Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of the participants and the moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. In an alternate reality, I'm a truck driver named Bubba. Big surprise. Don't say we didn't warn you.

We could see a Dragon Quest Online game on the same network as FFXI.

The situation's just glistening with irony, isn't it?

Onward.

My problem is that between time and money constraints, even game-of-the-year titles that everyone, friend and foe, says are brilliant, don't get played. Still, there's a certain amount of wisdom to your approach - in many European countries where news media comes in a wide variety of political flavors, it's not uncommon for someone to buy the paper that most nearly matches their views, and the paper that completely disagrees with their views. You're simply doing something similar, to get a degree of perspective on the situation.

Sounds about right - box art doesn't make that big a difference with me (because strangely enough, if I think I'll like a game then any box art becomes beautiful) but word of mouth from people I trust goes a fairly long way. As far as rentals go, tho, it's often the case that once I've rented a game, I don't feel the need to buy it because I've already tried it out.

And best ads? Hmm... might be a good topic for tomorrow, but for now I'll have to go with Final Fantasy 8 - it's amazing what a simple date and logo can do when you're already rabid with interest for a title.

Yep, that's it: brand names mean significantly more to me than nearly anything else. Of course, brand names for games are somewhat different from brand names in, say, clothing - plenty of people make jeans just as good as Levis, and it's easy to figure that out since a pair of jeans is a pair of jeans is a pair of jeans. Each game is pretty much unique to itself, so a proven developer doesn't guarantee anything... but it is a reasonably good guide to what a title might be like. It's always good to try new stuff, but for the most part, sticking with a proven winner's not a bad idea.

I have no response to that. Still, good to know Drew's safely in Japan, causing havoc to their plumbing system, I guess.

We get letters like this one a fair amount at the GIA, people hyped up about some rumor they heard and demanding to be told that it's true or false. Now, obviously we don't have time to lay to rest everything that gets made up by some bored 7th grader on a message board somewhere, but in general your chances improve if you

A)Use correct spelling, punctuation, and capitalization, and
B)Have a paragraph break or two every once in a while.

Yep, sad to say, the stuff your English teachers make you do in essays does have some bearing on the real world.

As for "famous Hollywood actors and actresses", I wouldn't sweat it too much. Some of the hype for the FF movie is not great, and even assuming some teenybopper star wanted to be in the game, I doubt Square would be willing to shell out the necessary funds. It's taken them nearly 10 years to hire a decent translator, you think they're going to pay 10 times more just to have Jennifer Love Hewitt as Yuna?

I don't buy the hardwired argument all that much - it's true that in real life, everyone tends to be more concerned with protecting women and children (and rightfully so) but in games, a certain type of egalitarianism sets in. Many female characters in games don't seem to fit the dainty damsel stereotype, so when things happen to them, it's no worse than when something happens to a guy. (For example, as fond as I was of Agrias, when things happened to her I pretty much assumed she could take care of herself.)

However, many women in games are portrayed as being weaker, more vulnerable, and more sensitive (sometimes to an unholy degree), so when something happens to these characters, it makes a bigger impact. I'll try not to name names, but in FF7-9, it's often the most feminine, idealized characters that have things happen to them. It's likely something of a catch 22 - when the writers want something important to happen, they make sure it happens to someone who the audience will feel for the most, but at the same time, that character may be made more vulnerable, so whatever action will have an even greater impact.

Or something.

Ideally, the fun factor would be a great way to rate games, but it's often tied in with the rest of the ratings, and it shouldn't be.

Think about it: how many times have you seen a big name title get across the board marks for graphics, sound, gameplay and fun factor, even though the game itself was superbly produced but didn't set your mind on fire? (For me, Chrono Cross and FF9 fit the bill, even though both of those games are quite excellent.) There shouldn't be any stigma attached to getting high marks in everything but fun factor, but if everything else is high, the reviewer seems to feel that FF must be up there too.

Alternatively, there are plenty of games that are a blast to play, even though they don't set any records for production values. If graphics, sound, gameplay and fun factor were the categories, Vib Ribbon would probably deserve a 4, 2, 6, 10, but I guarantee that no professional reviewer would give the title that, just because it'd mean he enjoyed a singing crack rabbit more than the latest Capcom Vs. game. And that just can't be, can it?

Closing Comments:

Let's go with Garion's topic for tomorrow: best ads for a game. See you then.

-Chris Jones, driving a truck with his high heels on