beginning, Sony had just turned their fortunes around after a period of ridicule. Home and Little Big Planet had just been announced earning them their first steps on the road back to respect. One hundred days later and a stable online service and console have seen them e doing alright, but nowhere near as spectacularly as predicted. As I've said many time over the course of this blog, it's the price that's stopping them. As are the games - it's been a barren hundred days, and I'm willing to bet a hundred and more before I get one.

Their main competitor (although Sony don't seem to admit so), Nintendo, just keep getting bigger and bigger. By contrast, the only thing staying the same is the lack of high-profile Wii releases. They're in the same boat as the PS3 when it comes to new stuff, only the Wii's got a ready and waiting market hungry to snap decent titles up. Enough with the remakes and ports already, though.

As for the DS, well, 'nuff said. If you haven't experienced the joys of importing handheld games cheaply and easily from the far East, I recommend you do so now. The DS has shown, and keeps on showing that it's bursting with brilliance. Any drought on any other system is well-quenched by this little wonder. Er, that sounds a little press release. I don't know what came over me. Must be the giddy fumes of the final lap.

Rumours have also reached us of a redesign for the PSP. The PSP's not being doing much of anything these past hundred days, prepared to sit quietly in the huge shadow of Nintendo. Although, that's probably doing it an injustice since we've had Portable Ops, Crush, Ratchet and Clank. So it's not all bad. Compared to the DS, however, it's scraps from the table. Get better soon, Sony.

Now, Microsoft. I wrote about my 360's red ring error a while back, and the way it scratched my copy of F.E.A.R. It hasn't done anything since, but I'm still counting the days until it does. It seems resentment's continuing to grow towards the amount of faulty machines out there. Will Microsoft issue an apology or an official recall? Stranger things have happened. I did finally manage to fix F.E.A.R. with a WH Smith scratch repair kit and am currently making my way through on Extreme difficulty in order to net some Achievements. Ah, yes, they are addictive aren't they. Nice to see that Live Arcade's still delivering the goods every now and again. Can't wait to play Prince of Persia, and I'll be putting some time aside after I finish this blog to go through Symphony of the Night and Gears of War. So, 360: healthy on the surface, troubled underneath. Fair enough.

And finally, the PC. We're almost at the tipping point where my years old PC will just laugh wheezily at any new game thrown at it. It's been good so far, as long as I'm willing to cut the detail somewhat. But Crysis looks to be the one everybody thinks will change all that. If anything it should help justify a DX10 card and a Vista upgrade in the wake of buying a brand new rig because it doesn't seem that the much-maligned Shadowrun and Halo 2 Vista have been doing that for the latter. Regardless, I think Bioshock will be the game that gets me to finally upgrade, although I said that about Oblivion and I still haven't played it. Oh, PC, why do you stay just out of reach?

Well, I could go on, but I won't. Thank you to anyone who had a browse of this blog these past few months. It probably means a lot more to me than it does you. Thanks to Al Kennedy for putting the idea in my head. And thanks to my girlfriend who I'll have to make up to after all this time spent neglecting her to do this. Sorry! If anyone fancies taking up the torch and blogging about one hundred days of movies or music or whatever, feel free. As for me, I've got a good idea for another specialist blog (one that won't keep me awake all night, hopefully), but that's for another time, and there'll also be a belated update of Seventy-Three Percent sometime soon. Until then, blessed sleep.

When I first started this blog, my intentions were to segue neatly from Al Kennedy's comics theme into me talking about a game that had made the transition to the sequential art medium. Unfortunately, the book that I ordered on Amazon to write about turned out to be out of stock for about two months. It eventually came, in the middle of my epic blog adventure, but by that time I was off on another tangent. So why not leave it to the end, I thought, and sure enough I did. Here it is, then: a few words on the comic adaptation of Metal Gear Solid.

I don't know how familiar you are with the artist, Ashley Wood. If you are, you've definitely decided if you either admire him or loathe his stupid style and wish he'd never been born. Wood's art is very distinctive - his pictures are produced using a combination of broad-stroke painting and rough sketching that sacrifices detail for expression. You can't expect focus in his work, instead he draws a blurred, low-colour view of the world, where backgrounds are hazy or non-existent and ill-defined faces are never the same way twice. It's like peering through a fog and it's often difficult to work out what's going on sometimes. Indeed, it takes a little while to get used to. Once you develop the knack however, it's easier to appreciate. His style's saving grace is the way the lack of clarity allows your eyes to flow easily between panels, picking apart the shapes tointerpret your own vision of events. If you don't fall for that, though, I can see why he might be considered horrible.

Certainly, it's probably safe to say that he's been brought in as illustrator due to his similarities with the original Metal Gear Solid concept artist, Yoji Shinkawa, a factor highly evidenced by Wood's signing on for the art job on the PSP's Portable Ops spin-off. To that end, it's not a million miles away from replicating MGS's secondary visual style. At least not if compared to if they'd got someone of the the spandex-covered biceps and busts oeuvre to do the job. Imagine that.

Anyway, it's been five years or more since I played through the original Metal Gear Solid. Reading through the comic, I'd completely forgotten how much there is to it. It's just set-piece after set-piece, really, as Snake forgets the stealth part of his mission and blunders from one encounter to the next. Perfect for the comic, too. Even better, there's no lengthy Codec conversations to interrupt the flow. Writer, Chris Oprisko's job is to boil that down into essential dialogue that tells the story in the best possible way.

It hasn't forgotten its gaming roots, either. It's difficult to think of Snake's extended episode running around collecting weapons and avoiding guards as anything but a homage to the time spent doing so in the game. Likewise the endless nonsense about key cards and moving to the basement level of the maintenance base or whatever is largely redundant, but they've seen fit to stay true. By staying faithful, it brings back all those fond, old memories of playing through first time without having to listen to everyone drone on about war and philosophy.

Metal Gear Solid, for all its pretentious posturing and overdone dialogue is a flagship series for the PlayStation. Sink into it and it's OTT narrative can't help but drag you along effortlessly. The book does the same, and even though it doesn't offer anything in addition, it's a worthwhile companion piece.

And remember that it's also on the PSP as an animated graphic novel. Having never seen that particular version, I can't comment, but it does look even more lush according to this trailer here. Meanwhile, Oprisko and Wood are just finishing up their version of the MGS sequel, Sons of Liberty. I'm even more eager to pick that one up, if only to see how they handle that game's bonkers ending. Where Wood is concerned, I'd expect nothing less than indistinguishable insanity.

Finally, I did try to buy this in the shops at first, but I didn't know how much it cost. I spent ages looking for the price to no avail until I gave up in frustration and went home. I later found out it was on the back of the book all along! [Insert parping trombone punchline noise here.]

So three days to go and we're winding down here. In that case, let me pick up on two sensationalist stories I've just had a peep at by way of everyone's favourite embargo-breaking aggregate videogames new site, Kotaku. The first has Howard Stringer, chief of Sony, apparently acknowledging the phenomenal success of the Wii and hinting at a combative PS3 price cut. The second rumours that Beautiful Katamari, the next-gen sequel to the ball-rolling insano-thon, will be a 360 exclusive, i.e. not appearing on Sony's console.

If both stories turn out to be substantial, that's interesting news as it appears that Sony are prepared to do a bit of humbling. Looking back at the early days of this blog, I can see that I predicted that they would steadfastly refuse to drop the PS3's price so soon since this would imply that the console is losing out to the 360. After all Sony's hype, they wouldn't want that. I might have been wrong, but it is in my interest to point out that the story fails to mention Microsoft's machine. No, it's just the Wii Stringer compares the PS3 too, somewhat suggesting that while they see Nintendo as a sales competitor, they don't feel that their rivals are superior in all aspects - they still want to proudly stand out as a unique next-gen hi-tech experience, and that's something that they wouldn't want to do by comparing the PS3 with the sales figures of 360.

As for Beautiful Katamari, that's an odd one if it's going 360 exclusive. I don't know how crazy gamers in Japan go for it, but it strikes me as a game that would achieve some moderate success. If this is some clever herding on Microsoft's part, perhaps we're looking at their effort to make the 360 more attractive to Japan. After all, it needs all the help it can get over there, apparently. Blue Dragon shown that it can be done, that (a few) Japanese can buy a console based on a game appealing to their character. On a wider scale, any game that expands the market beyond the 360's guns, cars, and sports is a good thing. Clearly, they need the kind of eclectic market of niche titles that the PS2 had in abundance for both greater success and respectability, and currently that's rather thin on the ground.

If BK's exclusivity is a result of faith being lost in the PS3, then that's rather surprising. I'd have thought it'd be a no-brainer to stick with it. Of course, that's dependent on the drought disappearing soon and the price dropping, but we know both those things are an inevitability some time. Only in the short-term would jumping ship make sense. I honestly don't think PS3 will do a Dreamcast or a Saturn. If that depends on Sony eating some humble pie, I don't know. We just have to remember that the 360 was, lack of decent games-wise, at this exact same point in its life. It'll be exciting to see what happens once things kick off at Christmas and the floodgates open.

As for the price cut. In the UK, £350 would be the sweet spot for the optimistic me. And rumble back in, please. And redesign the PSP. Oh, and sort out that backwards compatibility thing while you're at it.

(Oh man, four days to go and the Internet dies on me. So no entry until this morning. Worry no more.)

So where next for the future of games software? Some would say the future lies in digital distribution, where physical discs cease to exist and all content is downloaded direct to storage. I wholeheartedly agree, but I still have an innate attachment to tangible possessions. Knowing all my games exist in some gigabyte vortex makes me more paranoid for their safety than actual having a copy in a box.

Besides, do we really own these downloaded games in perpetuity? Lose one now and you can easily re-download what you’ve already paid for. But what would happen if, say, Valve with their Steam system went bust and vanished. Would we still have our stuff then, or would it get trapped in the ether?

Likely, it’s not going to happen for a long time, but it still worries me slightly, in the same way I know the battery backup on cartridges will eventually die making traditional play impossible (or at least a sleepless chore).

Digital distribution also completely eliminates the second-hand market, a factor of gaming I’ve been a strong advocate for. By only selling from one source it reduces the competition element. And without that, don’t expect games to come down in price as quickly as they are now.

Although, on the other hand, it may lead to better exposure for those overlooked games. Those games like Gitaroo Man which are off the shelves by the time word of mouth spreads (although that particular game did receive a second wind a while back), shouldn’t have any problems with downloads seeing as it potentially means infinite stock levels. That’s the kind of great service you get with Castlevania: Symphony of the Night for Xbox Live Arcade – a classic open to any 360 gamer and not just the few who spend their time scouring expensive eBay auctions.

For that reason, we can salute the download of games. I’m still a stickler for boxes, though. I wonder if my kind will be a dying breed, pushed out by market forces while sticking to our antiquated methods of purchase like war children who still buy Spam and tripe for sustenance. Will we really see the collapse of game stores in the next few decades? Only at the same time as the music and video stores, I presume. Stranger things have happened. And are we seeing the beginning of an upheaval with iTunes, et al or just a fad? For its few drawbacks, it’d be interesting to see that change take place. If only to see how it would alter the gaming landscape. I'd got out on a limb here and say that the game and music stores of the future will evolve into some kind of community-based hub, sort of like a face-to-face MySpace in which people go for ideas and inspiration, and to share their likes amongst others rather than just a place to pick up a CD. It's an idea at least, although one we won't see for a long time, if at all.

Where do you get your ideas from? It's a common question to ask any designer or artist in an attempt to draw out their influences or highlight their originality. As far as games are concerned, though, should we really expect more of the former and less of the latter?

With games being the last of the large entertainment mediums to hit the streets, they've got something of a reputation for mainly cannibalising from another source: movies. Developers voraciously create games based on films, usually of the action or sci-fi genre, derivative plots structured around a playable framework.

But that's only one part of the overall picture. Gaming also has a knack of copying itself. If one successful idea makes it into market, a dozen more will follow in its wake. Sniper rifles get made famous by Goldeneye, now every gun title has one. Max Payne does slow-mo Bullet Time (that, too, obviosuly copied from The Matrix movies), and everybody else wants to put that as a feature on the back of their box. It's testament to the togetherness of gaming as a one-for-all community that such idea-cribbing is so prolific. Without now getting bogged down in the minutiae of copyright law and what concepts a developer can or cannot take from another, I'd assume such homages are encouraged for the betterment of gaming as a whole. After all, it's not the plot and settings that (usually) get copied, but the playable features: the over-the-shoulder camera from RE4, the slideshow adventure format of Myst, or the shield recharge system of Halo. If it's in one good game, it'll definitely be in another one very soon.

Back to originality again. If narrative-based games take their influences for other media, it must be the abstract games that are truly unique. Games like Space Invaders, Pac-Man, Asteroids and Pong. Basically, those very early titles, influential in themselves, but beholden to no predecessor. OK, we could get into an argument as to whether they're based on any other worldy influences, however the fact is that those kinds of games are the origin of our genre, residing at the base of the huge gaming family tree.

With such a proliferation of features stemming from the gaming's historical foundation and from other mediums, it's not much of a push to say that there is nothing new under the sun as far as games are concerned. Games don't directly influence other media, it only works the other way. But that's a sweeping statement to make (where does Dance Dance Revolution fit in here?), and besides, even if we were to qualfy it, it doesn't matter: it's not about citing your sources but about perfecting what you do with them. Ideas are only as good as how they're executed. Done well and we don't care.

Here's my tip of the day: when you're reading a hundred day blog, and you're in the final stretch, don't upset the balance by moving house and having very limited access to a computer. The usual service shall resume tomorrow. In the meantime, here's a short list of recommendations.

Go to the Home of the Underdogs - My favourite abandonware site. It's full of such PC gems as System Shock, Dungeon Master, Stunt Island...and, quite literally, more! All fully downloadable if you can get over the slightly illegal hump and the increasing realisation that it probably won't come to Xbox Live Arcade (although stranger things have happened). A shame it hasn't been updated for over a year - it'd be sad to see it go. It can also subject your computer to horrific pop-ups if your browser software isn't up to date, so be careful.

Listen to the Games for Windows magazine podcast - I spoke about the 1UP Yours podcast a while back. This is from the same publishing company, but with a PC gaming bent. I was prepared to knock this before listening myself because, well, it's a PC gaming podcast, but the team are funny, enthusiastic and able to turn the world of flight sims and RTS games into something interesting. More than that, they have the ability to go off on a bizarre and hilarious tangent at a whim, which makes it all the more listenable.

Or you could listen to the PC Gamer UK podcast - And that's only once a month, so take your time. Rumours of a PC Zone podcast probably aren't unfounded.

Play Samorost - What year am I living in? I know it's old but it's the first great quick and free game that popped into my head. If you haven't played it, play it now!

Finally, listen to this guy, he knows what he's saying: