No Man's Sky just might be the game I've waited my whole life to play. That's a heavy burden to place on any one game, but it's mostly true. No Man's Sky speaks to many of my childhood dreams. And even now as an adult, I've found myself sifting through a myriad of thoughts triggered by this intriguing game.

I have to establish some history here. At the age of 9, I was certain that I wanted to be an astronaut, and I was very serious about that. My 4th grade science project was making a model of the space shuttle along with a 4 page report on the future of space exploration. I was very practical (for a 9 year old). I didn't expect, or hope to discover little green or grey men. I didn't imagine that we'd eventually discover a hidden race of aliens living under the crust of Mars. But, I did believe that the universe was an awfully big place where quite literally ANYTHING was possible.

Around that time in my life, I desperately wanted to be part of the youth space camp in Florida that develops young minds that dream of exploring the stars. I never got that chance, and that was a sore spot for a brief period of time.

Years later, I would get my very first home console, an Atari 2600. Among the handful of games that I owned was a game by Activision simply titled Space Shuttle. It was a surprisingly challenging flight simulator despite the technology. The shuttle itself was fantastically difficult to control. The color palette was laughable, and realism was a word that didn't really exist when discussing video games from the 1980's. Nonetheless, I loved it.

My imagination filled in the blanks where the game left off. I entertained the notion that I was doing something important by feeding my dream of one day piloting a spacecraft. For many years after that, though my desire to be an astronaut had fizzled, I maintained my fascination with space. I would soak up nearly any game, any movie, any TV show that allowed me to indulge that fantasy. My mind would soar. I wanted to know, what great things were possible OUT THERE amongst the stars?

In my mind, no game ever truly tackled that question with any measure of credibility until the arrival of Mass Effect. Was Mass Effect scientifically sound? Probably not. But, it did allow you to do something that is important even in the application of hard science. It allowed you to SEE, to speculate, to wonder, to question. Like all great works of science fiction, Mass Effect teased us with the fantasy, the possibilities of future space travel.

You may not have like the ending, but you could never forget the game.

No Man's Sky is a much purer experiment in simulating space exploration. It accurately reflects the impossible challenge of "seeing it all". After watching an interview with the game's director Sean Murray, I was impressed to hear that most player's will likely drift through space for considerable periods without encountering other player's. The in-game universe is so vast, that the developer's have deployed virtual "probes" to explore said universe and send back data. Though the parameters for the game have been established by the development team, the precise details of what is out there, and what is possible are a mystery even to them. THAT is just awesome.

I once heard someone on GIO critique No Man's Sky and it's procedurally generated universe, noting that such games rarely fared well in the past. There is also the question of how much celestial diversity will truly exist in that virtual universe.

I almost immediately found this question to be amusing because well... look around. I mean, in our own solar system, the Earth is fantastically unique. Yes, it is quite likely that there are many "earth-like" planets that COULD support life. But our home planet is not a hypothetical exercise. While other planets could, ours actually DOES.

Out there, in the expanse of our solar system, planet after planet and moon after moon feature climates and surface patterns that are repeated over and over again. Hydrogen, Helium, oxygen (yes, oxygen), and nitrogen are some of the most common elements found in space. There's plenty of ice out there too. But not ice like you might drop in your glass of Coca-Cola, or even ice that you'd find in the Arctic icebergs.

Recent photos of Pluto, courtesy of NASA.

And what the surface probably looks like. Feels just like home, no?

It's now speculated that Europa, one of Jupiter's moons, has vast oceans covered with ice, that would completely dwarf our own. But to the average person walking on the surface of those planets, the experience would probably be about as diverse as exploring No Man's Sky. It would be one barren slab of rock after another. Drifting endlessly, with perhaps the occasional rich, life-bearing world every few billion, or trillion light years or so?

And on a purely fantastic, hypothetical note, what's to say that our own universe isn't "procedurally generated"? Do we have enough definitive, irrefutable data to say that it is not? What if the very fabric of time and space are constantly shifting and being rearranged? Time is merely a standard of measure, and space is merely distance.

And finally, there's the ultimate goal that exists within No Man's Sky. The mission to discover the center of the universe. And what would we expect to find? Answers? Even if there were answers, would we believe them? And what if there was nothing? What if that place was just an empty space, devoid of anything remarkable or noteworthy?

Center of the universe? Talk about an anti-climax.

I suppose the fact that one game could trigger questions like these is what intrigues me, because to my recollection, no other game has. There is no space journey that humans will undertake, that will not have taken place,first, in their minds and imaginations. You have to be able to conceive before you can BELIEVE.

If it is the game I hope it to be, I think there is much that No Man's Sky may help us to conceive.

Details, details, details. Part of what has always made video games so fun is the details, the little stuff that in most cases, you might easily overlook. What would the 8-bit glory days of Nintendo have been without hidden areas, coin heaven, the tunnel warps, and it's many other tricks and secrets?

The inclusion of such secrets has been a main staple of some of the most iconic games of the entire history of gaming. It encouraged us to play longer, jump higher, look further, and search deeper. It was what guaranteed that a game would have replay value. Before their were "firmware updates" and "patches", we had hidden levels, secret codes and alternate endings.

For my part, my exploration in games is not always about finding anything particularly useful. Rather, I tend to just enjoy meandering through game levels, scrutinizing every minute detail. In my mind, the level of detail put into a game is directly linked to the degree of love a developer had for the project. Seeing how such passion is revealed through game design is always a fascinating journey.

For me, it all began with Sonic The Hedgehog on the Sega Genesis. When I first discovered some of the hidden areas in the Green Hill Zone, I knew I would be investing all my time in exploring every inch of the game. The original Sonic was just soooo so satisfying to my curiosity. It was pure escapism. I would plug my headphones into my Genesis for better sound, and I would savor every little digital ping, pop, crash and whistle. The sound of the waterfalls. The loud BOING sound when you hit a spring. Or the CLOP sound of trap doors snapping shut. Those were happy times without a doubt.

I gotta tell ya, I've loved games that I'm pretty darn sure NO ONE else would. One of the milestones in my life with video games was when I got my PS One. And I need to tell you, I waited about 4 years longer than anyone else to buy one. But it didn't matter one... little... bit. I could get lost here and go all nostalgic about how great the PS One truly was, but I won't. What I will say is that man oh man, I had some truly great times with that thing.

One of the first games I bought for my PS One was Fighting Force 2. I don't know why, but I had little desire to play the first. Most of the levels for Fighting Force 2 were dark and moody, and that's part of what I loved about it. There was also this strange feeling of isolation as you wandered through the games diverse levels.

Say hello to my laser mounted, semi-automatic, you're about to take a dirt nap, friend!!

I still recall one level where you wander through an office building, collecting weapons and issuing beat downs on wave after wave of baddies (I was particularly fond of using grenades). Anyway, as I walked through the various offices, I would look at each desk and the items on it's surface, trying to imagine what the workers of those offices had been doing.

Another favorite of mine on the PS One was The World Is Not Enough. I had never had the privilege of playing the N64 version, which many claim was superior, but "TWINE" was still a memorable experience. With all of the cool gadgets you get to use in the game, I really felt like I was getting the full James Bond experience. The only sour note being that you couldn't drive Bond's exquisite BMW Z8 convertible.

"What's the pen for? Why... nothing, nothing at all.  Uhrm... I just need you to sign something. Yeah."

It didn't take long before I joined the masses upgrading to the next generation of consoles. For me, it would be the PS2 and Gamecube. And if I thought I had lost myself to games before, nothing could have prepared me for the games I experienced next. Ironically, though I will always favor the Gamecube, the PS2 was definitely a sweet place of memories.

Hitman 2. That was the game that I could literally play all day, and all night, until my eyes were too heavy with sleep and I found myself repeatedly dropping the controller from sheer fatigue. I cannot fully explain to you how much I LOVED that game. It was like virtual hide and seek for grown-ups!

Even from that very first moment, as you crouch atop a hill, across from the Villa Borghese, plotting your next steps. It's just... so perfect.

Just LOOK at the detail on those columns!

I loved how you got to see the world in that game. Walking the snow covered streets of Russia, and actually hearing the crunch of the snow under your feet!!! Exploring the subway stations, and the old buildings. And from Russia to Japan, and Afghanistan to India. I had never, EVER seen such an exquisite, lovingly crafted game in my life. And I knew, I just knew that from that moment on, I was a fan. I can say with great satisfaction, that I have never, ever been dissatisfied with a single game in the Hitman series.

And then, along came a game that I wasn't prepared for. Destroy All Humans. I thought the game would be stupid. I'd heard about it. But reading about it, and experiencing it were two different things entirely.

I must explain to you now, I love the 60's. Not the tumultous, ugly, politically charged, and chaotic sixties. I love the Alfred Hitchcock 60's. The guys in fedoras and ladies in pencil skirts, sixties. The Leave It To Beaver, gosh, golly, gee sixties. A time that evokes memories of Frank Sinatra cool, and cars with big, cushy bench seats and clean lines. some may say that version of the 1960's was a total fantasy. And if so, well then so be it. But it's the version that I love, and Destroy All Humans allowed me to go there and visit for awhile.

Ah Crypto. So angry. So awesome.

Destroy All Humans wasn't all sugar and spice though. They didn't allow you to bury your head in the sand and remain ignorant to what the sixties really were. Always with subtlety and humor, the game allows you to see the ugliness, and  sadness that was always hiding just under the surface of that decade. I loved reading the minds of the towns people, getting intimate snap shots of their lives and pathology.

It's interesting because even though Destroy All Humans was stylistically a platformer, it was also very much a "God game", like RTS classics Civilization or Tropico. You had this broad overview of humanity, and what you saw was frequently unpleasant. It always left you with some small kernel of thought to chew on. You were playing a game, yet compelled to ponder the bigger picture of life itself.

On my Gamecube, there are two games that for me, are simply MAGICAL. Those two games are Pikmin and Harvest Moon.

Let me just start with Pikmin.

If you've never played Pikmin before, all I can say is... please do. Seriously. It is one of the greatest modern joys you can experience.

Pikmin... is so playful, and innocent, and childlike. It is simple and fun in that unique way that usually only children know. It filled me with a natural sense of wonder, and I felt plainly happy all throughout my time with it. Every pond, every tree stump, every patch of flowers is a mystery. If it weren't for the timer in the first game, I would have happily wandered around with Captain Olimar indefinitely, with no particular goal in mind.

I feel that Pikmin somehow tapped into some deeper part of the psyche that we all share. It was, it is a reflection of the natural beauty of our world. Uncluttered by the pretensions that pollute our adult years. How did they get that so right?

Then there's Harvest Moon, which is just a pure joy to play. I never thought I could have so much fun planting and worrying about my tomatoes, cucumbers, carrots and other crops. And then to also be tasked with developing recipes? Between caring for my livestock, milking my cow, making cheese, fishing and visiting the local townsfolk, there was little room for anything BUT happiness.

In Harvest Moon, I'd simply stand in the stream by my farm and watch how the rocks were piled atop one another. I'd watch the skies change as it would began to rain. I'd relish every chance to stroll down to the beach and watch the sun set. I loved the shadows cast by the trees and people walking, as the ground was bathed in softly fading sunlight. It was poetry. In a game.

Simply... gorgeous.

The "ordinary things" that I've loved in games are also the things that have fascinated me in life. Streets of Rage and it's bright lightse, and pseudo-grimy streets. The pur almost beautiful, and yet all at once tragic urban blight of The Last Of Us. The looming grandeur and darkness of Castlevania. The grit and ugliness of Killzone and it's war torn cities.

And within each place, within each setting, it's always the little things. The details. It's the visual cues to questions left unspoken, stories left untold. Who, what, when, where, why?

Man oh man. You gotta love this thing called gaming.

Way back in July of last year, I wrote a blog about Hideo Kojima, and the Metal Gear saga which helped make him a legend in game development and design. Looking back, I feel some measure of regret for the overall tone of that blog, as much of it was based in ignorance about the issues percolating within Konami, and no doubt placing strain on Kojima himself.

It had been my impression that Metal Gear, though it was always delivered with polish and care, had gradually become... empty, perhaps soulless is the word i'm looking for. I had admired that Kojima was always trying to gently prod players to consider the steep cost of war, and the looming horror of nuclear weapons.

But when The Phantom Pain was announced, and relatively soon after Metal Gear Rising, I feared that Meal Gear had become what most franchises eventually become. A tired cash cow being trodden out before the masses one more time for a quick buck. I wanted to believe that Snake's story meant something, stood for something. I mean, yes, the story is mightily convoluted in a way that few stories can match, but there had to be a point, right?

All that fighting, all that death, all the lost friends, mentors, not to mention limbs, all that was for nothing?

Technically excellent, but perhaps too... commercial?

But, as this year's scandal over Konami and it's internal upheavals came to light, I began to understand, or at least think I understood what had happened. It had been reported that Hideo Kojima had long desired to do other things besides Metal Gear, but being that the series was so vital to Konami's bottom line, and keeping their balance sheets in the black, Kojima's hands were tied.

And just imagine, because of that, we've never seen further development of Zone Of The Enders. Where could that story have gone?

But perhaps what is most remarkable to me is that despite the frustrations placed upon him, I believe that Kojima was truly committed to always delivering the best game he possibly could. After looking at Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain, I must say it is astounding what Kojima was able to do, considering the immense amount of pressure he must have been under.

Visually, the new Metal Gear is stunning. The combat seems very satisfying, just as it always has been. And of course, there are always the endless secrets, plot twists and ways of approaching and completing the game. For what I've seen of the gameplay, The Phantom Pain sets a very high bar for other stealth-based games. And I just can't help but thinking, this is the game we got with Konami in disarray and Kojima under fire!

So the question stands: Imagine what Kojima can produce in an ideal environment, working with people he can respect, and doing the projects he's always dreamed of?

If MGS V represents Kojima's best efforts while under stifling pressure, can you imagine what he does in peak form?

Mind blown.

Upon hearing of the reports of Konami's unraveling, the oppressive work environment, and the new direction towards mobile and casino games, it would be easy to stew in all that, and get lost in the negativity. But, I suggest that perhaps Konami's fall from grace has a silver lining. It will be interesting to see where Kojima goes from here. And hopefully, he will show us that Metal Gear was just a hint of what lay in his imagination.

One of my favorite authors, Agatha Christie, wrote some 66 novels, and twelve short stories. Some of my favorite music artists, have produced dozens of albums. One of my favorite animators, Hiyao Miyazaki, has been perfecting his craft since 1969. Considering that Hideo Kojima is only 53, I suspect that there is much more he has to show us.

You well know that one of the most iconic video games of all time is Goldeneye for the N64. And while the game has not aged all that well, for it's time, it was an absolute marvel of design and technology. But you must also understand that when that game debuted, it allowed players to experience an intriguing fantasy.

What was it actually like to BE James Bond?

As a 00 agent, would you have the wits to track down a target, and remain undetected? Would you employ stealth and subterfuge to accomplish your mission, or would you resort to brute violence. Although most people always think of James Bond as the distinguished gentleman who preferred vodka martini's, you may also recall that Sean Connery's depiction of Bond was particularly cold, and efficient when dispatching his enemies, male or female.

The world of 007 has always been a complex one. Here is a man, who must perpetually maintain his aura of charm, and unflappability. And yet, he makes many decisions that are inconsistent with the profile of a cold-blooded assassin. He is paranoid, as is indicated by the fact that he always sleeps with a Walther PPK beneath his pillow. Every time we see Bond anew, there is consistent reason to believe that he is a man at the precipice of alcoholism. Many have described the Bond character as shallow and mysoginistic.

Always and forever the quintessential bond. Cool, calm,and deadly.

Most of the games that have attempted to put the player in Bond's shoes have fallen to one of two extremes. You are either the boring Bond, who is full of tired quips and predictable gadgets, or you are James Bond, the warrior. Her Royal Majesty's personal Rambo, eager to annihilate any threat to the royal crown with all manner of guns, explosives and weaponry.

I think players need something more.

The 007 games made by Electronic Arts during the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube era were well received for the most part. But so much has changed since that generation of consoles. The level of sophistication in story, as well as action, is dramatically increased on today's hardware. And with the looming presence of VR gameplay just around the corner, I think there has never been a better opportunity to revisit the world of James Bond.

But how?

Well, for starters, it always struck me as odd that the Hitman games felt more like a true spy thriller than most 007 games do. I always felt more tension, more intrigue when maneuvering levels as Agent 47. And the openness of the Hitman games always felt more like what a James Bond game SHOULD have been.

As I mentioned in a previous blog, I greatly enjoyed my experience playing through The World Is Not Enough on PS One. In the game, as in the movie, the music was suitably somber and moody. There was truly a feeling that you had to outwit your enemies. Mere gun violence simply would not do. The use of the weapons and various gadgets made sense, and rarely seemed to just be thrown in simply for good measure.

I think there is an emotional connection that needs to be made in any future Bond games. One of the most disturbing levels in the Hitman games is found in Hitman: Contracts. When Agent 47 makes his way into "The Meat King's Party", he makes a grisly discovery that would give any player ample motivation to exercise some extreme brutality on the main target.

And yet, somehow, it was equally satisfying to maintain one's cool, and methodically go about the task of assassinating the Meat King. As much as you want to lose your cool, the Hitman games almost train you to think better than that. In my opinion, that sort of conflict should always be present in any future Bond game.

A truly awful discovery awaits Agent 47.

Bond: The One Trick Pony

Another problem with past 007 games is that his mission objectives are usually too linear. The true intrigue of traditional spy fiction is how often many smaller objectives must be resolved before the main character could take on larger ones. James Bond would fare well in an open-world setting these days, especially since that is the very nature of the work he does.

We are supposed to believe that Bond is the ultimate cosmopolitan, and yet the games that we have seen him in feel too... small, too limited. Watchdogs was another game that hinted at that sort of depth when it was in development, and we all know how that went.

007 Is No Saint

One of the more intriguing aspects of Daniel Craig's portrayal of Bond, was that he was utterly committed to his work. A work that left an indelible stain on the soul, no matter how one would attempt to wash it away. But we have never seen that side to Bond in games.

As November inches ever closer, and the release date for Spectre approaches, I find myself hoping that we might get a next gen Bond game that is just as evocative as Goldeneye was in it's heyday. But if it doesn't happen, hey, there's always 47.

We all know about IT. Gamers are intimidated by IT. Even video game journalists are not safe from IT. So what is IT? The dreaded backlog. If you've been gaming for any length of time, you know about this. These days especially, with the abundance of consoles and platforms to choose from, a backlog can grow from a small handful of favorites to a virtual mountain of software sitting in your house, or on your hard drive.

Like David Byrne from The Talking Heads (that's an 80's reference), "you may ask yourself, well... how did I get here?"

I recently took a moment to think about how my personal backlog got so out of control, and truth is, the answer  is a little loopy. I mean, it's one thing if you buy some games and then suddenly experience a drastic change in lifestyle. That's probably about as good of an excuse as any. But me? (sigh)

If any of you have read or followed my blogs, you know that my love of gaming begin on the Sega Genesis. And like most kids, I didn't have a steady income that allowed me to casually purchase whatever games I wanted. But, I loved games and I wasted no time snatching up games on sale whenever the budget allowed.

I think at my peak, I had 20 games for my Genesis. The number is fuzzy because I also had a bad habit of trading them in at The Wherehouse (another reference from a bygone era) for whatever pittance ($5-7) they'd give me. Of the few that I remember, my favorites were:

Sonic The Hedgehog

Midnight Resistance

Lightning Force

E-Swat

Flashback

Raiden Trad

Ranger X

Superman (yes, really)

Sonic Spinball

Shinobi 3

and Phantasy Star 3

Not a huge list. Certainly manageable. Let me just say, I played the hell out of those games. The beauty of games of the 16-bit era was that you could realistically buy, play and beat everything that launched in a typical calendar year. So it really wasn't all that unusual to end up getting lost in long conversations with friend's about finding secret rooms, or uncovering a glitch that gave you an significant edge. Everyone COULD talk about the ending of a game because most everyone HAD beaten the game.

I was no exception. I beat every game I owned. And then... the budding completionist in me began trying to attain impossible scores, or going on speed-runs.

I remember once reading about Street Fighter 2 purists who believed in developing their skill in the game to the point that they never needed to use special abilities or projectiles. And they could beat ANYONE.

Yeah.

These were the type of guys who scoffed at anyone who couldn't complete a bullet-hell shooter without dying once. Their skills were the stuff of legend. I suppose that on some level, I secretly dreamed of mastering a game, any game, in that way.

Anyways, at some point I got bored, and stopped buying as many games. In fact, after some disappoint from my investment in a Sega CD, I took a significant break from video games altogether.

When I came back to the gaming scene, it was with the Gameboy Advance. I never intended to be a "hardcore gamer". I just wanted to experience the tried and true, simple fun with which Nintendo's Gameboy had become synonymous.

My first game was Castlevania: Circle of the Moon (my first Castlevania), and I played it religiously. I even started buying Nintendo Power (a first), just to stay abreast on the latest games for the GBA. As before, I found that beating most games for my GBA was a short, but satisfying affair. And this time around, I was gainfully employed and able to splurge a bit more on my new favorite hobby.

And that's where it started.

I bought A LOT of games for my Gameboy Advance. To this day, my collection of games for my GBA is still a source of pride, and frustration. Where will I EVER find the time?

But here's where it gets really nutty. Often times I would buy a game,  start playing, and discover that I loved it. And, I would play that game until I was about 50% through it. And then, I would simply stop. Why? Here's where the crazy comes in.

I didn't want the game to end.

There have been many games that I've played where coming to the end was like reading a phenomenally good book, or watching a movie that just blows your mind. Like the first time I saw Inception. For at least what must have been a month, I kept thinking about all of the subtle themes and questions that were touched on in the film.

And I wanted more. I wanted to KNOW more. What happens with Cobb? Was it all just a dream?

And so, an obsession was born.

No, this is not my real backlog. But, you get the point.

To this very day, to my everlasting shame, I literally have at least ten games that I've been dying to play, and yet I won't pick them up because... well, what if I beat them? Then what? What if I run out of good games?

Even though my backlog has reached such proportions that I am in no danger of EVER lacking for games to play, I nurture this latent fear that I will. I find my thoughts drifting back to those days when I had beaten every game I owned, and there were no more secrets to discover, no more scores to beat, and that... bothers me. So somehow, maintaining an impossible backlog reassures me, comforts me, in some bizarre way.

But that IS kinda crazy. And it isn't really logical.

The funny thing is that I see powerful metaphors between gaming and life all the time. And in this case, the message seems perfectly clear.

No matter how hard we try to do everything, we're always going to leave a stupid amount of stuff UNDONE. So, you've just gotta make your best choices and see it through. Sometimes your best is enough. Other times, you may ask yourself "how did I get here?"

Rock on, David Byrne!

It's 2:48am, and I just got home from a night out at the movies. This, despite having to be at work in roughly 6 hours. But, I must say the evening felt well spent. Though I didn't know it would go that way. In fact, my enjoyment of the latest Bond film comes as a complete and pleasant surprise.

Skyfall, the previous Bond film, was a bit underwhelming for me. Though the story seemed fairly well crafted, I just never felt fully invested in the story. Now, with hindsight, it almost feels that Skyfall was perhaps simply a build-up for Spectre, and a convenient way of transitioning several key characters, such as M, Money Penny, and Q.

No matter. I've been waiting a long time for Spectre. From the first announcement of the film's title, to the full-length trailer, I felt confident that Spectre would be a worthy entry in the never-ending saga of "Commander" James Bond. That is, until I read early reviews by professional movie critics, which I can only say you shouldn't, if you haven't already.

To read the early critic reviews for Spectre, you would think that this was the worst Bond movie since the Timothy Dalton days. Practically every minute, and dare I say insignificant detail, is dissected and over analyzed, and it becomes plainly clear to me why I almost never trust movie critics. They live in an altered reality.

Still the most boring Bond EVER!!!

Over the years, agent 007 has been maligned for many reasons. Some of those critiques have been fair. The early reviews for Spectre were hardly better. Bond is too sensitive, the supporting cast are bland. The main villain is not compelling. The movie drags and is boring. The dialogue is terrible. And on and on and on it goes.

Truthfully, I suspect that the real problem is that James  Bond represents one of the last symbols of an era that did not embrace political correctness the way people do today. They are so many ways one could choose to be offended by Bond's character if you were so inclined. After all, political correctness is very much about undertaking the foolish task of trying to please everyone.

And yet, I must say Spectre is easily one of the best Bond films yet, and the most progressive. There is a strong theme of redemption in this film. And, I personally felt that Daniel Craig did some of the very best acting ever for a Bond film.

Spectre truly lets you go behind the walls of Bond's mind for once. You get to see his vulnerability, though he is still very much the powerful, blunt instrument. There are a few scenes where Craig delivers his lines with those icy blue eyes, and a casualness that leave no doubt that he is a cold-blooded assassin. And yet, there's more. This time around, there is a strong theme of choice and finding the strength/courage to move beyond habit.

The Spectre that Bond seems to struggle with seems to be both real and metaphorical. There is the shadowy organization that manipulates world affairs, and then there is the spectre of Bond's past, his conscience, which most would presume to be long dead.

The actions scenes were reliably fantastic. Most early reviews would lead you to believe that the only action worth seeing is at the beginning of the film. Don't believe it. Spectre is loaded with suspense and edge of your seat moments. The pacing is spot on as well. There are moments where the film slows down to get deeper into the storytelling aspect, but hey, that's a good thing. If you wanted to see non-stop explosions and gun fire, you could have rented a Michael Bay movie.

The cast of Spectre was particularly, and surprisingly well-chosen. Monica Bellucci is a vision of beauty and sophistication. She masterfully communicates emotions with her eyes as well as her beautiful accent. Lea Seydoux is radiant, and complex, and much, much more enjoyable since I last saw her in Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol. Dave Bautista as Hinx is just downright frightening. Literally. From the time you first see him, you know that Bond is going to be in serious trouble.

And finally, there is Cristoph Waltz. And there is a reason why I started a new paragraph just for Waltz' character, Oberhauser. There are only a handful of actor's who have masterfully captured the nature of true evil on film. Alan Rickman's Hans Gruber comes to mind. But what links all great portrayals of villains is a fundamental understanding of a simple truth.

This is one scary dude. No, trust me. SERIOUSLY.

True evil, comes in the form of a gentleman, or some other non-threatening form. The most sincere villains have very carefully crafted, but ultimately thin veneers behind which they hide. Underneath that veneer is a spring loaded device ready to unleash violence and madness.

Cristoph Waltz' Oberhauser practically hums with a coiled rage and hate that seem to vibrate from behind his eyes. His voice is ever so polite, and yet absolutely filled with malevolence. And it's his expression of truly base emotions from behind a crooked smile that is so compelling.

I walked out of Spectre thoroughly satisfied and completely irritated with the negative reviews that had almost convinced me to skip the movie. One of the chief accusations against Spectre was that it held no continuity to the rest of the Bond films.

Honestly, who are these blow hards that write these reviews?

Prior to watching Spectre, I watched On Her Majesty's Secret Service with George Lazenby (my first time) on Hulu. I was amazed at how good it was, and how it was far more entertaining and compelling then many of the later Bond films.

Spectre captures much of the charm of the classic Bond, but also allows Bond's character to mature and be fleshed out. After the movie, I sat over an Apple Crisp and coffee at the nearest Denny's and mulled over whether Spectre was my favorite Bond film. The jury is still out on that, but I will say that watching Spectre was truly a pleasure. Critics be damned.

Afterthought: One thing DID bother me. The Bond theme. Sam Smith's falsetto's are just a little bit too strident in certain parts of the song. I was actually happy when the intro was over.

In virtually any aspect of life, cheating is almost always a big societal taboo. Whether it's counting cards, filing taxes, your marriage (heaven forbid), or a heated game of Scrabble, cheaters are usually subject to some measure of disdain. Depending on the offense, that disdain can range from mild, to positively lethal. Unless you're a gamer.

Video games are probably one of the few, perhaps only areas where cheating is not only viewed with legitimacy, but also a source of fond memories and good, simple fun. Even before Pro Action Replay, Code Breaker, and Gameshark, there was the Game Genie. Before that, it was simple codes like the now ubiquitous Contra code:  ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A Start.

Even from the earliest days, most gamers have always had a soft view on cheating. It wasn't something you necessarily wanted to do. But sometimes... sometimes, damn it, it was something you HAD to do. When you were frustrated to the point of smashing your TV screen with a controller, or ready to take your NES to the backyard with a ball peen hammer in the other hand, THAT was the time to step away. Once you cooled down, you broke out that cheat device, loaded a few choice codes, and began to rain down absolute death upon every friggin' opponent/obstacle in your path.

An absolute essential of early gaming.

Eventually, when the smoke cleared and you finally saw the end credits began to scroll, there was no greater satisfaction than knowing that you had a secret weapon that no stinking console could ever do anything about. The computer could only throw it's most complicated routines at you, up to the limits of it's programming, but it was a hopeless cause. Your pride had been wounded, and now it was time to issue a digital BEAT DOWN!

Remember that? Most of the time, having the ability to access infinite lives, infinite weapons, skip stages, or execute one hit kills usually felt good. You justified it in your mind that somehow, this wasn't really cheating. It was leveling the playing field. It was payback.

In fact, if the game was impossibly hard (here's lookin at you Battletoads), breaking out the cheats was almost a must. No one was going to fault you for using that final ace in the hole after suffering such brutal defeats.

At the peak of the 8-bit/16-bit era, most game companies had help hotlines printed in their instruction manuals, offering to guide you to victory for a minor fee (actually not so minor). This wasn't cheating, right? In fact, to assuage any feelings of guilt, such "help" was usually referred to as "tips" or "hints". But cheating? Cheating? Of course not.

Nowadays, there's very little talk of cheat codes or cheat software. They both still exist, but gamers seem to prefer play the natural way, or not at all. Cheating, which was once a completely acceptable way of playing a game, is now noticeably less popular.

What changed? In two words: the internet.

Cheating has never been easier.

As is perhaps the case with many taboos, maybe the appeal of cheat codes and cheat software was that they were not as easy to come by. Usually, any good variety of cheat codes was going to cost you money, whether it was in a book, or through a "help line". This also created a feeling of you being in on some special secret, even though there was hardly anything secret about most cheats.

But now, cheating has a very different face. Now when you hear of cheats, or "hacks", there is often a negative connotation attached to it. Cheaters and hackers are the people on Xbox Live who ruin your kill streak in Call of Duty. They're the players who cheat to win in multi-player games or infect networks with lethal viruses.

The words cheating and hacking are now commonly linked with thief, and criminal. There are exceptions. Gamers watch speed runs for various popular games. Almost everyone still enjoys news of a new "glitch", or bug that allows players to have a special advantage in any given game. But overall, cheating is not viewed kindly.

Many game developers have begun to include unique ways of frustrating players who insist on cheating, especially if they attempt to do so in a multi-player setting. Within that context, I fully support that action. But otherwise, I'm not so sure I'm okay with developers tightly governing the way I choose to play a game I've paid for.

This should make any online cheater cringe.

This whole topic came to my mind because just recently, I finally finished Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. I know, I know. It's an old game.

Anyways, the experience... was bittersweet.

Overall, GTA: Vice City is one of the most fun games I've ever played throughout my time as a gamer. For a game that is more than ten years old, the level of polish, attention to detail, and simple fun are still remarkable. but there is one thing, one... accursed... thing that truly, TRULY soured the entire experience for me.

Prior to playing Vice City, I had played Grand Theft Auto 3, and found that trying to complete the Ambulance challenges was more frustration than I cared for. I went to the internet and found a series of codes that could be entered without special software. I entered several of them, and did not notice until it was too late that ONE of those blasted cheat codes could "corrupt" your game, IF you saved it. I saved it.

And... I found 99 out of 100 packages, and nothing more. Forever.

An excellent way to drive yourself insane.

For a completionist, as I frequently tend to be, this was like... like having someone put itching powder in your underwear. It sucked.

To make matters worse, I couldn't have possibly known that the same memory card I'd used for GTA 3, would lead to more frustration down the road. I took my time with GTA: Vice City. I was determined to have a better experience this time around. I was patient, methodical. I played the game the way I would Hitman or Splinter Cell. Brains over brawn. Strategy over guns blazing.

Then, one day my PS2 had a totally random, totally unexpected crash. It just... froze.

"No prob.", I thought.

"I'll just restart the ol' PS2, load my last save, and I'll be back in business."

When I tried to load my last save point, I found that it and one other save were simply... gone.

I tried rebooting 3 or 4 times, nothing. My saves were gone. Weeks of progress, from an already SEVERELY limited schedule, GONE. I threw down the controller, turned my PS2 off and didn't touch it for two weeks. I was that disgusted. Later, I went back and did a marathon run that brought me to the point I'd last saved. 

As I continued to progress, I can't explain why, but I had this nagging little feeling like something was wrong. I just didn't know what. Eventually, as I had done with GTA 3, I found 98 of the 100 hidden packages in the game, and I had no clue where to look for the last two.

Frustrated, and wary of using cheat codes again, I went online and used a strategy guide to find one more package. The last package, could not be found. I even used a map, and in-game screen shots to double and triple check the location of all 100 packages. Nothing.

Yeah. That was almost the look on my face. Almost.

Then, it dawned on me. I was using the same memory card I'd used for GTA 3. Some sites claimed that a corrupted game save would carry over the same problems to Vice City. I was... speechless.

In a fit of exasperation, I ordered a Pro Action Replay, and used cheat codes to 100% the whole dang game. And the worst part? By that point, I really didn't care. I wasn't happy. Whatever fun I'd had with the game had been been sullied by one simple bug, triggered by one cheat code. Later, i would discover that Rockstar had deliberately created the bug to prevent "cheaters" from getting 100% completion in the games.

I think that was what irritated me the most. After paying full retail for a SINGLE-PLAYER game, I can't use cheats without being penalized for it? Unbelievable. So, yeah. I used the cheats. I beat the game. But did I win? I don't feel like I did. And in that way, I guess cheaters never really do (win, that is).

I can still remember the first time I watched one of the Godfather movies. I started the trilogy backwards, with the Godfather III, and never progressed beyond that. I had no desire too. For me, watching the final film covered about as much as I'd ever care to know. That wasn't to say that I didn't enjoy the movie. I did. It was excellent. But, it was heart-breaking and overwhelmingly sad at many points. The desire to know the entire story had left me.

Often times, when I relate that story to friends in discussions about movies, they will inevitably say, "Oh man, you have to watch the first two. I can't BELIEVE you've never seen the original Godfather." As though my life is somehow diminished by not experiencing said film.

The ending alone is one of cinema's most excruciating.

And so it has been with many things in my life. Especially with gaming.

I love the final two games in the Jax and Daxter series, as well as Ratchet & Clank for PS2. But I have deliberately skipped the first game in both trilogies. Why? For the surprisingly simple fact that I didn't like the art, or visuals of the first entries.

The Prince of Persia games received lots of critical acclaim, but I never found them compelling until the release of "The Two Thrones", the last in the series to appear on PS2 era hardware. That's even overlooking that franchises' earliest beginnings on PC.

It dawns on me that for any given sequel, prequel, or whatever, everyone has their personal favorite. And sometimes, the reasons behind those preferences would seem pretty thin to anyone else. But, just as has been my experience with movies, books, and video games, I've often found myself wondering, "Did they really need to make a sequel/prequel?"

In recent years, it has often felt as though there is this general sentiment that it's somehow wrong to leave well-enough alone. It's not enough to have one, ONE shining experience that stands out in your mind. No. You must have a part 2, or a part 3, or what happened before.

It's somewhat troubling, because I can't help but wonder if our collective imaginations have become fantastically lazy. In times when sequels and prequels were not as abundant, the reader/viewer/game-player was left to fill in the blanks in a compelling story.

As a kid, I remember the experience of seeing E.T. for the very first time. After the wild success of that film, and even since then, there has been the occasional chatter about a potential sequel/prequel. Steven Spielberg consistently put such speculation to rest, indicating that the film was simply too special to him to try and create a sequel. It's interesting to me that even after all this time, E.T. is still every bit as magical as it was when I was a kid. I STILL get goosebumps during the bike chase scenes. And the ending is as emotional as ever.

A one of a kind, and timeless film

That's what is so difficult about sequels, right?

It's one thing if an author/director/creator felt that they HAD to stretch a story out over several parts in order to do it justice. But these days, it feels like sequels are a foregone conclusion with anything that is reasonably successful. And to me, a sequel often feels like a covert admission of negative feeling towards the original content. And yet, isn't it ironic that most modern sequels pale in comparison to their original material.

The first "Matrix" has always been considered the best and only necessary film of the three. The Dark Knight was widely considered to be Christopher Nolan's best Batman film. Bioshock 2 failed to impress in the same manner as the first. It's even been said that you could skip the original Borderlands altogether, as Borderlands 2 is the true realization of the games potential. See where this is headed?

Once you've visited Rapture, you can never be the same.

There have been many times when I've felt some bizarre obligation to experience every entry within a given series. But the truth is, some creative works take A LONG TIME to get good, or to even become interesting. And some... well, some never do.

There was a time in my life when I firmly believed in the importance of always trying new and different things. And to some extent, I still do. But now, I have amended that conclusion, and now feel that not all things both new and different, are also worthwhile.

As much as people love and rave over the Zelda games, I never cared about the series until the Oracle games on the Gameboy Color. I have no desire to play the NES classics, and probably never will. That feeling is not limited to Zelda.

And what about you? Do you feel obligated to play every game within a particular series? Or do you only play what you want? I'd love to hear some other points of view.

Wow. December is just around the corner, and well folks... what a year. What an absolutely incredible year it's been. It's been a year of fantastic advances in technology (VR technology), and deep disappointments (Hideo Kojima, Konami, Nintendo). It is only the second year since the current generation of consoles launched, and the landscape of gaming is DRASTICALLY changed.

But let's be specific. One of the most inescapable realities is that 2015 has been an extraordinary year of major firms walking back from damaging positions. Did I say walking back? I should have said RUNNING back. And frankly, it's been nothing short of amazing.

This became exceptionally clear to me last week, when Sony countered Microsoft's backwards compatibility announcement with a virtually identical announcement, something Sony claimed that they had no interest in. To be fair, Microsoft certainly did it's fair share to feed the idea that backwards compatibility was a difficult, nigh impossible challenge. What seems certain is that in either case, consumers were not getting the truth.

For Sony to announce backwards compatibility now, it's fairly clear that it's been on their minds, and that they've been working on it for some time. But consumers have been getting a different story. While it would have been just as easy to adapt a "no comment" stance on such issues, both Sony and Microsoft lied. And now that I think about it, well... Nintendo lied too. Three times, by my count. Once, when we heard that their was no successor to the Wii, the second time over the launch date for Zelda Wii U, thirdly when the existence of the NX was denied.

As it is now, Nintendo refrains from commenting on anything until they are ready, and THAT is something I can respect. But, wow. Really? When did honesty become so out of style?

Now let me dismount from my high horse before someone threatens to knock me off. I understand that business is challenging, and that managing public relations is perhaps one of the most challenging aspects of modern business. But even today's business is merely an advanced form of barter and trade. And trade had always been linked to bonds, relationships, the establishment of TRUST and goodwill. If there is no trust, there can be no goodwill.

Some people try to frame these issues in a different light. As though values and ethics are optional in modern commerce. You have those who eagerly rush to the defense of million dollar companies, as though they'd received a guarantee of future employment for doing so. You have the frustrated dreamers, who take any criticism of any aspect of the industry personally, because it reminds them of their own experiences. And then at the very bottom, are the fanboys.

Actually, let me not say fanboys. Fanboys can be cool, funny, and actually part of what makes gaming fun. No. At the bottom, is the fan babies. The infantile, entitled, crass individuals who make the gaming community consistently look BAD.

So... with a market as complex as that, doing business isn't  going to be a walk in the park.

But frankly, it's been astounding to see how much industry backpedaling has been done in this year alone. I mean, the easy target in all of this is Microsoft, who have reversed their positions on nearly every aspect of the Xbox One launch.

But now, we're beginning to see that Sony isn't squeaky clean either. The Sony that is now enjoying breakaway success with the PS4 is still the same company that forces PS Vita owners to spend nearly $100 on a proprietary 32GB memory card. No effort has been made to change that. And in all honesty, unless Microsoft had forced their hand, Sony probably would have never followed through with backwards compatibility.

One can't help but think back to the E3 of 2013 when Sony pledged to permit used game sales, and basically do the direct opposite of everything that Microsoft was. Was that decision really coming from respect for their fanbase, or did Sony just see an opportunity to win back market share?

But Sony and Microsoft are the usual suspects for this kind of stuff. Throughout 2015, we saw plenty of poor decision making, and then the inevitable (and sloppy) attempts to do damage control.

This year we had Konami appearing to willfully do everything possible to ruin their brand. More recently, there has been the uproar over micro-transactions in Payday 2. Then there are the endless Kickstarter scandals. How many games have we seen that were irresistible at first pitch, only to see the project canceled. In many instances, such scandals are frequently followed by editorials that attack backers for being upset about the cancellation of said project.

The picture that starts to develop of the industry in general, is one where developer's truly believe that it is impossible to sell games for less than $70, that digital distribution should not immediately translate into lower prices, where DLC, season passes, and bug-riddled launches are perfectly acceptable and par for the course.

Huh?

When did playing video games become this?

This isn't to say that video games have taken a turn for the worst. The industry is experiencing some growing pains right now, but I actually believe that 2015 has been a fantastic year for gamers. Both the Xbox One and PS4 are fantastic consoles with great potential for fresh, new entertainment experiences.

There are a lot of things being done right on all sides. But I must admit, it is troubling when I hear Sony saying that they don't really understand the PS4's success. I am concerned when I hear would-be developer's exhibiting total confusion on how to successfully manage crowd-funded projects. I am upset when a company doesn't think I (the consumer) am worthy of honest discourse and transparency.

Am I overreacting? You tell me.

It's no secret that Microsoft has been fighting hard to win back trust. Throughout the entire length of 2015, Microsoft has been extremely careful to keep it's fingers on the pulse of gamers, and aiming to give them exactly what they want. The past two years have offered hard lessons for not only Microsoft, but the industry as a whole. Ironically, it is the former that seems the most eager, and willing to learn from their mistakes and charge forward.

By now, the story of the disastrous Xbox One launch is a dead horse. It happened. It's over. Nuff' said. But I must say that I am mightily impressed by how strong of a comeback the Xbox One is making. Now in all likelihood, it could be said that Microsoft will probably never regain the leading market share for this generation of consoles. It's too late for that. They gave that away two years ago, and some things simply cannot be undone.

But, you can really respect the fact that Microsoft at least RECOGNIZES how it messed up. In today's gaming scene, that is huge folks. I mean, think about it. Have you noticed the absolute clueless thinking that seems to pervade segments of the gaming industry these days?

Whoops! Baaaaaad idea.

Often times it feels like the people involved in making either games or the hardware that runs them, are hopelessly out of touch with what average people want. Is it really that hard? Have human tastes become more complex than say... quantum physics?

I started off by saying we need to forgive Microsoft for E3 2013, and we really do. Here's why. If you really, really pay attention, you'll realize that although Sony is blithely enjoying the PS4's success, Microsoft is the one that is really working hard to absorb what gamers are asking for. Here's some points to consider:

Hardware: Microsoft nailed this one early on. They learned from the RROD debacle on the Xbox 360, and made certain that the Xbox One would a console built to last. And while the Xbox One may trail the PS4 in raw power, it is easily powerful enough to satisfy your gaming needs.

Bundles: The Xbox One bundles are increasingly hard to resist. This past Black Friday weekend was proof of that. While the Xbox One releases one compelling bundle after another, Sony's PS4 has featured one ugly design after another (Star Wars/Black Ops 3). Honestly, there's seems to be no excitement to the PS4 besides the promise of what it can deliver in terms of power. That promise feels more and more empty, as we have yet to see ANYTHING that clearly demonstrates the PS4's superiority.

The Controller: Remember the promises of how the light bar and touch pad would change the way we play games this gen? And? Yeah, nothing. The addition of the light bar and the touchpad are novelties, gimmicks. People often deride the Wii U gamepad as another pointless gimmick, but at least it offers functionality that is easy to understand. What the heck are you supposed to do with Sony's two "gimmick's"?

Then there's the one glaring flaw in the PS4's controller. The thumbsticks. Rubber that wears off on a crucial part of a $300+ investment? You've got to be kidding me. My Mach 3 razor doesn't even have that problem, and I dunk that thing in water, and put it through all kinds of abuse when shaving. Granted, the Dualshock 4 is a very competent controller, and the general design of Dualshock controllers will always feel good. But, once again Sony fails to successfully demonstrate the superiority of the PS4 in a crucial area. Control.

The Xbox One controller, on the other hand, is a no-nonsense instrument. There is nothing extraneous in it's design. It is a tool designed with one-purpose: To give you the purest, most comfortable, most functional experience while playing games. There's no gimmicks. The Xbox One controller is sturdy in a way that is usually reminiscent of Nintendo products, yet it is also aesthetically pleasing to the eye. Each variation of the Xbox One Controller has been a perfect marriage of form and function. 

Software: Now here's one area where you'd think that it'd be difficult to argue in favor of the Xbox One. But I would say, take a second look. First, let's be fair and honest. The Xbox One is no slouch. Sure, the PS4 is getting some great software, FANTASTIC software (No Man's Sky). But, Xbox One isn't lacking for quality games in any way whatsoever (Quantum Break).

Sony has clearly locked up an impressive lead on all front's, but there is one trump card that Microsoft proudly wields. Backwards compatibility. Now, I know what many of you may be thinking. No one buys a next gen console to buy last gen games. And, you'd be right. But having a tremendous back library of games IS a valuable incentive for any console. And if you're anything like me, you probably missed out on a whole lot of great games from a time when the Xbox 360 ruled gaming.

In truth, Microsoft's decision to pursue full backwards compatibility for the Xbox One was a master stroke. And I doubt that it was a move Sony saw coming. You see, Sony may be enjoying a comfortable lead, but that's also part of the danger. Sony's runaway success may also be the bullet train leading them to complacence and apathy.

While it seems that Sony just assumes that they've won this war, Microsoft is working overtime, and is attacking on multiple fronts. Sony feels that they've already won you (the consumer) over. Perhaps they also feel that there's no more hard work to be done. That would be a HUGE mistake. HUGE. There are so many things Sony needs to fix before they can truly say they've earned their place.

First, Sony needs to do right by all those people who invested in the Vita, and that needs to be done YESTERDAY. They need to immediately and permanently slash the prices of all Vita accessories by at least 50%, or more. I honestly think MORE. They need to either perfect Remote Play, or just shut up about it FOREVER. And finally, they need to put on their big boy pants, take a few hits to the budget, and make some first-party/Game of the Year quality games for the Vita. I think at least five.

If Sony is going to try and go toe to toe with Microsoft on the backwards compatibility thing, they need to do it right. That essentially means doing EXACTLY what Microsoft is doing, or better. Do you hear me Sony? If you think I would be interested in repurchasing a game I already own, YOU are smoking metaphorical crack.

And if you're going to announce backwards compatibility, how about doing it with some games that I actually care about?

So yeah, you know Sony... Sony needs to stay wide awake, and hungry. If they repeat some of the tomfoolery we've seen from them in the past, it would be all too easy to squander the gains they've made with the PS4. Just as was once the case with Microsoft, this generation's console war is Sony's to win or lose. Microsoft really has learned from their mistakes. Let's see if Sony can.

On December 3rd of 2015, it was announced that Scott Weiland, lead singer for Stone Temple Pilots, had died. There was no warning, no reports of him battling illness. He was just gone, that quickly. Now, I never knew the man, and though it was tragic news, it would be silly for me to claim that I was deeply affected by this news. But, I was affected.

It's funny how we can become fond of people, artists, musician's, actor's, anyone really, even when you've never even met them. These figures are attached to our lives through endless memories, some fond, some not. But all along the crooked path of life, it can often feel as though these people have been there with us, or perhaps us with them, sharing the ups and downs.

The night after I heard the news, I became nostalgic, and spent the whole time listening to 90's alternative music. Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Alice In Chains, Nirvana, Bush, Smashing Pumpkins, Live, and many, many more. All the great music that I heard and loved in high school and beyond. Man, it took me back.

I remembered driving to college blasting "Even Flow", meeting friend's at the local comic book shop in highschool. I could recall the shock from when Brandon Lee died, and the buzz over his last film, The Crow, which... has one of the best soundtracks EVER, I might add. I keenly remember the electric charge in the air when Mortal Kombat first hit the silver screen.

The movie theater parking was jam-packed with import tuner cars and every social clique you can imagine. When the movie started, people actually cheered.

"You're SOUL is mine!!!"

Needless to say, these were great times.

It genuinely felt GOOD to revisit those memories. I don't do that all the time, but every once in a while, it's nice.

So why did I mention all that?

Because now, perhaps more so than I ever recall, it seems that the vast majority of modern entertainment is driven by nostalgia. That strange, illogical longing for days long past. Whether it's movies, TV, music, video games, or whatever,  it all seems to start with, "Oh! Remember when... ??? Yeah... that was AWESOME!!!"

Which is often followed by...

"Man, I wish they would bring that back." Or something like that.

I wish that I could say the results of such reminiscence has always been rewarding and worthwhile, but I think we all know a little better.

This past year, 2015, Fallout 4 was inevitably compared to it's predecessors, and fell short by the standards of MANY. Star Wars Battlefront, though breathtakingly beautiful in it's visuals, paled when compared against the gameplay of the original Battlefront.

It would be safe to say that nearly every Nintendo console since the Super Nintendo/Famicom has been the victim of nostalgia, since no other console seems as universally loved. Even Nintendo's own attempts to rekindle interest in the disappointing Wii U were muddied by the past. No new Star Fox will ever capture the way it felt when the first debuted. There is no way to recreate the joy of playing Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, or Super Mario 64 for the first time.

Many have tried to recapture those moments, and failed. Repeatedly, and miserably.

Like that Sade song, "It's neverrrr as good as the first time."

Perhaps the only thing to not fall victim to the dark side of nostalgia (no pun intended), was Star Wars: The Force Awakens. Yes, there were comparisons to the original trilogy, as well as the prequels. But overall, fans were jubilant over the chance to go back to that story in a galaxy far, far away.

It's often been said that the past is almost never how we choose to remember it. We sugar coat it. We buff out the rough edges, and polish it to a nice, glossy shine. We've all heard the "Back then..." intro. And the truth is "Back then..." usually never existed, except in our own subjective memory.

I've always dreaded growing into one of those dreary souls who emphatically sputters on and on about how much better things USED to be. I know that there was NEVER a perfect time. Not ever. But I've caught myself in the act a few times. Is that a bad thing?

Why do we do it?

I have to believe that nostalgia is like a survival mechanism. Like the Saint Bernard that comes to bring you whiskey when your stranded in the Swiss Alps?

When things are rough, times are dark, or you're feeling low, you take a long swig of good ol' nostalgia to keep you warm. To hold you over until the clouds disappear, or the snow melts. You could knock it and say it's a bad thing. But it's really no different than dreams, or imagination. It's how we maintain. We are finite creatures in a infinite universe. What the heck else are we supposed to do?

So... I understand the drive behind all the trips back to yesterday. I do. But, tomorrow could be just as good. And I'll take TODAY anytime. Nothing like the present.

Maybe that's the trick. Balance.

By the way...

Remember when...???

Virtual Reality has undoubtedly been one of the most highly discussed topics of the past two years. And though many are skeptical about it's immediate viability in gaming, several big names in the electronics industry have invested heavily in this new technology.

We are told that VR will transform the way we play forever. Some have hinted that Virtual Reality may facilitate the next big leap in human development as a whole. I'll admit, I also found myself swept up in the enthusiasm for a dream technology that has been a long time coming. But, I just can't help but wonder if VR is turning into a bit of a sacred cow. I'm sure the experiences we'll get from the Oculus Rift, HTC Vive, and Playstation VR headsets will be mind-blowing. But, the more that I think about it, I realize that there are other technologies that could be developed, and might be just as profound, if not more so. Among them?

Artificial Intelligence

Anyone remember those old ads for the Sega Dreamcast where it would show the system with it's red glowing jewel? Somewhere in the ad, the text said, "It's Thinking."

I could never forget that slick piece of advertising. In reality, there was nothing intelligent about the Dreamcast itself, though it WAS a well designed console. But just the suggestion, just the tease that a game console could be silently cogitating, and adapt to your inputs... that was a tantalizing idea to me.

But, the unfortunate truth is that if you play a simulation, shooter, or RPG in 2015, it is not much different from what gamers experienced on the Dreamcast, or any other console in video game history, yes, even the original NES. You're not playing against another brain. You're playing against odds and probabilities, along with a specific set of predictable rules. Meanwhile, we've gone from playing with pixels, to polygons, to cel-shading, to 4K resolutions, and now... Virtual Reality.

When's the last time you played a game and were nearly convinced that someone, something was anticipating your every move? When you thought, "This can't be the programming."?

How many of you remember the moment when Psycho Mantis read your memory card in Metal Gear Solid? And then when he took control of your controller?

How many moments have you had in gaming like THAT?

In TV and movies, it's called the fifth wall. That moment when the characters address the audience. Depending on how it's done, it can be a powerful way to draw in your audience. And it is rarely, if ever done in gaming. (Exception: Seaman on the... wait for it, Dreamcast)

I am certain that games will continue to get prettier and prettier, and ever more real, until perhaps at some point we just stop caring so much about visuals. But I'm truly baffled that the growth of advanced A.I. has been so stunted.

Lately, as I try to tackle my video game backlog, I am playing through Hitman: Blood Money, and having a fantastic time doing so. But, as much as I love the Hitman series, as biased as I am towards those games, I see one glaring flaw. The lack of truly compelling A.I.

I am frequently amused when Agent 47 has just left a body laying in a pull of blood, in plain sight, and the guards only appear to be mildly disturbed before resuming there patrol. Often times, guards continue casually walking past a dead body, with seemingly no interest in how it got there. I've pulled out the fiberwire in plain sight of gunmen many times, and absolutely nothing happened.

Hitman-"Wait, what? No! I didn't kill your friend. I'm a security guard, duh!

What? Why do I have a silencer?"

But let's take it a step further. What if the NPC's in a game like Hitman could interact with you? Ofcourse, even in 2015 there are going to be restrictions on how much interaction could occur. But imagine NPC's that respond like Apple's Siri, or Google Now?

This is literally uncharted territory, and it has been that way for well over 20 years!!! How has this one area of gaming been so neglected? Is it because we are afraid of developing A.I.? Do the programmers worry about creating a Frankenstein with advanced artificial intelligence?

Even if that's the case, I think there's an awfully large gap between a machine that simulates intelligence, and a machine that demonstrates self-awareness. I know that there are many in the tech industry who have deep reservations about the wisdom of A.I. development. Well... then, forgive me if I have a certain lack of enthusiasm over the next level of eye candy. There's more to gaming than visuals.

I've got to stop reading movie reviews. They never seem  to tell the truth. A fairly ironic observation, considering that this blog is basically the same thing. But it never ceases to amaze me how stark the disparity that exists between professional critics, and ordinary movie goers.  Go to a site like Rotten Tomatoes, and you will find no shortage of movies that have been panned by critics, and yet general audiences love them.

Ofcourse, I suspect that some professional film critics would argue that the average movie goer has an unrefined "palette" when it comes to determining what is fine cinema. The proletarian masses will consume anything you shovel at them, n' est-ce pas? I digress.

Hitman: Agent 47 is one of those films that critics appeared to have declared dead on arrival. Not that the first was well-received either. Heck, if Daniel Craig's James Bond struggles to get any love, what hope would there be for our favorite assassin in a red tie?

One particular review I came across was so meticulous in nit-picking the film, I wondered if he had a chance to do anything besides tear apart every aspect of the film. People don't go to the movies seeking perfection. They go to escape the humdrum of the daily grind. They want to experience some adventure for an hour and a half, maybe two. Something that lights a spark of excitement, and feeds our imagination.

The new Hitman does all that quite well. It is a competent film, light on story, much as the games are. In fact, as I am currently working my way through finishing "Hitman: Blood Money" for the PS2, I was surprised to see how closely the film follows the games.

Yes, the infamous fiberwire does make an appearance in the film.

Rupert Friend is both a surprising, yet excellent pick to play 47. He has the right build, the right blend of stealth and athleticism, and menace that one would expect. I must say that even though I felt Timothy Oliphant did a fantastic job on the previous Hitman film, Friend sets a new benchmark of his own.

Speaking of athleticism, all I can say is... wow. The fight sequences in this movie are brutal, brutal, brutal. Part of the gory goodness is seeing 47 do things we've actually NEVER seen him do in the games! The close combat scenes are primal, and ugly, as in no artfully choreographed tomfoolery.

I also got a big kick out of 47's use of disguises throughout the film. And, the way 47 uses those disguises actually addresses one big question I've always had when playing a Hitman game. Don't the usual staff of any given place recognize that 47's face is different? And, it's kind of hard to hide the big bar code on the back of his head too.

Kinda hard to miss something like that.

Some critics argued that the open street gun battles throughout the film help undermine the idea that 47 is a master of stealth. Perhaps. But one could also argue that in the Hitman games, stealth is an option, not a requirement. Trust me, I've gone full Rambo many, many times in the course of trying to "fulfill a contract".

Without spoiling any aspect of the film, I will say that one way that this movie succeeds is by expanding the narrative in a way that could also lead to broader options in the games as well. I truly hope that the developers for the next Hitman game have seen the film and taken notes.

I would love to see a Hitman game with cars.

Rupert Friend's portrayal of the bald assassin is magnificent in the same way Daniel Craig's Bond was, and is. This 47 is fast, and SO much more physical. There are a few fight scenes with Zachary Quinto's John Smith were you could practically feel the force of each blow.

Now to be honest, the film is not perfect, and my love of it may well be tainted by my love of the franchise overall. But, out of all of the dud's to hit the screen in 2015, Hitman: Agent 47 is not one of them, and it got a lot right. It would be interesting to see the same actors under a new director perhaps. Does Paul Verhoeven still make movies? Gawd, that would be SICK!

Anyways, if you're sitting at home and looking for an easy flick to watch on Netflix, or any of the other bazillion streaming services, Hitman: Agent 47 is a solid pick. It thoroughly delivers as an unpretentious action flick, and won't leave a bad taste in your mouth. Now go nuke some popcorn!

In the days when I started gaming, traveling from one point to another was a fairly limited and straight forward affair. In a world of side-scrollers and isometric planes, your options tended to be walk, run, or in the case of Sonic the Hedgehog, roll. The exception to that rule would have to be with role-playing games. But, in a time where open-world games are so common, the choices for means of transport have expanded considerably.

Let's see... walk left, or walk right...

Swing left, or swing right. Weeeeeeeeee!!!

Do you take your time, and slowly absorb the beauty and detail of your surroundings? Or do you look for the fastest transport possible, and say to hell with background? Do you pick something heavily armored, that protects you from potential ambushes, or something light and agile?

For me, I love to soak up environment. I like speed, but only because it tends to allow me to move on from one interesting sight to another. My eyes become greedy for one visual feast after another. Moving faster always facilitates that desire to see more.

Whenever I think about travel in games or otherwise, I am reminded of an old interview I saw on TV with Mick Jagger, legendary lead singer for the Rolling Stones. I believe that they had to do the interview somewhere in South America, and the journalist, along with Jagger, were casually strolling through the streets enjoying the sights. At the end of the interview, Mick Jagger turned to the journalist and graciously thanked him for showing him around, adding that he probably never would have taken the time to visit a place such as he'd seen.

No doubt, the enormity of his fame would make traveling anywhere challenging. But I never forgot that interview because I felt it illustrated how easily we can overlook, or miss things of beauty/interest all around us. More and more, I am convinced that to live the best life, you must always preserve and feed your curiosity and sense of wonder. Be willing to seek out the things you might have missed.

Do you know where this is?

So for me, I think of two things. Being on foot is where you get the most detailed appreciation of things around you. Even in real life, going for a walk is almost always the most effective means of discovery.

From time to time, I take walks for light exercise. Besides the feeling of having fresh air in your lungs, and getting in tune with everything around you, it is frequently surprising how much you miss when you spend most of your time driving about.

I've discovered quaint neighborhoods and charming cul-de-sacs, historical oddities and natural treasures all in places that I must have driven past countless times within the course of my life. And it's funny. When you just stop and simply observe life in it's pure, abstract form, without judgement or assumption. It's amazing what you can see.

So in games, when I want to have a complete appreciation of the environments, I feel that I must go on foot.

But, there are times when going on foot is simply not the most ideal approach. As much as I loved strolling through the streets of Liberty City and Vice City, I was immensely pleased when I took my first flight in the helicopters of GTA: Vice City.

But it's more than just that.

I happen to be a big lover of strategy games such as Tropico, Empire Earth, Command & Conquer, and countless others. But a big part of what I love about those games is how it gives you this broad overview of life as it exists in the game.

In Tropico, you can see and hear the thoughts and speech of the islands residents. You understand what drives thems, compels them, even what they hope and dream of. In games like Empire Earth and C&C, you see how almost every activity, every move has strategic value.

Ahhh Tropico, how I love thee!

That's a sort of insight that is only possible from the skies, which is a big part of what makes flying so attractive to me in games. Another part of the appeal is the notion that you have some sort of secret advantage from way up there in the clouds. It's a "I can see you, but you can't see me!" sort of thing.

Back when I was obsessed with the original Far Cry, my greatest joy was soaring about in the hang glider, peering down on the mercenaries on the islands. The even greater thrill was picking off said mercenaries with a Heckler & Koch MP5SD3, and knowing that they were mostly powerless to retaliate.

So, I suppose that my transportation decisions are really driven by two considerations. Do I want detail or abtract? But I have to say, there is an absolute reason why everyone from Leonardo Da Vinci to the Wright Brothers dreamed of flight.

Either way, whether on foot or in the air, either satisfies. Just don't ask me to choose.

Is this gonna be another sappy, saccharin sweet reminiscence of the "glory days" of gaming? No. I've done my share of looking back. But, I've got to say, I'm getting tired of constantly looking ahead too. I've been fighting with a peculiar feeling for... oh, I'd say a while now. And I couldn't quite put my finger on it or know what it was. But it's been there.

I have gradually gotten back into chipping away at my backlog, and for me THAT WAS  a challenge. Because without me realizing it, the urge to play anything outside of mobile games had dwindled. I was quite upset at the idea of "burning out" on gaming, mainly because I'd made such a considerable investment in said hobby.

But, I learned to find the joy again.

How do I continue? Okay, let me say this. When you get older, it's the little things that really start to annoy you. At least, that's my reality. In recent years, I find myself having less tolerance for things that don't... just... work.

Angry that an "update" just bricked his next-gen console.

We live in a unique time where we are given so much choice, so many options. And yet, we rarely optimize that freedom.

This past year, I have felt that gaming has taken such a sad and disappointing turn from what it has almost always been to me. It has slowly morphed from being a simple, straightforward hobby into a quagmire of controversy and neurosis. I'm starting to see the same familiar patterns year after year, with little variation.

Let's see, it's February. So... very soon now, we'll start getting early speculations on what E3 might hold. Will Nintendo score big with news of the NX? Will Sony lose their dominance? Will Microsoft re-take the lead? And... we'll get excited looking at screenshots and demos of unfinished games that are promised to be the next great thing, yet rarely are. We'll hear reports of lone developers leaving studios to go "make the game they always dreamed of."

There'll be news of several firmware updates that either do nothing at all, or just frustrate the hell out of nearly everyone. Developers will string along loyal players with sporadic DLC, and whimsical patches that help to "correct" the gaming experience.

Oh, and we'll hear a lot about VR.

Yawwwwwwwn. (zzzzzzz...)

"VR? Meh. Wake me up when you have some catnip."

This is not why I began playing games. This is not why I continue playing games. But it has nearly been why I stopped playing games.

I just don't care about all the BS anymore.

If some billion dollar corporation goes to the trouble of manufacturing a fairly expensive product that is disappointing out of the box, I'm not buying. Period. Screw you. Screw the arguments on why I should be patient. Screw you. I spent money. I spent A LOT of money, and I expect my stuff to work. Don't tell me you'll fix it later. FIX IT NOW. I can't pay you later, right? So then why do you have the right to "fix it later".

If it's software you're selling, look... I hate to be that guy, but I don't CARE if you have budget problems. I don't care if you're a small group. I don't care that the project ended up being more complex/difficult/expensive than you expected. Since when was that my problem, or my fault? And isn't it kinda your job to anticipate having problems like that?

Let me paint a picture for you that will help you understand.

I buy and download the latest album from one of my favorite artists. The artist has already stated that the album will have 15 tracks of brand new songs, plus 3 new bonus songs for those who pre-order the album.

When my download is complete, I discover that it consists of eight songs. That's it.

Later, my favorite artist apologizes to all the fans, and says that they are still finishing recording on the missing songs which will be forthcoming within several weeks. As consolation, all the fans who pre-ordered the album will get a free t-shirt. That's okay, right?

This is not why I game.

I guarantee you that after I've spent a long day at work, and come home tired, the very last thing I want to deal with is stuff like what I've just described.

"Well, that's just what goes with living in a modern society." Bull. That's what goes with dealing with companies who are keenly aware that they can get away with railroad robbery.

This week, we're hearing about The Division. And it's not anything gamers haven't before. In fact, it's become so consistent, it's just stupefying. And people wonder why mobile games have enjoyed such success.

Never before has it been so hard to just have... FUN!!! And isn't that the antithesis of playing games?

Why can't I just fire up my happy little game box, and jump right in to an hour or two of good, simple fun? Why do I have to tolerate people who thinks it's okay to sell me unfinished/sub-par/or downright broken product? Who do I have to pay so much and feel like I'm getting so little? Why do I have to feel like I'm the a--hole for being upset about this kind of stuff?

Why do I have to worry about any of this at all?

Seriously... what HAPPENED to fun?

Once again, Andrew Reiner's recent feature on "Going Into Game's Blind" got me thinking. Despite everything I've heard about The Division and it's disappointment's, I can't help but be drawn to it. I can't explain it. Well, maybe I can. The Division has such a visually intriguing setting. The urban decay is not on the scale of The Last of Us, but it harkens to that kind of bleakness, and I can't get enough of it.

The Division reminds me of something that was frequently said about the Tim Burton Batman movies. In those iconic films, Gotham City was as much of a star as Batman himself.  The original Batman and Batman Returns simply would not have been the same films without that unique look that was imagined for Gotham.

THAT is how I feel about The Division and it's depiction of a ravaged New York. Why? I don't know. Maybe it's because New York in many ways represents the earliest beginnings of American society, and so the idea of seeing that replaced with pure chaos is at the very least, a highly compelling thought.

I've given some more thought to the numerous critiques of The Division, and I now wonder if it has become a victim of it's own publicity. I mean, what if instead of Ubisoft teasing us for more than a full year, what if they had just sprung it on us? No expectations. No time for disappointment to creep in. Just a simple announcement perhaps one month prior to the game hitting shelves?

I've heard it said that the combat system is flawed. Some of what I've heard truly does raise concerns. There is no reason why a human should be able to withstand a headshot from a high powered weapon, or why an enemy should be able to walk or run directly into a hail of gunfire, and not go down. Even if the game is supposed to have RPG-like elements, you mean to tell me there's no way of calculating the difference in hit points lost between being shot in the head, or say... the foot? Reiner is right. For a game so rich with bleak, and gritty imagery, the combat sounds a bit G-rated.

Then, there's the stories of the ghoulish and predatory PvP gameplay in the Beta. Roving gangs using bully tactics, deception, and outright treachery to secure and maintain dominance. And while I can understand how this might be intensely frustrating for new players just trying to survive and enjoy the game themselves, I can't help but wonder if that isn't part of the point behind the game?

The Division aims to portray a dark future where the very fabric of civilized society has unraveled. I once watched footage of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and I must say... in any large scale human crisis, it is often a theatre of human behavior at it's very worst or very best. It's all about extremes.

In the case of Louisiana post-Hurricane Katrina, there WERE roving gangs with guns and weapons, looting, killing, raping, and much more. It only took a matter of days for the very idea of law and order to evaporate. Maybe, just maybe that's what the makers of The Division were trying to encapsulate?

Nonetheless, I can't bring myself to think of The Division as a BAD game. And I can't help but think, what if I just chose to forget everything I've ever read or heard about the game, and just tried to sit down and have fun with it? Could I?

I didn't have the chance to try the Beta, but I have used this approach before with everything from games, to movies, to even food. I mean, really... how bad could it be? Watchdogs was maligned as though it were a new Twilight movie. But, the actual game seemed perfectly fine. Not awful, not great. Just okay.

Personally, I can do just fine with okay.

$300, $400, $600, $800. Gaming has never, ever really been a cheap hobby. But these days I find myself becoming more sensitive to the costs associated with gaming. I frankly wonder how current gen console owners manage to keep up with it all.

First off, let's be frank here. Video games are not really for kids anymore. At least, kids aren't the ones BUYING games. I don't know of many kids between the ages of 9-16 who completely finance this increasingly pricey hobby.

What's that you say? Gaming is no more expensive than in the past? Maybe.

All I can tell you is my personal experience versus what I see in popular media.

When I was a teenager, I avidly read editorials and reviews from magazines like Gamepro and EGM, gobbling up every bit of news I could find. Then, just as it is now, the growth and excitement around video games was always driven by the technology of tomorrow.

But, I always found it odd how casually many media sources would rattle off the costs associated with console-based gaming. Primarily because consoles were traditionally supposed to be the "affordable alternative" to arcades and expensive PC's.

I've seen consoles go from RF cable connections, to composite cables, to component, to HDMI. I knew someone who spent roughly $5000 on a plasma TV when that was considered to be the bleeding edge of visual technology. By contrast, just the other day I saw a 4K 50" display for roughly $500.

Now, despite being a mere two-plus years into the PS4/Xbox One generation, VR is looming on the horizon, promising to change the way we play games and empty our pockets... again. And it was just the other day that I came across a little blurb of speculation that mobile devices will outperform PS4 and Xbox One visuals by 2017.

We're not talking about impulse spending. No sir. It seems that the cost of new hardware seems to gravitate, with frightening determination, towards the $1000 mark. And it doesn't stop there. When DLC, Season Passes, and mini-transactions are all factored in, a single game is easily $100 or more.

Want accessories? Need an extra controller? How about Xbox One's $150 "Elite"? No?

The Dual Shock 4 is roughly $50. The Wii U gamepad is between $120 and $180. Need a hard drive? that's an extra $80 to $130.

Then there's the cost of services like Xbox Live, and Playstation Plus.

I don't think I ever recall a time when these sort of numbers were tossed around so readily, and so comfortably. In fact, I've often been tempted to believe that perhaps these figures were perhaps not as... dramatic as they might have seemed. Maybe I was just crazy? I mean, plunking down $400 isn't THAT big of a deal right?

But then I drift back to reality. A reality that consists of friend's who say things like, "Man, I wish I could afford a PS4." Or friend's who have to save money for an entire year to buy that 60-inch TV. Or friend's who tell me that their wives would literally kill them if they even dreamed of spending $700 on a VR headset. This, is reality.

And now, as I get older, I can't help but think of all the other cool things I could get with the money that would normally feed my hobby monster. One Oculus Rift is equal to two seven day cruises, or nearly 10 visits to Disneyland or killer seats at 10 different concerts, or one collectible Fender electric guitar.

I ventured into Gamestop recently and took a gander at several "collectible" figurines, none of which were less than $150. I tried to imagine sinking that much cash into a desk ornament, and I just couldn't.

All of this is not to say that these things should not exist, or that the makers of said products have no right to demand such prices. But I would like to know, exactly WHO are they marketing too?

If the average individual had thousands of dollars in disposable income, I would feel foolish to even broach this topic. But the people I know, make their own coffee at home because Starbucks is too expensive. The people I know hardly ever go out to the movies because "it's too expensive".

Gaming, it seems, is gradually becoming a luxury hobby. Read any given magazine, and you'd be tempted to think that a PS4 graces every home in the civilized world. You'd be inclined to believe that nearly everyone has free and ready access to high-speed internet. This... is delusion at it's finest.

Though you may not see the correlation, consider that 663 million people (nearly twice the U.S. population) lack safe drinking water. This, on a planet of which 75% is covered... in water. But, I just bet that it would extremely difficult for anyone to conceive that this is a REAL issue.

For your consideration:

Between its government and its banks, Greece owes 323 billion euros to creditors and its debt-to-income (GDP) ratio is 177%, according to Trading Economics. In other words, Greece owes 1.77 euros for every euro it earns. The average U.S. household, by comparison, owed $204,992 in mortgages, credit cards, and student loans in mid-2015 on a median household income of $55,192, according to data compiled by Sentier Research. This translates to a debt-to-income ratio of 370%. -Fortune Magazine

So, why am I mentioning all of this? Because I'm negative? Because I'm bitter? Because I need a different hobby? To the latter, perhaps.

But in reality, my reasons for droning on and on are quite personal. I have some very fond memories of gaming. Usually, whenever I think of my history with gaming it's a positive thing. But, I can't pretend that the cost of gaming has not become a bottleneck or an obstacle, because it has. And I suppose I just wish there was a little frankness about that in general. Nuff' said.

Platitudinous. Isn't that a fantastic word? I hadn't even heard of it until I began trying to put together a new blog. I was looking for synonyms that could best describe how I've felt about my writing as of late. The first year that I blogged on GIO was nothing short of a thrill ride. There was just soooo much to talk about. My mind was literally bursting with ideas about all sorts of topics that had been bottled up in my head for what seemed like forever.

Each day that I sat down to write, I literally felt a rush of excitement. It felt good to create. It felt good to explore and to try and find my own sense of pace, trying to master putting my thoughts into words that felt precise and true. Of course, the bonus to all of that was to be so well-received and supported by the GIO community. That... was... huge.

But after about a year, I began to discover that I didn't have the endless well of ideas I once thought I'd had. Instead, I often found myself just exploring subtle twists to previously covered territory. I had nothing TRULY new to say. After a while, I suppose I was merely trying to refine thoughts and conclusions from the past.

All of this reminded me of something that I've become hyper alert to in recent years. Years ago, I used to know an older colleague with whom I'd share many conversations with. This colleague was also a Viet Nam veteran, and old enough to have seen some mighty interesting changes in the world. For roughly 4 years, we talked about nearly everything you could imagine. Life, philosophy, history, economics, politics, it was all up for grabs.

Whenever you get to share discussions with anyone over that length of time, needless to say, you get to know A LOT. In the case of this colleague and friend of mine, I learned about how he was able to buy his first house for what would probably have then been one to two years salary. He told me about the time when Jimmy Stewart (who had once been in the Air Force) had visited his base, and how he'd missed getting to meet him by mere minutes.

He told me about his surprisingly hilarious experiences being a pay clerk at a military installation in Alaska. He'd then went on to work for the Postal Service for many, many years and had become so good at his job that he could tell you the zip code for nearly any region in California, by memory. Even at the age of 65.

Believe it or not, this old friend looked A LOT like this.

After a while, I knew many of this friend's stories, and could probably have repeated them nearly as well. And while I would never presume that I knew and understood the entire span of this man's life, I felt that I knew him quite well.

In the course of our talking over some four years, I noticed something... about the both of us. We had both reached a point of... experiential saturation, if you will. In other words, after a while, we were all talked out. There was very little left to say that was new. Our occasional conversations would somehow always predictably drift back to past experiences, and we would laugh and talk about it all as though it wasn't the 57th time we'd done so.

And it dawned on me, we weren't saying anything new, and we hadn't experienced anything truly new. At somepoint, all the stories that we felt were worthy of remembrance were firmly settled in the past. And the future? Well, it wasn't even a topic really.

After that epiphany, I started listening to people and how they talk. I mean REALLY listening. And while I had thought that my observation was an isolated case, my observations revealed that this... this business of repetition is something surprisingly, stupefyingly common.

How do you know if you're growing? How do you know that you are better today than you were yesterday? Wait, wait. Forget better. How do you know that you're still breaking new ground? That you still have that hunger, that fire and curiosity for all of life?

Is each day new, or do you find yourself in a loop? Saying the same things, eating the same foods, going the same places, reading the same books, playing... the same video games?

This has been my great challenge, and the question that perpetually haunts me from time to time. As a blogger, how do you find new things to say? How do you find new things to talk about? How do you avoid being cliche?

I've often thought how odd it would be to stop learning, searching and exploring halfway through life, and to merely rest upon one's knowledge of the past, to embrace... platitudinous tendencies.

Yep. I love that word.

So, you've just finished watching a marathon of the world's cutest cat videos on Youtube when a commercial queues up. Dramatic music swells. Cannon drums pound furiously. Your eyes are bedazzled with explosions, gun-fire and some of the most breathtaking action sequences you've ever seen. As the screen fades to black, words form in all white caps commanding you to, "PRE-ORDER YOUR COPY TODAY!"

A voice soon follows that sounds like your high-school guidance counselor, telling you, "Pre-order now and get the Ultra Super Duper Unique and Incredibly Rare Bonus Pack, along with ____ maps, and ____ hours of exclusive content."

Something spasms in your head and your body is jolted into action. Credit card card in hand, you re-direct your browser to "www.SuperHyped-AAA-GenericGame.com". Minutes later, you lean back, arms folded behind your head with a smile like the Cheshire cat. You imagine how jealous your friends will be when they see that you have what will surely be the Holy Grail of gaming a whole week before anyone else!

Well, maybe not a week. A day?

Mmmm...

Okay, okay however far back in the line your friends were at the midnight launch.

BUT STILL! When launch day comes, by Odin's beard, you will have secured your little slice of virtual heaven long before those other poor schmoes. And while you head home, eager to blow heads apart and tear enemies asunder, those who had less foresight will be left to silently weep as they stare vacantly at signs that read, "On Back-order!"

And you? You will shrug your shoulders, and shake your head in dismay. Thinking, "Those poor, poor fools. When will they ever learn???"

Sounds pretty legit, right? No?

Hmmmm... okay. Maybe not.

So here's my thing.

Whenever I think of Pre-Orders, or Season Passes, I think of Fandango, or Ticketmaster, or some creepy guy in a trench coat saying, "Psssst! Hey buddy! You need tickets??? I got front row man! How much you got?"

I also think of my younger years going to summer blockbuster movies. Way back in the stone age. Before the internet. Before cell phones. BEFORE UNCRUSTABLES, which are arguably the greatest invention of the modern era.

An invention more important than the polio vaccine.

Way back yonder, pre-release movie buzz would spread by means of an antiquated practice called conversation, and crowds would descend upon their local theater en masse. Lines would form around street corners, and only the wise understood the importance of arriving early. Otherwise, you'd get the uncomfortable seats in the smelly little corner of the theater, floors sticky with soda and God knows what else. Then, you'd get to head home with neck pain and nasal trauma from the guy who kept farting behind you.

That was how you paid penance for procrastinating. And now, well... now we're safe from all that.

What is the common thread here? Scarcity.

Fandango, Ticketmaster and the like, all exist to provide peace of mind, convenience, protection against unpleasant surprises. That's the basic idea behind any reservation system, or pre-order scheme. It is insurance against disappointment.

So how's that working out?

It'd be one thing if AAA game releases routinely sold-out, leaving customers desperately scrabbling about for product. But in most cases, that just doesn't happen. The whole concept of a sales strategy adding an element of excitement to gaming ends up being squandered. The very thing that was meant to prevent disappointment in fact guarantees it.

Call me crazy, but I just don't get it. You?

For me, the Hitman series is the virtual equivalent of comfort food. Much like fudge brownies, a good brand of coffee, or a favorite old chair, the Hitman games are easily one of my favorite ways to unwind. It's strange, to be sure, since the gameplay is all about the tension that goes with executing the perfect hit. Nonetheless, I've frittered away countless hours leading Agent 47 through one intriguing location after another, popping in and out of the shadows, discreetly dealing death.

Blood Money certainly seems to be the "Holy Grail" in the series, while the title before it, Hitman: Contracts is widely viewed with tepid enthusiasm. Why? Honestly, I've never understood it. I personally loved "Contracts", but... I"m also a die-hard fan. It's pretty hard for me to be disappointed with a game that I've consistently had so much fun with.

Anyways, Blood Money. I get it. I finally get what all the praise and critical acclaim was about.

I've always been impressed by the detail and care that went into making the Hitman games, but Blood Money is truly the pinnacle, and quite a tough act to follow. For me, one of the ways in which it truly stood out from it's predecessors was in the emotions it was able to invoke.

Blood Money starts out on a seemingly peaceful, dilapidated pier stretching out into the sea. But something in the look of the skies, and the daylight itself seems different from previous games. You just know that something is different. Upon 47's first interaction with another human, your suspicion's are immediately confirmed. This 47 is much more cold, and brutally efficient.

And so it begins...

There are new tricks to learn, like throwing a coin to create a distraction. There's the added ability to engage in close combat, to disarm your opponents, and... to use NPC's as human shields if the $#!% should hit the fan (my personal favorite). There are new ways to dispatch your targets and make it appear to be an accident. You can push targets over ledges, down stairs, or into deadly objects. You can rig electrical appliances and devices to explode with deadly results, or you can sabotage the environment (dropping a chandelier on a target).

One of the most welcome changes, and most long overdue, was the ability to hide bodies in dumpsters or crates. I have no idea why it took so long to add that feature since it was also used in the very first Splinter Cell. The downside is that the game arbitrarily limits you to one body per dumpster. Really guys? Thankfully, I've heard that was changed in Hitman: Absolution.

Sorry, 47. Sam Fisher was doing this waaaay before you.

Anyways, there's still a whole lot to love about Blood Money. Truly.

The first mission will have you executing a hit that just might leave you feeling morally conflicted. Your designated target doesn't appear to be a bad person per se, just someone caught in an unfortunate set of circumstances. Unbeknownst to said target, those circumstances are about to become exponentially worse, primarily because YOU have to kill him.

After reading the headlines, you almost feel bad for the guy.

That simple introduction to the game helps reinforce one simple fact about 47 that may have been somewhat unclear before. 47 is not out for justice. He's not a hero. 47 is not the good guy. It's never personal. It's business. As if to drive that point home, the game repeatedly brings up the issue of money for dirty deeds. Whether it is 47 trying to confirm payment on a job, or whether you accept bonus "jobs" for more money, it is crystal clear what primarily motivates 47.

From there, the game just keeps getting better and better. For one thing, keep in mind that I played this game on a PS2. A PS2! And for what Eidos was able to achieve on that hardware... frankly, it's astounding. Each and every level is huge, detailed, and beautiful. Although there are simply too many good levels to really have favorites, I was particularly intrigued by...

A Vintage Year, which takes place in the mountains of Chile.

My second favorite was Curtains Down...

...which takes place in an elegant opera house.

And lastly, You Better Watch Out,

...where you wander through a pseudo Playboy Mansion high in the Rocky Mountains.

Honestly, each level is so good, often times I found myself just wandering aimlessly, just to take in the scenery. The snow capped Rocky Mountains, the ambient noise in the casino and garage levels in Las Vegas, the sound of the water while cruising down the Mississippi river on an old Steamboat, or the chirping of crickets by the soft glow of tree lights at southern-style wedding.

I can't help but realize that half of the reason I play the Hitman games is because of the amazing locations you get to visit. Having something to do, no matter how gruesome the task, is pretty much a bonus.

It's also interesting to note that one of the things that makes the Hitman games so great is that it is nearly impossible to play poorly. It is nearly impossible to fail. Whether or not you can execute your hit is rarely at question. Rather, the question is, what kind of assassin do you want to be? You can either be an all gunz n'glory madman, blasting any poor fool who gets in your way, or you can be as ethereal as the night itself. Passing in, passing out, with only a few unfortunate souls suffering your presence.

Is his neck supposed to bend like that?

That simple formula of there truly being no right or wrong way to play almost guarantees high replay value, and it never leaves the player feeling overly frustrated or bitter. In fact, this is exactly what makes you keep coming back to the game time and time again.

I would literally finish a level of the game, and later that night as I would lie in bed, I'd find myself thinking, "What if I'd killed the cook, and taken his uniform?", or "What if I drug that guard's coffee?" I'd wake up the next morning still thinking about the game. That's when you know a game has it's hooks in you.

Throughout Blood Money, you can sense a certain tension between 47 and Diana, as though there are things that have gone unspoken, but definitely linger. At times, it seems as if Diana is trying to relate to 47 on a more personal level, while 47 himself is predictably cold as ice. Perhaps too cold to be truly dispassionate, which raises even more questions. That tension culminates in an ending that will leave you with many questions about the relationship of the two. Questions that seem to extend into Hitman: Absolution, and the newest episodic Hitman.

The ending will leave you wondering, but it will also leave you feeling satisfied. And as I myself finished Blood Money, I couldn't help but think of the current episodic Hitman.

I am conflicted. On one hand, I am excited to see a new Hitman title on next gen hardware. But, I can't help but think that if I'd had to play the previous games in bite-sized portions, I probably never would have grown to love the series the way I do. I want to believe that the developer's have a good reason for this new approach, but honestly, my gut just tells e that it's not a good move. If anything, it firms up my resolve to not even consider buying until the game is available in one complete package. It's probably my favorite game franchise ever. I can only hope that they don't ruin it.