I'm sick of answering the Call of Duty!

Hello fellow Goats!

In this post, I'm going to be going over the COD franchise and why it's a failure and at the same time, a success.  I'll also compare and contrast between other franchises and the game industry itself and how COD fits in.

When COD4 was first released, it gave birth to a whole new experience in the FPS genre, similar to how Halo changed and defined most of what the genre is like today.  This of course is going to portray my personal opinion on things as usual, I will try my best not to be biased towards certain matters.. Because y'know, I'M NOT FUCKIN IGNORANT!  ...moving on..  FPS games in general have a certain formula that attracts players.  The captivating single player, multiplayer greatness, and the feel of the game as a whole (more on this formula later).  COD4, like Halo before it, created a whole new experience and would define a new generation of gamers and the genre again.  Perhaps this time for the worse? (SEE!  I posed this as a question so that it doesn't seem like a biased opinion! ;D)

Before we get into the nitty gritty of why I think what I do (because I know you're all dying to know my thoughts!) I would like to touch on the different types of gamers we're talking about within the FPS genre.  I myself was generally a PC gamer as I had no consoles besides the late dreamcast, then upgraded to the gamecube and finally the Xbox.  Being a PC gamer I was into RTS games etc. and then I got to play Halo!  It was an experience that would change me forever as a gamer!  I played it religiously on the PC as I didn't have an xbox, and I got to play online and I got quite skilled at the game, games like Half Life followed and I was thrust into the FPS community, great games with great story lines and wicked multiplayer forever growing in quality with each instalment!
      What I'm really getting at here, is that my experiences of gaming turned me into a different type of gamer, I got the Xbox when Halo 2 was released and was hooked.  A lot more people, didn't have the same FPS experience as I did, because a lot more people had the PS2 rather then the xbox or gamecube (gamecube wasn't really popular for FPS either.).  The PS2 had games like metal gear, devil may cry, final fantasy, and grand theft auto.  Not exactly your typical FPS games, the only noteworthy FPS game was Killzone which was pretty lame to my standards.

The release of the Xbox 360 and PS3 posed the next generation of gaming, and they were right.  A new generation had emerged...  For me, it was same old, still playing Halo 2 on the 360, awaiting the next instalment, playing FPS games etc. and of course other games like Guitar hero (which we'll use as an example later..).  The PS2 generation were more then likely looking forward to the PS3, but Microsoft took the leap first and released their Xbox 360 console which may have acquired some of the sony fan base.  Other people like me who had played Halo, were sold on the new xbox, despite hardware failures, we  were going to play Halo 3!  The people that were new to Xbox haven't really experienced Halo for what it was, or ignorantly decided to boycot it because it wasn't their kind of game, and the PS3 fanboys seen it as Microsoft so they did the same thing.

Along comes COD4!  All of these newcomers to the Xbox and inexperienced FPS PS3 peeps are thrilled with this new experience that they've never seen before! "such a good game!" they would all say!  Then.. the flame wars would begin between shooters like halo and COD, people who haven't played halo would say "it sucks! COD is soo much better!".  Those who play halo would say "COD is ok, but it borrows a lot from Halo that came before it."

Most of this currently is probably off topic, but to grasp my understanding, you'll have to endure just a bit more..  My point here is that people who got into Call of Duty early on "or even late I guess" Fell in love with it and in my opinion didn't know what to expect from FPS franchises after many sequels.


ALRIGHT! MY NEXT POINT!

Call of Duty now has 8 games under its belt, 5 of them being the new more popular ones (COD4, WAW, MW2, BOPS, MW3.).  My theory as to why people are so loyal to this franchise is because they haven't experienced an FPS game that makes a point in improving the overall game and changing its formula. (BRINGING FORMULA UP AGAIN!)

The Halo franchise made a point at changing its formula after every major instalment.  The game was noticeably different every time a new one was released, and as a result it would take longer for the game to come out.  This was the norm for people like me, waiting anxiously for the sequel, getting hyped with every trailer that came out!  When the game is finally released you notice the crisp new graphics, the new engine, new weapons, gameplay improvements and changes to the controls, everything just seems so much better!  The story captivates you more, you tell yourself "man!  This company cares about the game!  They really gave it their all!"  With COD, this just isn't the case...

The most recent Call of Duty games don't share the same production value as other games like Halo, Mass Effect, Uncharted, God of War, Metal Gear Solid, Deus Ex etc.  COD seems to have an assembly line mindset.  In each instalment, the single player changes obviously, which feels more tacked on (in my opinion).  The multiplayer however, never really changes, it's the same thing with a new skin basically.  It's kind of like a car company when you think about it.  Every year they release a new model of the same car, it has some new bells and whistles, but doesn't look drastically different, in some cases even has the same "engine" (lol! see what i did there?).  However despite all of this, the car does exactly the same thing.. it drives, and the changes are minimal.  This is how COD feels to me.  In the point of games, production is key, I like to feel like the developer cared enough about the game to make it feel new and different.  Every COD game I've played since 4 has failed to live up to any sort of expectation I have when a sequel is released.  The same engine is used, the same mechanics, everything.  There is no giant leap to the next great thing.  Halo for example has been successful with each new game, they've made a leap to something new which makes it worthy of the full price.  COD feels like an expansion with every release, and therefore, not worthy of the $60 price tag.  This is the exact reason why COD is a failure as a franchise.


NEXT POINT!

"So.. Mike why is it so successful if it's a failure like you say?!"

I'm glad you asked, because those players I was talking about before, they don't have the same respect for production value in games as other people.  I of course haven't dismissed COD from my gaming life, of course not, I still have COD 4 (LOL!! Because it hasn't changed? Get it?  They're all the same game?).  COD isn't a bad game by any means, it just fails to live up to my expectations which demand a higher production value.  The COD Fanboys out there, don't really respect or maybe even see that aspect, most of them seem to be adolescent kids that just want instant gratification, and that's why COD is such a success.  I'm definitely not saying this is all COD players, some people just enjoy that formula.  If something's good why change it?  This holds true for Halo, things changed in every instalment and they lost fans because of it, but real fans stayed interested and loyal to the franchise.  COD hasn't changed at all, which means they're playing it safe, which also means that they're loyal players will stay loyal, and they'll pay that $60 for the expansion of a game... (squeaky fuckin kids!!)

Some of you probably think I'm the ignorant one for omitting certain details.  I'm getting to those now..  I've been saying COD this entire time, because Activison is too long to spell out that many times.  Activison is the real culprit here.  They have 2 game companies consistently working on COD non-stopped.  So even though a COD game is released every year, the development cycle is done through 2 years.  This just shows how much like an assembly line Activison is, constantly pushing out a product.  We've seen this in multiple Activison titles as well..  Games like Tony Hawk and Guitar Hero were butchered by Activisons greed.  I'm a person that was in love with Guitar Hero 2, but then Activison took ownership and popped out enough games, that if they were children, could challenge octomom to war.

NEXT POINT!

Lets get into the video game industry.  COD is a bad example of a success story, because for gamers like me, it's the opposite of what we want..  We want games that aren't assembly line, we want unique titles that stand out on their own within a franchise.  New fresh ideas.  COD (or Activison rather..) promotes the assembly line, and once they have something that sold well the first time, they focus only on that, take no chances and release a bland product over and over again with minor changes.

Obviously the entire gaming industry isn't following this model, and I think that more are starting to wise up and see that only Activison can really pull this off for some reason.  EA tried this, (and every company that has come out with a modern combat shooter recently has also tried it..)  But EA seems most prominent, Battlefield Bad Company 1 and 2, and also the newest Medal of Honor game.  These tried a little bit to steal some spotlight from COD, but ultimately failed, of course people liked the games, it just wasn't as popular.  EA still tried, and wised up, realizing "We can't just try and copy COD and release the same game.. We need something BETTER!"  So they called up DICE... again... who had done the other BF games and the most recent MOH. "Make us a Battlefield 3!  A major installment to that franchise!  It's been a while!  Make it from the ground up!"  So they did! (i don't know if that's how it actually went, but that's what happened in my head.)  DICE created a whole new engine for this game (keep in mind that Battlefield 2 was released on PC in 2005, and an Xbox/360 version Modern Combat was released in 2006 over 5 years before BF3 was announced.).  They created the game from the ground up, and today it truly does rival COD, because I chose it over the newest COD, and the game plays like a charm.  It's still in the modern combat genre, and is a small contradiction that the story in the game is still lame...  But other then that, it's a glimmer of hope that EA won't make the same mistake as Activision and constantly release the same game over again..

My fingers are starting to hurt.. but i still have more to say!

I'm in no way dissing COD players, I think that everyone has their opinion, and there is no one that has the one right opinion.. and that's why it's called an opinion.  I'm not telling you to put down COD because it's hurting the gaming industry (because most companies and developers know better.. and care about more then just money..)  If you want to keep playing the same thing over and over again every year, then go for it if that's entertaining for you.  Multiplayer games are a social experience too, which is one thing I'll give credit to COD for.

I mean no disrespect to real gamers who enjoy COD.  I also enjoy it, I'm just sick of supporting the franchise, the changes made in these latest sequels from COD4 are not enough for me to justify a $60 price tag.  I will continue to play BF3, and of course like I said, I still have the original COD 4.. and will play that over the existing new COD games in the franchise, because the experience is still the same.

Thanks for reading everyone!! Sorry for wasting those 5-10 minutes of your life that you won't get back :D!

Please feel free to leave your thoughts, whether you agree or disagree, but please leave an educated argument, and not just a blatant ignorant opinion like "COD RULES!" or whatever.  I had the decency to write fucking thousands of words to explain myself!!

Later Goats.

--
Michael MacDonald

Music the good and the bad by Mike MacDonald

RANT!

So today, I decided I'm just going to rant and rave about one of my favourite things!  Music!  Now this is all my personal opinion.  I'm going to talk about my beliefs and my opinions on music and the industry.  There will be no pictures in this rant, just me and my wonderful text.

So let's begin.  I'll be honest, I'm not very open minded when it comes to music.  Well I shouldn't say that.  I'm open minded, but I'm very set in my ways.  I do enjoy a fairly large spectrum of music.  This ranges from punk, hard rock, film score, and more.  But my main obsession is Metal.  Metal has a lot of stereotypes associated with it, but I'm not going to get into those.. because the problem with stereotypes is that.. well they're stereotypes, stereotypes are great misconceptions of what the genre and it's people actually are.  Especially since Metal as a whole is made up of various other genres such ass blues, classical, and many others.  I enjoy metal the most because of this fact.  Metal has a very wide range, as do other genres, but metal remains to be unique.  Of course there are a lot of bands in the genre today that tend to be and sound exactly the same..  The worst part is, a lot of these bands are big now.  This annoys me.

The mainstream music scene saddens me greatly, because there is a lot of unheard talent out there that is unique and doesn't get the chance to be heard.

The first problem I'm going to state is the pop culture phenomenon.. American Idol.

I watched the first season of American Idol, and maybe even the second season, because I was interested in what the judges had to say, and I wanted to see if people were any good.  After that, I stopped watching and judging from my point of view, because I realized that none of these people are being judged correctly, and there are so many "pop" singers today, that it's hard to actually know who they are.  I honestly could not tell the difference between Lady Gaga and Kesha or whatever their names are.  This could be due to that I'm not really immersed in the media, and don't really care about these artists.  But the reason I don't care who they are is because neither of them were unique to me.  This is the case with American Idol. All of the contestants sound the same, all of the people who win you either don't really hear about, or they sound exactly like another artist..  Usually the person that wins will sound like the person who won last year. 

Another problem I have with this is that all of the contestants are judged mainly on their voice...  Their range, wether or not they understand pitch and can control their voice in that way.  Yes, they are good singers obviously...  But, are they good songwriters?  I really could care less how high of notes you can hit.  Ya, it's impressive, but you don't get famous and successful from performing someone elses material...  That's what these contestants are judged on!  How good they can sing someone elses work!  What kind of competition is that?  These people should be forced to write their own material and sing their own material.  Because the people who win, could very well be an amazing singer, but could be a horrible song writer...  I'll give you an example of Clay Aiken from one of the earlier seasons...  He is not a good song writer..  "If I was Invisible"?  His single sounded more like he was being a stalker than anything.  I know some of these performers have other people writing the songs.. and they should be to blame for being bad.  Than that still just emphasizes the point that, they're not writing their own stuff...  They don't deserve it.

I feel very strongly about this obviously, and I refuse to watch the competition, or any other competition that relies on people performing songs from other people.  It's the same thing I think about with musicians.  Ya, you can play guitar really fast, but can you write something with that?  I consider myself to be a fairly rounded guitarist, more average really.  I know my limits and I know what I'm capable of, and I can properly apply that to my writing, if something I write is more difficult for me, than I learn how to do it.  I think of myself to be a fairly good songwriter, I write music all of the time, I probably have 3-4 albums worth right now of material.  These people that are on American Idol and similar shows have probably never written a song in their lives.  If you can sing, but can't write, well.. I'm sorry, but you don't deserve to be famous and successful, maybe you can be a vocal coach or something.  People who get big from other peoples material, and people who get big through American Idol are taking the places of people that have real talent.  The music industry seems to be a little lazy from my point of view.  Let's just have a competition and let the nation decide.  The more popular they are the better they must be right?

WRONG!  Over half of the population is probably tone deaf, and they choose the person they feel has the best personality or is the best eye candy.  I'm just angry and sad that the music industry has fallen so far that they just keep making copies of singers.  Once one singer gets older and people like them a little less, they pop out another one!  Hence why American Idol has so many fucking awful seasons.

I could go on about how bad the industry is today.. but, what about the good?  Well, the good of the music industry is the older music.  There are some new good artists today, but these artists are no where near as popular as most of the mainstream pop copies.  70's music, 80's music, 90's music, and a little bit of modern music, and even further back.  Back in these decades, people didn't even have to know how to sing!  Singing was a point of view, a style of the voice.  Some people spoke to their songs, some people yelled to their songs, and some people sang with heat, anger, and emotion.  This is the good music.  These people can write good music, which is very rare in todays society.  The problem with music, is that it's a very personal thing to those who are greatly immersed into it and have strong opinions.  But a lot of society just listen to what's popular because, they think it must be good if it's popular.  These are the people I call drones..  Because they don't try and discover what kind of music they like, they fall into social norms and expectations.  Their friend listens to Katy Perry.. so they listen to her too.  That being said, I don't really like Katy Perry, but she is actually an artist I can pick out on the radio,  so she must be doing something right.  So maybe that was a bad example.  But people mostly listen to the music their friends like.  I know because I used to be the same way, and in High School it was considered "cool" to listen to Iron Maiden, even though people didn't properly understand or respect just how good Iron Maiden was.  I know this because they would always talk about the same select songs that were sooooo good.  Ya those songs are good, but there's more than just their "popular" songs.  Most songs that are popular aren't the best, because music is such a personal thing, other songs besides the singles etc. will resonate much better than others.

I believe my opinion on music is very insightful.  No, I don't listen to everything, but I don't like everything, and music is a very personal taste.  Music is, and should be emotional and really reflect the kind of person you are.  Which brings me to my main point about music.  The disrespect of certain genres.  There are different genres that I will not listen to, because I honestly just can't stand it and the musicians associated with it...  One of those being Country music... Country music is by no means unique in any way in my opinion..  It's predictable, all of the singers sound the same, and it's just not unique, if you've herd one country song you've heard them all, technically and lyrically.

I'm a strong believer that there is no such thing as bad music.  There's not, because there will always be some people that like a certain style.  Whether that be country, rap, metal, rock, jazz, etc. etc.  You can't say one genre is bad, because there will always be someone there to defend it.  Country as I said before, I really hate.  But the fact is, is that it does resonate with some people, regardless of my technical, insightful, educated opinion on it.  So if you're going to talk about music with someone.. Please leave your ignorance at the door.  We all have our reasons for liking something, just because our opinion differs doesn't mean we're right about it.  That's the thing about opinions, there is no right opinion in anything, because every opinion is personal and mainly relies on likes and dislikes, and everyone has different like's and dislikes.

I could keep going on the topic, but I think I'm going to end my rant there.  On another note, there is a battle of the bands happening in May, in my home town of Miramichi!

I did this all by myself :)

Join the facebook group or at least check it out, many different genres will be playing and I hope many people attend and support.  http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=183991791639239

Shameless Promotions 1! by Mike MacDonald

I thought this was hilarious, so I'm gonna use it.

This is a little segment that I decided I should do every so often called Shameless Promotions!  This is where I take random things I like and things I think that should be brought to the spotlight because, well, it's good stuff, and I know it, and my opinion is the only opinion.  Not really, but really.

The first thing I'm going to promote is myself.  I'd say that's something pretty shameless to start off with.  Now where to begin... Because you know, I've got plenty of awesome traits.

ChronoshifT!  This is my music project.  I write all of the music for this project, play all of the instruments including the vocal work.  I also record all of it as well, and design all of the logo's artwork etc. etc.  (I'm actually pretty good with HTML and web design and all that stuff, I just don't feel like putting much of that effort into the blog..  Would loose it's... mystique!).  Right now I'm a one man band, and I'm hoping for that to change at some point.  You can check out this stuff at any of the following pages!

http://www.myspace.com/chronoshiftmetal
http://www.youtube.com/csofficial
http://www.twitter.com/chronoshiftmdm
http://www.facebook.com/pages/ChronoshifT/125506318597

This link is very important, this link is to help promote this further!  With your help the music can spread to the audience it's supposed to be heard by and have the fanbase grow.  Even if you don't like metal music, helping out people is always nice and will leave you feeling much better about yourself!

http://signmeto.roadrunnerrecords.com/artists/chronoshift

Go there, if you need to create a fan account or whatever it's called, it doesn't take long, give ChronoshifT some high ratings, pick my songs and pick me as an artist, you can also leave an "anonymous" nice review :D!

Shameless enough?  I think so.  Now lets shamelessly promote someone that deserves it!

One of my old college buddies has a well formed, well worded, intelligent blog.  Unlike the things I talk about on here, he portrays things that actually matter to people.  He writes about interesting topics and gives his honest opinion, which I respect!

(on a side note I'm in a cafeteria, and an old lady asked another old lady "Where'd you get that?!" "My son got it from the internet!"  No referal of website or company or anything.. Just the internet..  Some kind of contraption to help quit smoking.  I thought that was pretty funny and thought you people might like it!)

Sorry, got off topic... Where was I?  O YA!

If you'd like to check out Beef Pattie, you can check it out at the link I'm providing under the unneeded, continuting, procrastinating, ongoing............................text.

Beef Pattie - http://beefpattie.com/

He also is a damn good graphic designer!  You can probably hire him if you want, I'm sure he likes money, of course if there's a problem with this or any shameless promotions I put on here, I will take them down right away, but who doesn't like free promotion?!  (I've mispelled Promotion as Pomotion like 10 times, so this is taking me forever...  We might just stick with that for the rest of the post.)

Here's the link to his graphic design page I'm pomoting!

N.J.D. Designs - http://njddesigns.com/

Well...  That's our Shameless Pomotions for today!  If you think you've got some good stuff, whether it be a blog, youtube channel, website, business etc. etc.  If it's good, respectable, not stupid, and not creepy I might put it up.  Of course the amount of people reading this probably won't be of much help in pomoting, but I need something to write about once and a while when I'm stumped, so help me, help you, help me.

--
pomoted by
Mike MacDonald

Xbox 360 vs PS3 by Mike MacDonald

So, earlier today I was on facebook, i'm not gonna bullshit you.. I use facebook more frequently than I would like to admit... So I don't admit it.  I've been doing this 30 days of gaming thing like a bunch of other people.  It's where you post 1 picture per day for 30 days of what game suits that day, the days being best gameplay, or, saddest game moment. etc. etc.  I won't get into detail on that.  One of my friends posted they're console of choice today, that being Xbox 360.  You can only imagine that PS3 fanboys started coming out to bash it of course...  But you see this pretty much anywhere someone posts anything about one console or the other.  I'm not just pointing fingers at PS3 fanboys either, 360 fanboys are just as bad.

The thing that really makes me mad though is ignorance.  If you think something is better, or if something is horrible, back up your damn argument.  What evidence do you have that such and such a system sucks?

Before I really get into it, I would like to point out that no, the Wii will not be entering this battle, because Nintendo has failed to join the next generation of consoles, but are still doing extremely well for their cheap little motion sensing machine.

So let's get started.. I'm going to do some comparisons.  This is from my PERSONAL opinion, I have owned both consoles and have experienced them pretty equally I'd say.

The Games


What console has the best game library?  Well it's hard to say...  The majority of both game library's are multi-platform games, that means both consoles have them.  So if you're into Call of Duty, each console will play these games just as good.  Of course there has been evidence that for some reason, some multi-platform games don't work as well on the PS3 as they do on 360, Bayonetta being one of these games.  This is probably due to the fact that a lot of these games are designed on the Xbox 360 first, and than made for the PS3 later, more than likely a hardware compatibility thing, but I'll get into that later.

So we can't judge these consoles on multi-platform, that's for certain, because they both have them.  Comparing the graphics on them doesn't work because they look pretty much identical with maybe different brightness or lighting, but this usually has to do with the TV too.

Imagine your favourite console is in his hands..

Xbox 360 Exclusives:

Alan Wake

Dead Rising series

Fable series

Forza series

Gears of War series

Halo series (including Halo Wars)

Lost Odyssey

Mass Effect

Saints Row series

Playstation 3 Exclusives:

God of War 3

Killzone series

Uncharted series

Metal Gear Solid 4

Infamous series

Heavy Rain

Gran Turismo 5

Demon Souls series

Little Big Planet

Now I know there's definitely more than just those, but I feel those are the most notable ones from each console.  Not all of these games interest me at all.  Games like Forza and Gran Turismo just don't float my boat.  For me, there's more games on the 360 front than there are for PS3, that interest me.

My picks from both:

Xbox 360:

Alan Wake

Halo series

Fable series

Gears of War series

Dead Rising series

Mass Effect

Lost Odyssey

PS3:

Metal Gear Solid 4

Uncharted 2

God of War 3

Killzone 2

It's pretty obvious that I'm more into the hardcore games than anything else.  Xbox 360 offers more in the realm of exclusives.  However, the PS3 exclusive games are very heavy hitters, I enjoyed MGS4 and God of War 3 immensely.  There's definitely talent there, but PS3 doesn't have enough of these and not enough original games that aren't sequals.  All of the other games besides Halo and Fable are original to the Xbox 360 and are new innovative ideas, where as all of the PS3 games I've listed come from either a PS2 game or is a sequal.  Uncharted being probably the only original idea, taking a spin on Tomb Raider/Gears of War.  That being said, sony's original games that came from PS2 have excellent story and gameplay "with the exception of Killzone, the story in that kind blew".

Please keep in mind that this is all personal preference.

Online Gaming

*squeaky*PWND! N00B*squeaky* "FFFFUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!!!!!"

This is where a lot of the debates start between the 2 consoles..  Mainly because PS3 has a benefit of free online with an option to upgrade for more content etc.  Where as 360 is about $60 for 13 months of online play.  I agree to an extent that online gaming should be free, if you pay for a game you should be entitled to all of its features.  But I see this as a World of Warcraft effect.  Blizzard charges roughly $15/month to play their game, and they've been doing that for year.  You buy the game, and you end up paying for it forever...  Play on private servers, it'll save you a lot of dough and it's pretty much the exact same as retail, with some minor bugs here and there...

When it comes to online games.. this, for me, is the decider.  People will buy the console that their friends play.  In my case it's Xbox 360, because everything that we play online is pretty much muti-platform, so there's really no argument you can make.

Xbox 360:

Xbox Live - $60 for 13 months of online play + services

I prefer this because Xbox has the party chat option where you can have up to 8 people in the same chat, you can watch movies together while online, play games, and video chat etc.

PS3:

PSN - Free online play and access to some services

Playstation Plus - $50 for 12 months of access to services similar to those of xbox live.

I haven't seen PSN lately, so don't get mad at me if I missed some things, I've never experienced a party chat or video chat and whatnot on PSN when I owned the PS3 console, it may have changed since than.

From my standpoint, I'd choose XBL, because all of my friends play on Xbox live, and that's quite a bit of people, so I usually always had someone to play with.  PS3 I only had 2 friends that weren't online very often.  The services PS+ promotes try to sound exclusive, and I'm sure it is, but from my standpoint, the same services are available to everyone on xbox live, so, everything is exclusive to those who "pay" for it.

Hardware and Innovation

Ok, so, I'm just gonna put it out there.  PS3 definitely has the better hardware inside it's black box.  This is proven through their exclusive games like God of War 3, Uncharted 2, Killzone 2.  All beautiful looking games.  Xbox 360 does have excellent hardware capabilities, almost comparable.  That's why a lot of games are multi-platform.  Games like Gears of War on xbox are quite comparable to those on PS3.  I would consider Gears to be one of the better looking games on Xbox.  Crysis 2 is another game coming out with excellent visual graphics comparable to PS3's top games, however, again, it's multi-platform.

Bottom line is, PS3 has better hardware, but 360 is comparable.  I'm not gonna go into specs and fancy numbers and all that crap, no body cares.  The bigger the number the better isn't always the case, so shut it!

We've gotten past the hardware, now let get to the innovation...

We should have kept track of the design process a bit more..

I don't care how much of a PS3 fanboy you are, you can't like PS Move, how can ANYBODY like this Lollipop dildo Wii rip off!?  That's literally what it is, when it comes to innovation, I put a huge fail stamp on sonys forehead.  The Move is basically a high definition wii console, but the bottom line is, it's been done.  People into this stuff probably already have a wii, most PS owners are hardcore gamers and don't want to pay $180+ to play with a Dildo that has a light up ball.  There might be some girls who do.. I dunno.  The wii has already done this, established the market and have the games for it.  Sony is very late to the plate, and weren't even original on the concept, they didn't even bother to try and change it.  It's exactly the same as the wii!  Come on sony!  Don't be stupid, stupid!

This used to be Natal, than people made fun of it :(

This, is more like it.  Microsoft definitely stepped up to the plate on this one.  Again, this is a product of the Wii's success.  Instead of following suit and making yet another motion controller, they came up with the Kinect motion tracking camera.  They completely eliminated the controller and let people play games with their entire body.  I have the Kinect and have to say that it is very well done.  It does however need a larger library, but I feel like Microsoft is on the right track with Kinect.  It becomes more than just a motion control gimmick for sports games, but a voice activated and hand gesture interface for your console.  It's quite basic at the moment, but you can see the future with this device.  Keep in mind I'll always want a controller when playing a shooter.  I quite like Kinect, it differs from the wii and PS3 with the fact it has no controller.  Kinect I think is more milestone for the future.  This is a product of good design and innovation.

I'm trying my best to be as unbiased as possible, as I haven't played PS Move.  I just don't feel that Sony made a great decision with Move.  It's overpriced, it's gimmicky, and it feels like one of those knock off 3rd party video game things that is copying the wii.  I've owned a Wii, enjoyed it for a while, and the motion controller thing just isn't for me.  Kinect came with my xbox, so I just ended up owning it.  It was a package deal.

Final Verdict

After everything I've said, I give the edge to the Xbox 360 from my personal experience.  Xbox has the games I want, the online experience I want, and the innovation to keep the platform moving forward.

Sony has always come short for me when it's come to the PS3, I watch every E3 conference with great enthusiasm, waiting to see what they'll show in their press conference.  Every press conference I've watched Sony has talked more about the PS2 than they have with the PS3.  This past year was an exception.  We can all agree that sony has had a hard time getting started with the PS3.  When it first came out it was overpriced, didn't have a great library and was falling behind.  The Blu-Ray player is what  I think really set it behind out of the gate, but it proves to be working for it now, especially since beating out HD DVD's.  Blu-Ray discs are definitely a benefit for the PS3, but I don't see that as a decider.. I can get HD movies that look just as good and can fit them on one DVD and watch it on my HD TV.  The Blu-Ray doesn't have much effect on me.  It's more the TV than the player on that point.  Blu-Ray is definitely a step forward for sony, being able to fit every game on one disc rather than 2, 3, or 4.  But, I've always enjoyed having more discs for some reason... I just feel like I'm getting more for my money when that happens.

The one thing I didn't mention in here was the failure rate Xbox 360 has had in the past.  The reason I didn't is because I never really had that big of a problem with the RROD (red ring of death), and Microsoft has since than seemingly eliminated it from the console.  PS3 also had it's own failure, being the Yellow light of death..  This just wasn't as widely broadcast, but there were plenty of PS3 consoles that have had this happen.

In conclusion, you're experience may differ from mine.  This is based solely on my personal experience with both consoles, and I believe my reasons are valid for thinking what I do.  I'm not perfect in my opinion, no I'm not, however much I like to believe that I am, I know I'm not.  If you disagree, or have a different opinion, you are entitled to it.  But for the love of fuck!  BACK UP YOUR DAMN ARGUMENT!!  Saying Xbox sucks, or PS3 sucks, is invalid and devoid of merit.  Each console has a living thriving fan base, and the very fact that fanboys exist for both sides just proves that neither of the consoles suck.  It's almost like racism in a way isn't it?  Judging something and calling it names just because it's different!  FOR SHAME!

Thus concludes my basic reasoning for favouring Xbox, the title really should have been, "Why I like Xbox better than that piece of trash that calls itself a console shitty garbage disposal of a machine that's better at making coffee than it is at playing video games!"  lololololololololol  ;).

--
by
Mike MacDonald

Amnesia: The Dark Descent Review by Mike MacDonald

I had mentioned a couple of posts ago that would be doing a review on a little game called Amnesia by Frictional Games.  This is that post.

Introduction

Amnesia is a classic survival horror game that can be described as a hidden masterpiece in the video game industry.  This being a not so well known 3rd party publisher, it's nice to see something different and actually well done compared to all of the heavy hitter titles from well known publishers that have somewhat taken the main focus.  I'll explain to you all f the features that make this a great game.

Story

Amnesia begins with the protagonist Daniel traveling through the castle of brenninburg (spelling?).  He had drank something to make himself lose his memory, on purpose.. for some reason.  Daniel leaves himself a note explaining that he needed to make himself loose his memory and that he must kill Alexander, specifically says "murder".  There are narrated notes and flashback sequences that explain how Daniel got into the position he's in.  A good storytelling method to keep the mood of the game and still keep pretty good pacing.  Daniel travels through the castle to find Alexander and makes his way to the Inner Sanctum, Alexanders most precious chamber located deep underground.  Throughout the game you see mentionings of a Mythic Orb that Daniel found in Africa on an expedition, this orb holds great significance throughout the entire game and is a main plotpoint as to why Daniel is in his position and why he is going to "murder" Alexander.  The story is very immersive and keeps you interested through the entire game, you're constantly wondering what the monster is that is chasing you, and what the purpose of the orb is.  It has a great sense of mystery which is something that few games today accomplish.  The only thing I was disappointed with was the lack of backstory Daniel and Alexander, but again that adds to the mystery to the past of Alexander, the castle, and his motives.

Story Rating: 8.5/10

Gameplay


Amnesia has a simple, unique, and somewhat classic RPG gameplay style.  You are completely immersed into the world as Daniel, there are no cutscenes, not breaks in the gameplay.  Everything that happens does so on screen in front of Daniel, so basically what he see's you see.  You ARE Daniel.
The most fantastic feature that makes this game so unique is the fact you have no weapons, you have no way of defending yourself against the monsters in Brenninburg.  This mechanic works incredibly well as a survival horror factor.  You literally have no choice but to run and hide, and that's exactly what you'll do.
Daniel has a lot of issues, one of those issues is, he's afraid of the dark... literally..  this isn't explained in the game, but you can kind of tell by how he starts to go insane if in the dark too long.  I'm not even joking, there's literally an insanity meter in the game.  Staying in the dark slowly drains your insanity, the more insane you get the more blurry your vision becomes, the harder it gets to walk around, and you'll eventually imagine bugs crawling on your face and faint.  After you've fainted though you lay down for a bit and get back up, and your insanity is reset, so you can really go through the whole game without turning on a light.  The negative to light though is that it's much easier for monsters to see you, and if you see a monster, your insanity starts going way up if you look at them too long.  Usually though if you see the monster you're pretty much dead.  This is what you see before you die.

Notice how all of the lights are on?

So if you want to be smart, you'll stay in the dark.., you'll slowly go insane, but progressing through the game and solving puzzles with help you regain your insanity.  Now the above pictures shows you what not to do..  Now this is what you're supposed to do!

Dammit!  He evaded me with darkness!

The rest of the gameplay revolves around puzzles and creating items.  At times you'll find your route blocked because of weird organic substances, or a bunch of rocks.  You eventually make acid and explosives, and you need to create other items in order to obtain the ingredients needed to create other items.  The puzzles really aren't all that hard, but you will find yourself in some places where you don't know what the hell to do with something you just picked up.  I picked up a metal pipe at one point... and I never ended up using it, but rest assured every item has a purpose, but you can find ways around even needing those items, so the game kind of lets you be creative in the way you progress.  The only items you can't get, are weapons.  Of course you can pick up things you could use as weapons.. but even though Daniel some how sports super human throwing strength, he doesn't seem to understand the concept that knives are sharp... and hammers cause blunt force trauma...

Health, Sanity, Inventory

The gameplay really does provide a great survival horror experience without allowing you to harm the monsters or defend yourself, it's really just you going from point A to point B, but having to hide in dark corners while your trying to get there.  There are instances in the game where you can't even hide from the monsters, and are forced to just run and slam doors behind you... Which the monsters will inevitably smash open.  It is kind of weird though that there's plenty of weapon type things lying around that you could use, but Daniel explains at the first of the game that he's tried everything.  So I guess he can't pick any weapons up because he already knows and doesn't want to embarrass himself.

Gameplay Rating: 9/10

Graphics

Now, I don't think graphics are particularly all that important when it comes to this kind of game.  That being said, the graphics really aren't bad and are actually pretty comparable to some bigger titles.

The textures are all pretty sharp and the environments are chilling, especially when they change right before your eyes.  The sprites in game could use a little more TLC, but you rarely see any people or even the monsters to really care about that much about it.  The lighting in all of the different areas sets a different mood and feel.  Those moods being "I am definitely going to die here." and "I might possibly die here.."

All of this plumbing and I have not ONCE seen a bathroom!

Everything about the castle in Amnesia tells you that it's always been a dark and dreary place, some messed up stuff happened here..  You're constantly looking around every corner in suspense, you never really feel safe.  That's definitely a job well done when it comes to survival horror.  All of this being said, you can tell the graphics are a bit dated in this day in age, but you can't really expect all that much from a low budget.  The graphics do the job, and the team knows the limitations of the engine and don't try to overdo it.  The game runs smooth and some lower end PC's with decent graphics as well, which is pretty much a plus I'd say.

Graphics Rating: 7/10

Design


When I talk about the design of a game, I'm really talking about the sound, atmosphere, environment, art style, and the overall feel all of these elements bring to the game.  In Amnesia's case, all of these elements work together rather well.  Having these things work good in a survival horror game is pretty vital, because in this kind of game, if you don't instil fear into the player than the game isn't doing it's job.

The sound works incredibly well to bring you into the atmosphere.  You hear distant screams through pipes running through the castle and underground.  There are plenty of instances where Daniel will gasp and turn in a direction uncontrollably without warning, which is actually kind of freaky at times, because you're like "WHAT?! WHT IS IT DANIEL!! TELL ME! O GOD!".  It's quite a fun experience..

I'm not really one for scripted occurrences, because it takes away from re-playability.  The game isn't very fun when you know when and where something is going to happen.  There are some places where this happens in Amnesia, but not as much as other survival horror games.  Of course if you've played the game as much as I have, you'll know when to be careful and where you can relax.  Really, the first play-through is the best, and definitely scares the bajesus out of you.  Doors will open by themselves, pianos will play in the distance, and when you find them.. there's no one there.. you close the piano, and you leave.. you hear it again.. go back.. AND THE PIANO IS OPEN AGAIN!  This and other scripted happenings like, someone banging on a door and yelling to get out and than quickly silenced by a hulking beast.  All of these things work together well to make you feel unsafe... and insecure.  Which is exactly what they should do.

Design Review: 10/10



Final Verdict


Amnesia, is one great game, it will terrify you, and if you like survival horror, it doesn't get much better than this.  Disturbing scenes and images will haunt you..  For the type of game Amnesia is, it does everything right.  Anyone interested should really buy the game, don't just download it.  Buying the game actually helps this publisher and will get them to make bigger and better games!

Story: 8.5/10
Gameplay: 9/10
Graphics: 7/10
Design: 10/10

Overall: 8.6

Now, I leave you with some excellent moments in Amnesia!

Crysis 2 Multiplayer Demo Review! by Mike MacDonald

Now, I've been hearing people all up in arms about the Bulletstorm demo, probably just because it's made by EPIC, who did Gears of War.  Ya it look cool, has some cool ideas, but I think people are missing a real true hidden gem that was released just 2 days ago.  Well... Dead Space 2 came out just 2 days ago and that is definitely something you should pick up. Awesome game..  But I'm talking about the Crysis 2 Multiplayer Demo.  I don't have very many pictures, because I couldn't find very many that do the game justice, so be prepared to read rather than look at pretty pictures.

I feel like Crysis is being a little underrated by people who haven't really taken the time to play it.  Crysis 2 is a learning curve at first, but it's very familiar.  Crysis 2 sports the exact same control scheme as the Call of Duty franchise, you could say that their ripping it off, but it works perfectly and is good for people that are shooter fans.  I was able to jump right into the fray, I even placed 1st in my 1st game!  The controls are almost exact give or take a couple of buttons.

In a nutshell, this game almost feels like Call of Duty and Halo had a baby.  You'll see what i mean when I go over the features of the game.  Right now actually!


Features

At first glance, Crysis 2 seems like just another shooter, borrowing ideas from other shooters..  But lets not forget that the first Crysis game was using these same ideas on PC back in 2007, roughly around the same time Modern Warfare and Halo 3 came out, Crysis actually brought new ideas and implementations to the table that we're only now starting to respect.  When I heard Crysis 2 was coming to the consoles, I was both excited and skeptical.  I wasn't sure how they were going to work all of the abilities into the control scheme of a modern console controller.  But I have to say, they worked it out pretty good.

I won't have to explain much, because everything is exact to COD controls except the D-Pad and the Bumpers.  Your bumpers now sport 2 armor abilities "similar to Halo Reach".  Your D-Pad now holds your grenades, you need to equip them and than throw them.

Unlike Halo, you have all of your armor abilities available to you at all times.  These abilities include:

• Maximum Armour (almost like an over shield, extra armor you can trigger in a firefight)
• Cloak (Simulated invisibility to sneak up on people.)
• Run (same as COD, slowed down while in Power Armor mode)
• Super Jump (Holding the A button will make you jump really really high, almost like having a jetpack, but quicker.)

Maximum Armour Bitch!! :D

These are just your default armor abilities, everyone in the game has them.  These abilities can be upgraded as you progress throughout the game.

All of these powers are used with limitations via the energy meter.  Every ability uses energy, and once your energy meter is empty you just have to wait for it to recharge.  This is good because it balances the game and encourages you to use more than one ability.  However, if you do like using one ability, like say.. The cloak ability, that ability will level up higher than all of your other abilities.  The more you use it the better it gets.

I've only made it to level 10 so far, so I've unlocked some things, but probably not as much as I could.

There are some cool little features you can add to your armour and replace.  One ability in particular that I've replaced is the ground stomp.  This ability allows you to crash to the ground with a powerful shockwave after jumping and holding the B button.  I decided to replace it with an unlocked ability, I can't remember what it's called haha, but it's basically a sonar ability to let you know when enemies are nearby.  It's starts off with a quiet beep and gets louder as they get closer to you or you get closer to them.  This helps a lot when flushing out campers or if you're looking for a stealthy kill.  There's also a similar ability that allows you to detect cloaked enemies.  You can really describe these as perks, similar to call of duty.  But as similar as it may seem, it is a completely different multiplayer experience.

The game is balanced in a couple of different ways, you gain experience and unlock different things and level up your abilities.  But unlike CoD, you don't just unlock your weapons at a certain level, you eventually earn weapon unlocks/class unlocks, and they also become available as you progress.  This isn't necessarily due to your level, depending on your performance, you can receive attachment upgrades and unlock new weapons.  This might be due to level as well, but you're not restricted to a certain gun or attachment at a certain level.  It's hard to say what it will actually be like in the retail version because a lot of things are locked out in the multiplayer demo.

There are 2 available gametypes in the game.  One is your typical team deathmatch, 6v6.  The second gametype is basicaly king of the kill.  An alien ship drops a pod, and you need to find and capture the pod for however long you can to earn points.

Killstreaks are present in the game, I've only witnessed 3 so far, and I'm not sure if they're customizable, they're not in the demo.  The way this works is you collect dog tags after you kill an enemy player.  These dog tags count as your killstreak.  Instead of just simply killing someone, you have to collect their dogtags, 3 tags=rader, 5 tags=giant beam thing, 7 tags=alien air combat thing.  the equivalent to a helicopter in COD, except alien, which is cooler.  If you miss the dogtags you don't get the killstreaks, sometimes you'll have to kill more people to get your streak.  For example, I killed 9 people, but only collected 5 tags.  I like this system better, because it doesn't spam the game with constant bombings of killstreaks.  You can go through a whole match without ever seeing a killstreak.  This is a much better balance because you still get your reward for your streaks, but it's not as constant, and you can focus on having fun more.  Also, you don't have to use your streak as soon as you get it, or before you die.  If you only have 2 tags and you die, than yes, you lose your streak, but if you hit 3 and than die, than you will still have your rader, but your tag collection is reset.  Same as if you hit 7 tags, you will have all 3 of your streaks if you die.  Unless you used one of your streaks at some point.  Regardless you will still have whatever streaks you leaft off with before you died.  Your tag collection still goes up even if you've used a killstreak reward.

I'm probably not explaining things in a way everyone can understand.  But what I can say is, that Crysis is well on its way to being the next big shooter franchise.  The game is just as good if not better than Halo and Call of Duty.  Fanboys will probably disagree with me, but that's why they're called fanboys.  This first glimpse at Crysis has really impressed me, even with such a small experience, it feels massive and complete, give or take a few bugs here and there.

If you're interested in the Crysis 2 Multiplayer demo, you can download it now on the Xbox Live Marketplace under game demos.  The multiplayer demo only has one playable map, 2 gametypes, and only allows small class and character customization.  It's definitely worth playing, I've been playing it for the past 2 days and haven't gotten bored of it yet.  The game feels incredibly balanced with all of the features it has and is just damn fun!

So play the game a couple of times, get the feel for it, and enjoy it!  It takes a little bit of getting used to, with all of the super jumping and what not, I definitely jumped off of the edge and killed myself on more than 10 occasions...  but it was still super fun to kill myself!

Say ello to my lil friend!

In conclusion, Crysis 2 is a beautiful looking game, top notch graphics and excellent gameplay.  I personally can't wait for the release of this monster!  A nice surprise after seeing all of the other dry shooters out there (and seeing the same damn COD game get released 4 times in a row...).

Look for Crysis 2 March 22nd,  and here's a visual taste since my explanation doesn't do it justice.

DISTURBING NEWS! by Mike MacDonald

I know I said I was going to do a review of Amnesia next, but that will have to wait...

I was watching TV, just like any regular lazy procrastination filled night.  Than a commercial came on...  O but not just any commercial mind you, no no no, this was a movie trailer!  What kind of movie trailer you ask?  What kind of disturbing monstrosity with 100 eyes, 20 legs, 75 arms, and british looking teeth could it possibly be!?

Well my friends... it seems that the countdown to 2012 (if you believe in that BS) has begun, but if you don't believe in 2012, you may begin to believe..

Get to the point already?  What is it?  Can it really be that bad?  Is it another remake or sequal?  A straight to DVD Disney movie?

Ok ok...  I won't keep you in suspense any longer......




...


sorry..

The trailer that struck me so hard, that I needed to blog about it instead of writing a legitimate review on something else... was..

The Justin Beiber Movie!!

(pause for effect)

I know... shocking, isn't it?  Not only is a movie bad enough..  It's advertised as a "Rags to ritches story".  A rag to ritches story?  Are you fucking kidding me?  The kid was attending school when he was "discovered" at 13 years old for crying out fucking loud!  What kind of rags was he in?  They must be talking about the dish rag he used for chores, for allowance money, that he clearly doesn't need anymore..  So it should really be called, a Doing dishes to riches story.  Right than you can kind of imagine how the movie would play out..

Mom - Justin, do your dishes!  Pick up that dish rag and do them!

Justin- NO!  I'm going to become a famous tween sensation and make millions of dollars off of cliche crappy pop songs, but little pre-pubescent girls will love it because I'm singing to them and they can relate to my dish washing pain!

Mom - You'll never achieve that goal!  You must do dishes in order to get your allowance money, and you need money to get places n life!

Justin - Beiber my balls mom, I'll show you!


Than he somehow becomes famous, and never had to do dishes again...  hence the rags to riches..

In all honesty though, it's kind of hard to go from rags to riches in 3 years... especially when your a teenager and you don't have to worry about anything at all, because your mommy and daddy buy everything for you, and drive you everywhere you need to go.  I mean, the kid hasn't even gotten old enough to move out of his damn house or even reach puberty for that matter!  Maybe if he was like 30 years old now and 10 years ago he lost everything and than became a pop star and became rich.  Than there would be an excuse, but you're about 14 years away from that Beiber old boy... or... young.. boy?

Regardless... the majority of the audience that are going to attend this movie are girls under 16, young boys confused about their sexuality, and pedophiles...  Someone... will get raped..  I mean, seriously though, Michael Jackson didn't get his own movie until he was dead! DEAD!  Not to mention that his reputation wasn't exactly all that great near the end of his life.  But there's a lot of material for a movie there!  Because he's been a star, pretty much his whole life.  There are a lot of artists that have movies now though, and some that are based on other artists.  But come on...  To have the nerve to even suggest someone have their own movie about their life of a 3 year span, and than have even more nerve to play yourself in that movie?  That's just ridiculous.  I mean having a 50 cent movie was bad enough, and now this.  I guess this is the same kind of idea that happened with Hannah Montana.. or.. Miley Cirus?? whatever her name is.  Sooner or later this kid, being all famous and being undisciplined will probably hit the drugs and alcohol eventually and fuck up his image and be all over the news.  Personally, I can't fucking wait for that to happen..

In my opinion, I don't think anyone his age should be exposed like that, sure if you have talent I think you should be able to express that and promote it.  But not like that, not like a god damn tween posterboy.  I think everyone should have a chance, but when they're older.. mature.. and can actually handle the pressure that will come with that kind of fame.

In conclusion... this movie is the first of many events to occur, that will start a chain reaction which brings us to the apocalypse!

Mac vs PC by Michael MacDonald

Anyone involved with computers are pretty familiar with the constant flame wars between Mac and PC users..  Well I'm here to douse those flames and bring peace to the ever growing fanboy empires of modern middle earth.  Except in this case there is no one computer to rule them all... or ring...

I am not biased in any way shape or form.  I like to look at both sides of the equation and weigh them equally before I make the ultimate decision that will decide the fate of the computer fairing world.

When you're looking at computers, you can't look at it as a computer.  There is such a thing called the "Operating System" or for those who enjoy acronyms, the OS.  This is really what makes a computer what it is.  So when you're saying Mac vs Pc, you're really saying OS X vs Windows.  I say this because  a Mac and a PC have very similar insides... Pretty much every computer does regardless of the Operating system.  When it comes down to it, every computer is a PC "Personal Computer".  As I said before, the debate is mainly about the operating system, but we'll get into that.  A PC can range from various operating systems, like Linux, Windows, and even OS X.

In the rest of this article, i'll go over the pro's, cons, and benefits of the hardware and software as you would buy them.  Hopefully this might sway someones opinion in one direction if they are torn between purchasing one or the other.

The Mac (Macintosh)

Steve Jobs personal computer

Macs are seen as high end, expensive, and professional.  I'm currently using a mac, so all of that is immediately proven false.  For the average user a Mac would seem expensive.  Why are Macs so expensive?  Well, the main reason is because Steve Jobs has an image to uphold, blue jeans and black turtle necks just scream "money".  In simple Terms, Steve Jobs is the same to Apple that Bill Gates is to Microsoft.

The noblest of men

Mac runs primarily on the o so originally named Mac OS X "Macintosh Operating System 10".  There are many benefits that come with this operating system.  One of these benefits is Multitasking, which you'll see in many of apples devices like the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad.  For the Mac it is primarily done in what is called "Expose".  With simple touches of the keyboard or mouse, you can switch quickly between various windows and different programs.  Another great multitasking feature is "Spaces".  Spaces allows you to have multiple desktops and switch between them at lightning fast speed.  Certain programs can also be assigned to a certain space or "desktop" making it so that when you select the program from your dock it automatically switches to that space.

Multitasking definitely is my favourite feature of the Mac, and this makes it great for video editing and photo manipulation.  I definitely prefer the Mac for using programs like Photoshop.

Spaces and Expose

The recently released Mac App store is also an excellent addition to this operating system.  If you've ever used the app store for the iOS "iphone, ipod, ipad OS" than you probably understand the basic concept.  You can look through the app store, buy apps instantly and install them right into your dock.  It also updates your apps whenever they are available.  Avery streamlined process.  1 click install.  but of course, there will be a "hacked" version of this app store to come out at some point.  I've heard rumours of a program called "Kickback" that might be coming out in the fall..  But you didn't hear it from me!

Apps.. you cost money.. but not for long..

As a whole, the Mac OS is very simple to use once you get to know it, and it's very functional.  Most apps have many customizable features and preferences that you can set.  The operating system itself has preferences that you can set for the layout, size and many other things including the expose and dashboard feature.

The dashboard is one of those things that you can have little gadgets with.  Want to instantly know the weather?  date? keep track of your twitter feed, facebook, post it notes with one click.  Thats the dashboard.

This is my Dashboard, there are many like it, but this one is mine.

When it comes to features, the Mac is highly customizable.  Not so much the look of mac, although I'm sure you can do that too, I choose not to.  Mostly anything that has preferences can be customized.  You can also download new preference applications to do so, so that it integrates directly with the rest of your preferences.

Now, the real beauty in the operating system lies within the hardware/software integration.  The operating is designed specifically to work with the hardware built into every macintosh computer.  That means that the operating system can run faster, and more efficiently than the average computer.  All of the applications mad by apple also fall under this same principle.  Apple only uses a select range of hardware and mostly design or have a hand in designing most of it themselves.  So when it comes down to it, the Mac really is the complete package, designed around one idea to make it more efficient.

The only problem with the complete integration the mac has, is that it's not very customizable when it comes to new hardware.  Macs are made specifically so that there is no unused space, and thus, you can't really add anything.  That and if something in the computer breaks, you need to send it back to the company, unless you really know what you're doing, but than you'll probably void any warranty you had by opening it.  Of course if you wanna add more RAM you probably could, if you know what you're doing you can replace parts obviously, but again, that's not what Mac's are made for and they only have specific drivers installed within the Operating System.  So if you don't know what you're doing, don't be stupid and do something...

One huge benefit that I think people sometimes overlook with the Mac is the BootCamp feature.  BootCamp is made so that you can install windows onto the Macintosh as an additional operating system via hard drive partition.  This may sound complicated, but it's actually quite easy when using the boot camp app in mac OS to install, than you install Windows regularly.  This is a definite bonus when it comes to the Mac because it fixes one of its flaws.  That flaw is the ability to run .exe (executable) files that Windows runs natively.  There are ways around this for Mac, as there usually is for everything, but we'll get into that later. 

Sexy, or what?

With BootCamp, you can start up your Mac and set it up so that you can either use Windows as your default OS or your Mac OS X as your default OS.  If you need to run windows programs, or play certain games that only windows can run, than you have that option.  Also, at this point, windows fanboys really have nothing to complain about or any argument... Because Windows runs perfectly fine if not better on the Macintosh hardware with BootCamp than it does on a comparable PC.  However, Windows does run the battery and system much harder than the Mac OS does.  However, even though Mac has these capabilities, it's still kind of pain that you can't run a lot of games and PC software natively on the OS.

If you're like me, than you don't really like having to switch between and boot another OS whenever you want to use a certain program.  So here's the work around.  There are various programs you can download that will allow you to run .exe files almost natively on a mac.  Some of these include CrossOver, crossover allows you to install programs and games and run them through that program.  It does cost money however.  WINE is another recently discovered program I've been using to run .exe files and proves to work quite smoothly and has Direct X capabilities.  Those programs don't have great support however and can be slow depending on the program they're trying to emulate.

Here's one important fact, Mac's do get viruses, but they are few and far between.  The Mac file system greatly differs from the PC file system and doesn't get viruses that a PC can get, and that's the way viruses are designed. I've never had a problem with it.  That being said, Macs don't have a very big library when it comes to pirated software "lets be honest we all do it.."  But if you're a goody goody, than you will likely never run into this problem and can omit it from the evaluation.  This also might be due to that there are some programs you can get for both PC and Mac, and PC pirated software floods the library, Mac specific software isn't really that hard to find. but can be hard to find cracks/serials for them.

On to discussing the price range of the Mac..  In comparison to relatively the same hardware as a PC, it is more expensive.  But if you're like me, you won't get a PC unless it's custom made, in which case, it comes to roughly the same price as a Mac.  Also taking into consideration the time and effort used to integrate the software and hardware and still satisfy windows users.  I'd say the price is worth it, you definitely get what you pay for.

All of this being said, the Mac is quickly increasing in popularity and is getting more support for games and other software that used to only run on Windows.

The PC (Personal Computer)

pretty big statement there.. compensating for something?

The PC is obviously the most common household item.  Most of these use the Windows operating system, and lets be honest, Windows hasn't exactly had the best run with the introduction of Vista, and had to release Windows 7 just to fix the bugs.

Windows 7 is basically a remake of Vista, but that being said it's definitely the best OS that windows has released thus far.  The huge benefit of Windows is that, you can really do almost anything you want with it.  There are many available customizable features available, but like the Mac, it's mostly 3rd party software.  The downside to this is that to customize windows, you usually have to go into the file structure and do a lot of the work yourself to get it the way you want it, and it's not always easy, and if you screw something up, than you have to restore or reformat/reinstall windows.  I haven't really experimented with the actual Mac UI and doing themed look that I have with windows, so I don't know if the same problems exist.

dock, taskbar, gadgets... let's add a fucking wheel!

Windows 7 definitely has jumped forward to compete with OS X.  The new taskbar allows you to see what programs are open and see all of the windows open in that program by rolling over the programs icon.  you than have the option to close the window or program from the taskbar or to open the window/program.  Mac has a similar feature within the expose if you only want to view a certain program instead of all, but windows is limited to only viewing one through the taskbar.  Most people know about fast program switching when holding the Alt+Tab keys, this applies both for windows and mac.  Mac is pretty basic, just like windows used to use.  But windows now shows the open programs in a diagonal form.  This is good to see that windows is trying something new, but falls somewhat short because you don't always know which program is which, depending on what programs you have open.

It's like the OS X dock!  Except.. not..

The big major difference and huge con of the PC is of course, viruses, malware, spyware.. all of those fun things.  You gather a lot of these when surfing the web, and due to the way the windows file system is set up, it's pretty easy to get a virus unknowingly.  It's almost like telling your kids STD's exist and are bad and than sending them into a whore house and telling them don't forget to wear protection.  We know how people can be, people are stupid, and often don't wear protection, or sometimes the condom breaks, or she forgot to take the pill.  That's what the internet is like to your PC, if you don't know what your doing, you will contract a virus.  I use AVG when using a PC, it's a free virus protection program, and I like to think I know what I'm doing, and I have never contracted a virus within the last 2-3 years on PC.

Most people that have a PC, get those crappy store bought ones from Staples or Best Buy, all of those "brand names" like HP, Acer, Dell etc. are crap, all of these have little additional programs they include with the operating system and are annoying as all hell.  They make you think you're being protected with these little restore/backup programs, but all of these are crap.  I'm telling you right now, if you're serious about buying a computer and aren't really constricted by a low budget, get a custom computer..  These are the real computers.  Most of these companies strive to meet the same standards as Apple, but they fail in comparison, mainly because they do the same thing, but worse.  They have warranties that are void if you open the computer to either fix or add to.  Stores that sell these computers also benefit from Viruses and things that go wrong because they charge you to bring it back so they can fix it.  It's the same idea as bringing a car to a mechanic.  Once its fixed you find out something has mysteriously gone wrong with it, or the mechanic discovers that something that wasn't previously broken before is now broken.  This is what goes on with stores that sell these kinds of computers.

lol

I've been bashing a lot of PC things so far, but here are the real benefits for REAL PC users.  Real PC users that know what they're doing and are serious and have the cash, go for a custom built rig.  This way you can decide exactly what parts you want in your computer.  The average lifespan for a PC is probably 1-2 years.  With the way technology keeps jumping forward, this isn't surprising.  Most custom PC's will outlast and can live for up to 5-10 years maybe.  I can directly relate to this because I custom built my own PC and I've never had to take it to a computer repair man, mainly because I can do it myself... I won't say it didn't have problems, but I was able to buy specific parts that allowed my PC to last and stay up to date.

This one thing PC's can do that Mac's can't.  Stay up to date.  If you buy a mac, you're pretty much set, the hardware is good, but in the next 2 years, it's almost guaranteed that there's going to be a much better version.  If you get the right motherboard for a PC you can put whatever the hell you want in it, it can last you for a very long time.  Need a new processor?  No problem!  New power supply? No problem!  New Graphics Card? WE CAN FUCKING DO THAT!  For serious gamers and users this is the main feature that wins people over obviously.  There's no competition when it comes to customizing the actual hardware of the machine, but this pro doubles as a con.  You will eventually dish out more money on your PC to keep it up to date by buying new hardware.  However.. I did say before that this was about the operating systems...  But I did also go into how the Mac hardware works for the Mac.  In PC's case this where most of the problems arise with Windows.

Windows doesn't have any set number of drivers or configurations, you can install pretty much anything you want, Windows isn't really open source like Linux, but when it comes to hardware, you're really only limited to the space you have.  Every piece of hardware a computer uses has a driver that allows it to run with the operating system.  A lot of the time, these drivers are made by 3rd parties to be able to run on windows, but you can run it on other operating systems too.  These drivers may be designed for windows, but Windows isn't designed specifically to run on a certain configuration.  Since windows doesn't have one configuration it doesn't have the same integration as Mac has, that's where you can get slower speeds and improper CPU/GPU usage.

However, it may come to a surprise to some of you that PC can also run the Mac OS.  Yes!  It's true!  This does take a lot of time, work, and frustration to accomplish but it is possible.  I have done it myself, and that's what ultimately drove me to buy a Macintosh computer.  If you have good PC knowhow and are familiar with your hardware, you can find certain Installers to install OS X for you.  Keep in mind that the hardware might not be supported and you'll have to do a lot of searching and tweaking to get your hardware to work properly with the OS X.  I was able to get OS X to run almost flawlessly on my PC, but I wanted the full experience and broke myself down...

BLASPHEMY! the fanboys cry

This last topic kind of brings me to Pirated software for PC.  Almost every program on PC has a pirated version, and it is incredibly easy to download and use the programs for free regardless of activation or CD keys.  However, use caution if doing this, because this is how a lot of people accumulate viruses, be smart about it.

The Final Verdict

I probably missed a lot of points when it comes to PC and Mac, but these are a lot of the main differences I see between the two.  If you asked me about Mac 3-5 years ago, I would have told you to definitely choose a PC.  Macs have had a lot of problems in the past, but have since than stepped up to the plate.  I'm still a PC man at heart, but Windows just can't deliver on what I enjoy in an operating system the way OS X can.

Mac Pros

• No Viruses
• Complete hardware/software integration
• Boot Camp to run Windows
• Expose/Spaces
• Clean and Customizable
• App Store
• Macs are ready to go out of the box and are actually a GOOD computer brand name

Mac Cons

• Small Game library
• Low support for .exe files
• Expensive
• No hardware customization/replacement
• Short lifespan in terms of new products
• Harder to get/find "pirated" software for both PC/Mac supported programs

PC Pros

• Highly Customizable hardware and OS
• Large program/game library
• Almost everything supports Windows
• Upgradable/Longe lifespan (if you build it right)
• Easily find/pirate software

PC Cons

• Very prone to viruses, malware, and spyware
• Constantly need to update hardware to stay up to date
• Store bought brand name PC's are garbage.
• Customizing Windows can be tricky and may lead to breaking the OS

You may have noticed some things about the Pro's/Con's comparison.  Before fanboys or any bigots start questioning my evaluation, shut up and let me explain!

Mac does have more Pro's than PC, but the Mac also features more Cons than the PC does.  In contrast, the PC's pro's and con's are more significant in what they are.  This just goes to show that the Mac has many notable features in it's operating system, and PC's are better known for their hardware.  Let me put it into even more simpler terms for you:

Software=Mac

Hardware=PC

Needless to say, the less expensive and easier route to get more power and bang for your buck is the PC.

You can do the same with Mac and really Mac has more powerful capabilities if you're willing to dish out the cash.  But Mac mainly relies on it's OS to get the job done, and it really does get the job done.

Well, that's my final decision on Mac's and PC's.  When it comes down to it and you really know what your doing, it comes down to personal preference.  I love both PC and Mac, but I prefer OS X over Windows, and you really can only get the Mac experience on a Mac.  I'm not biased, because I still used windows now again.  I'm more of... a Pacintosh guy!  Or... Personal Macintosh person?  Does that make sense?  No?  Well you're attention span was probably sucked dry about half way through this article.

Anyway, I hope you enjoyed this, and if you're thinking about purchasing a new computer, I hope this helped to sway your decision in whatever direction you were looking.

Next post will be a video game review on this wonderful hidden gem called Amnesia: The Dark Descent!

Thanks for reading!

--

by

Michael MacDonald