The NES Classic and Economics

We anarchists and libertarians are bothered by a great many things, but one of the things that bothers us most–and that is almost universal among anarchists and libertarians–is the general economic ignorance that pervades the United States. We wouldn’t tolerate this ignorance in any other subject, but it serves the state’s purpose to keep us ignorant of economics (the manner by which we turn energy into product), so it’s a field that is touched only briefly–if at all–in high schools. The average American knows only that there’s a thing called “demand” and a thing called “supply,” and then their eyes tend to glaze over and words like “derivatives” and “inflationary tyreni index G7P 14.7” run through their minds.

So, first of all, forget all of that. Forget about GDP, forget about inflationary indexes, and forget about all the shenanigans that we have come to associate with “economics” now that we have given over control of the entire economy to a coalition of privately owned banks that operate with no Congressional oversight. All of that crap is fiction. They are obfuscations designed to confuse us and distract us. They are smokescreens designed to keep us disinterested in the subject, to make us feel ignorant and stupid, and to make us blindly trust in these experts who seem to know what they’re talking about. In reality, they’re just talking nonsense, like this guy:

I’m not kidding. That’s the average state economist. That’s the Fed Chairperson. That’s the Secretary of the Treasury. For the most part, they have just completely made this shit up and invented rules that don’t have anything to do with reality. It’s a game of Monopoly that they’ve invented and tricked us into playing, and they keep us playing by using complicated language and nonsense to convince us that we need them being the game’s referee.

Now, I am not talking about the fact that Nintendo has ceased producing the NES Classic. For those unaware, Nintendo recently released a mini-console for $60, which contained 30 classic NES games like Mega Man 2, Castlevania, The Legend of Zelda, and others–even some stupid ones like Balloon Fight that nobody wants. Naturally, the thing sold very well, but Nintendo notoriously has problems with supply and did the same thing with their Amiibos (which are little toys that interact with some of their games). Nintendo repeatedly failed to manufacture enough Amiibos to meet demand, which led to accusations that they were doing it on purpose (in fact, one can conclude nothing else, since they publicly addressed the problem and then did nothing to fix it).

This obviously created scalpers, and scalpers are getting a lot of criticism. Some enterprising individual pops into Wal-Mart, buys an NES Classic for $60, and then posts it on eBay for $100 (or whatever price), pocketing the profit. This is actually a good thing, economically, but it’s a band-aid to the situation. Realistically, Nintendo should be the ones directly increasing the price of the NES Classic, instead of continuing to sell them for $60. In fact, thanks to the scalpers, there is no shortage. Calling this a shortage is economically ignorant and incorrect.

A shortage is when consumers are unable to buy an item.

And there you go. What we have with the NES Classic clearly isn’t a shortage. In economic terms, a shortage exists when Demand exceeds Supply–when more people want to buy a thing, and there aren’t enough of those things to go around. In fact, scalpers have ensured that there isn’t a shortage. Rather than condemning them, we should be thanking them.

The people complaining about a “shortage” don’t really mean that they are unable to buy the item, do they? Clearly, they don’t. What they mean is “I’m not willing to pay that much for one.” This is a critical element of economic understanding: price is not some arbitrary thing. Prices are supposed to increase like this, as the increase in price offsets Demand. Again, this is obvious. Many people were willing to pay $60 for an NES Classic. Fewer people are willing to pay $110 for an NES Classic.

This means that, quite literally, supply exceeds demand, not the other way around. In reality, what we have is a surplus, not a shortage. A shortage exists when demand exceeds supply; a surplus exists when supply exceeds demand. Thanks to the increased price, the supply persists today, and the demand has been lowered.

There is a character in The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time who sells Magic Beans to the player, and each purchase increased the cost by 10 rupees. The first costs 10 rupees, the second costs 20 rupees, the third costs 30 rupees, and so on. An increase in price because of high demand is a normal, expected, and beneficial part of economics, as it ensures that we never experience a shortage.

During the 1980s, the United States saw pretty severe gas shortages. Gas stations attempted to raise the price as the supply of gas decreased, but the Federal Government put a Price Ceiling on it and forbade them increasing the price beyond that. So, naturally, everyone immediately set their price at the ceiling (even if they weren’t yet that low on supply). As the cost of something increases, people’s willingness to do it or acquire it decreases, which drives them to seek alternatives. Few people would have been willing to pay $100 for a gallon of gasoline, and so they might have taken that money and bought bicycles instead. Is it ideal? No, the ideal solution is to also increase Supply to re-lower the price, which will be necessary because some people have already chosen to go without because of the increased price. “No, we’re not going to go to grandma’s house this week, not for $20 per gallon. We’ll just not buy the gas at all.”

In the real world, some money is better than no money, and this is why producers can be counted upon to increase supply to meet the demand. Otherwise, they’re just leaving money on the table, and that money will go to someone else. This all has to do with diminishing returns, as well–at a certain point, because all goods are scare and finite, the cost of furnishing the supply gets too high, so the price of the good increases beyond the demand, and producers have to come up with alternative solutions for consumers. This is why we don’t have to actually worry about running out of gasoline: once we get up to $17 a gallon, so many alternatives will be cheaper that gasoline will be phased out all by itself.

While it’s certainly bad to have gasoline at $100 per gallon, especially during the 80s, it’s preferable to not having gasoline available at all. If some family had to take their sick child to the emergency room, it’s infinitely better for them to be able to buy gasoline at $100 a gallon than to not be able to buy it. High prices are always preferred to shortages. Those people out there who really, really want an NES Classic can buy one, which is obviously better than their being totally unable to buy one.

Scalpers have performed the critical service of increasing the Price of the good, which in turn lowered Demand so that Supply exceeded it. I was just talking with someone at Jim Sterling’s website about it, and I’d pointed out that marking the item as “Limited Edition” would have made the “shortage” worse. This was before I’d thought about the situation enough to realize that there isn’t a shortage. Sure, one can’t buy one at Target or Wal-Mart, but one can buy one, and that is unequivocally not the case in a shortage.

The only real point of contention is that the thing costs more than they’re willing to pay. Hey, that’s not a problem. There’s a “shortage” of $10 ones, too, and $10 is my price point for one. Every single person out there has their own price point–has their own amount that they’d be willing to pay. Evidently, for most people that number is around $60. For some people, it’s around $120. For me, it’s around $10. The fact that there aren’t any available at my price point doesn’t mean there is a shortage, though. It means that I don’t want one of the things as much as other people do*. These people who want to buy one for $60 are talking about “shortages,” but there isn’t a shortage–their price point simply isn’t as high as other people, and because of the low supply the price of the good has increased beyond the price point as determined by their personal demand.

So scalpers are good. They have performed the critical function of providing the NES Classic to the diehard fans who want them most, and we can say that pretty definitively, as one’s personal price point is determined almost entirely by one’s own demand. It follows that people willing to pay $110 obviously want one more than someone who is only willing to pay $60 for one. This means objectively and measurably that the scalpers have ensured that people who wanted the NES Classic most were able to acquire one.

It becomes little more than a whine when looked at economically. “I wanted one, but he got it because he wanted it more than I did! It’s not fair! Fucking scalpers!”

But, again, all the scalpers have done is ensure that people who are bigger fans of Nintendo and NES games were able to acquire an NES Classic, while people who weren’t as big fans and didn’t want one as badly as those other people weren’t able to, because they weren’t willing to fork over that much cash for one. I can’t even pretend to think it’s a bad thing that people who are bigger fans of Nintendo are able to purchase a Nintendo product that they want, as opposed to people who aren’t as big of fans being able to acquire the product. Clearly, it doesn’t matter as much to them, and the role of currency is precisely to allow us to measure value. That’s literally what currency does. The USD is a unit of measurement for value, and we use it to gauge how much a person wants something. If Person A wants a thing more than Person B, then Person A will be willing to pay more. If Person B can’t get it because he’s not willing to pay as much as, or more, than Person A, then the good should go to Person A, because Person A measurably wants it more.

I try not to tweet much at Jim Sterling, but I think I’m going to tweet this one at him, because he’s been pretty hard on scalpers in the past, and I don’t think that’s fair. Looked at economically, all they do is separate the Diehard Fans from the Casual Fans and ensure that the Diehard Fans are able to acquire the things that they are Diehard Fans of. I agree that this sucks for the Casual Fans, but that’s a problem of Supply, not the scalpers. It’s Nintendo’s fault that someone went without an NES Classic. The scalpers only ensured that it was the Casual Fans who went without, and that the Diehard fans didn’t have to.

I think that’s a good thing. I think that if Person A is a bigger fan of This Thing than Person B and is willing to pay more for it than Person B, then Person A should be the one who gets it.

* Actually, I don’t think I’d even pay that. To be completely honest, I don’t think I’d want one if it was free.


Switching Zelda Up

I love Zelda. But you probably know that already, and, if you have followed me for a while, then you also know that I’m exhausted and exasperated by the Zelda series and Nintendo’s lamentable tendency to just keep re-releasing Ocarina of Time with modified dungeons and a different title. I very badly want to play The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, but I simply can’t right now, because I don’t currently own a Wii U, and there is no chance whatsoever that I’m about to go out and buy a Nintendo Switch.

Do You Got the Power?

Nintendo Power used to be an institution of gaming. I don’t know anyone who didn’t have a friend or family member, or themselves, subscribed to the magazine, and for good reason: Nintendo was the gaming company. It’s not hard to navigate to a certain bay of pirates and find the first fifty issues of Nintendo Power and browse them, and I’d highly recommend everyone do it. Something will immediately strike you, though, as you piece together why Nintendo shut down the magazine.

Each issue was filled to the brim with previews and reviews, of course. At one point, Nintendo was running a Top  30 NES games section, and even though most of the top ten were games made by Nintendo, they had more than enough games to on the system to fill a Top 500. In fact, at the end of its life, more than seven hundred titles had been released on the Nintendo Entertainment System, from developers like Capcom, Bethesda, Konami, and others.

The Super Nintendo reached similar acclaim and had more than 700 titles at the end of its life, but then things went awry. Fewer than three hundred titles were released for the Nintendo 64, and a shockingly large chunk of them were first or second party titles. The Gamecube, with more than six hundred titles, at first seems successful–compared to its predecessors, it certainly was. However, this is when gaming really broke into the mainstream, and a whopping 1,850 games landed on its competition, the Sony PlayStation 2. Compared to its competitors, the GameCube was found wanting.

Things only got worse from there, with the Nintendo Wii having a mere 317 exclusive titles. If there’s any reason to continue, the Wii U saw fewer than 300. And, just as was the case with the Wii, the bulk of the Wii U’s library was total bullshit. The GameCube, Wii, and Wii U left no doubt whatsoever that, while Nintendo themselves still made excellent first party games, there simply was not enough third party support to justify purchasing the console. No gamer owned just a Wii, or just a Wii U. Everyone who owned one also owned one of the other two consoles, or a PC.

None of the hit, new games being previewed in Nintendo Power really captured the public’s attention. Players who wanted to read about the latest in RPGs, strategy games, and other genres had to go to a different publication; only players who wanted to read about the new Zelda and Mario continued with Nintendo Power and, let’s face it, there just aren’t enough new Zelda and Mario games to justify a console.

So unsurprisingly the magazine was dropped. The early days of Nintendo Power saw most of its issues filled with talk about third party games. Castlevania 2, Dragon Warrior 2, and so many others. Only rarely was an issue fixed primarily on a first party title, and never was an issue fixed only on a first party title.

The Wii

I made the mistake of buying a Wii. After reaching the second world in New Super Mario Bros., my wife and I were so bored with it that we didn’t anticipate that either of us would ever play it again. In fact, we didn’t. After one night of mandatory bowling and boxing, we took the stupid thing back. Even hacking it didn’t seem very appealing, since we each had a PC capable of running anything we wanted to play.

It wasn’t until the price of the Wii dropped to $40 that I purchased another one, and that was primarily for the purpose of hacking it and playing some of the GameCube games that I still had. It didn’t make sense to try to find a replacement GameCube since the Wii ran them, and I’m pretty sure the Wii was cheaper. Despite my frequent requests, my sister regularly left it on, and it predictably fried the disc drive, exactly as the Wii was prone to doing when left on.

She eventually bought a Wii U, and I borrowed it for a while when she was bored with it, but I never purchased one myself. Mario Kart 8 was a suitable distraction here and there, but it certainly wasn’t enough to command my attention long–just another Mario Kart game, really, with no evolution and only negligible changes to the gameplay. Just as Zelda has been, the Mario Kart series has been stalled since the N64. The only changes have been gimmicks: Oh, now you can have two drivers! Now you can drive upside down!

Nintendo sure loves their gimmicks.

Super Smash Bros. 4 was an enticing and enjoyable game, but extremely lacking in content. I readily admit that I played probably thousands of hours in Smash back on the GameCube, with my wife and friends in Melee, and Nintendo seemed to be under the impression that they could just do that. In fact, it seems they forgot to put an actual game in there. I’d love to play Sm4sh, but… there’s nothing to do.

The HD remaster of Wind Waker and Twilight Princess were neat, but I don’t see much of an improvement over the original WW, and I can’t fucking stand Twilight Princess. It is easily the worst Zelda game ever made. I have no idea how anyone can tolerate that trite, inane, and repetitious crap that was little more than a remake of Ocarina of Time in the first place.

Ocarina of Time… Ah, there’s a classic. Except… it isn’t. Because Nintendo won’t let it become a classic, because they won’t let it age. I’m not referring to Ocarina of Time 3D or the Zelda Collector’s Edition or even the GameCube OOT/Master Quest disc. I’m referring to Twilight Princess, which was pretty much exactly the same as Ocarina. I don’t see any noteworthy difference between the two.

The only truly great game that hit the Wii U was Super Mario 3D World, which is an absolute masterpiece of platform gaming. Goddamn, that game is good. I came very close to 100%ing it–and would have, if my sister hadn’t reclaimed the Wii U so that she could sell it for more Lego Dimensions character sets. The only thing I had left to do was beat the first seven worlds with Toad and Luigi, two characters that I never used. I loved that game.

This game is a masterpiece.

The New Zelda

Nintendo would have been crucified if they hadn’t released Breath of the Wild on the Wii U, so I understand their decision to do it. However, that decision is also the reason that I’m not going to buy a Switch. A Nintendo console gets one, maybe two, Zelda games–HD remasters don’t count. I have to commend Nintendo on putting a great deal of time and care into a product, and I’m not saying they need to release more Zelda and Mario games, but I am saying that… it’s not very likely that the Switch is going to get another Zelda game.

The NES received two. The SNS received one. The N64 received two. The GameCube received two. The Wii received one. Oh, yeah. Skyward Sword. I’d forgotten about its miserable existence. It’s also a remake of Ocarina of Time. The Wii U received three, technically, but really just one. Hell, the Wii U came really close to not even getting a new Zelda game, to be honest.

This decision of Nintendo’s–a pro-consumer decision all the way–to release a new Zelda game on two consoles is not good for them. I never owned Twilight Princess on the Wii. I had it on GameCube. Why on Earth would I buy the tedious, motion-control nightmare that was the Wii version? Why would I have bought a Wii to play it, when I could play it on the GameCube?

Today I’m faced with essentially the same decision that I was faced with back then, when I giddily purchased Twilight Princess at Wal-Mart for the GameCube. Goddamn, I was so excited! I couldn’t wait. And then… Ugh. By the time I completed the second dungeon, I was so bored with it that I purchased a strategy guide and just followed its instructions through the rest of the game. In effect, I remember very little about Twilight Princess. I played it on Auto Pilot, following a guide, because it was so extraordinarily boring. I’ve tried several times to replay it, but always get bored before reaching the lake temple. I honestly don’t understand how anyone who has played more than 2 or 3 Zelda games finds any enjoyment whatsoever in Twilight Princess.


While I’m probably going to find a Wii U from a pawn shop–I’m on excellent terms with one of them [they’re a client] and can probably get it for less than a hundred books, and I’ve no qualms about trading in a few laptops or something that I have lying around–and am going to get the new Zelda, I’m not particularly excited for it.

I’ve avoided most of the hype and trailers, just as I always do for a game that I’m interested in, but what I’ve seen so far doesn’t leave me particularly excited. Zelder Scrolls sounds more and more appropriate, but learning that it borrowed Assassin’s Creed “climb the tower, reveal the map” shit really lessened my interest, because I know exactly what to expect. A bunch of meaningless collectibles, a set of items that we’ve all seen before, and a meaningless return to the series’ origins.

I’m judging the game before I’ve played it, and off of very little information about it, but that’s the problem. Even if I didn’t have the personal mandate to avoid all spoilers and information, I’m not interested in information about it. I already know what to expect. It’s another Zelda game. It will have Zelda items and Zelda dungeons set in an Assassin’s Creed overworld and with Elder Scrolls type side quests.

I’ve put off the decision to buy a new graphics card in favor of buying a Wii U, but it’s not really the new Zelda that I’m most excited about–it’s Super Mario 3D World that I’m looking forward to. In fact, it may be a few weeks before I even buy the new Zelda game. It just doesn’t seem appealing, and very few people have more experience and history with the Zelda series than I do.

People are raving about it, and lunatics are criticizing reviewers for only giving it a 9/10. Predictably, some people are saying that Ocarina of Time has finally been dethroned. By a paint-by-numbers Zelda game with an Assassin’s Creed overworld. I’m going to play the game, and these criticisms of it aren’t even fair since I haven’t, but, again, that’s the point. These people praised Dragon Age: Inquisition, and it’s one of the worst games I’ve ever played. Final Fantasy XIII received extremely high scores, and it’s also one of the worst games I’ve ever played. Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning got a 7 in Game Informer. These same people are giving the new Zelda a 9 and 10. It doesn’t mean anything to me, because they watched the latest superhero movie and came all over themselves, even though it was exactly like every other superhero movie. So I don’t exactly trust their ability to recognize crap when they’re consuming it.

I should be excited. It’s a new Zelda game! Unlike JP in Grandma’s Boy, I didn’t beat The Legend of Zelda before I could walk, but I had beaten it before I entered kindergarten. This is a series I’ve been playing my entire life. It may even be my favorite series. Other than some of the handheld titles, I’ve never missed one of them, and never failed to get one near its release day. Even Twilight Princess had me excited.

But this?

It’s just “Oh, look. They made another one.”

How To Fix Civilization 6

civilization_vi_cover_artI’m absolutely shocked by the extremely positive reception that Civilization VI is receiving. Those familiar with me know that I have a long history with the series, and have been playing since Civ III–apparently, whenever you attempt to criticize one of the games, you must point out how long you’ve been playing the series, and if you can’t at least claim to have started with 3 then your opinion becomes invalid. This is rather like how people can’t criticize Final Fantasy X unless they started with Final Fantasy VII or earlier–on that note, I started with Final Fantasy. No number. Beat that.

I am doing a full review of the game for Cubed3, and I’m going to post what I have so far here, but I’m going to be a bit more honest afterward. Anyway, here’s the yet-to-be-finished review. Please ignore the BBCode:

[i]Civilization VI[/i] is a game where players attempt to build cities while a psychotic AI declares war on the player, marches its troops up to the city centers, and then politely stands there while its army is bombarded to death. Much has been said about the awful AI, but given that diplomacy is such a critical part of the game, it’s nothing short of disgraceful that the AI-controlled players seem to have no idea how to play the game.


It’s not uncommon to hear complaints that, before the one hundredth turn, every single civilization on the player’s starting continent had declared war on the player. In a few games, enemy civilizations were [i]introduced[/i] to me—they hadn’t yet been discovered—by declaring war on me. “Oh, hello there, Brazil. It is a pleasure to meet—[i]we have had enough of your insolence![/i]” None of the games in the series have had intelligence that could remotely qualify as “intelligence” by even the most under-achieving programmer’s standards, but this reaches absolutely remarkable levels of [url=]Artificial Stupidity[/url].


Diplomacy as a gameplay mechanic is such a cool concept, but it continues to elude Firaxis on how to implement it. Not only is the AI horrendously stupid, but the only options presented in diplomacy are trade deals and war declarations. This is such an enormous step backward from the ability to tell rival civilizations not to build so closely, not to send their missionaries, and things of that nature. Again, the Community Patch Project rightly expanded the options of the predecessor, such that they were as extensive as those found in Civ IV, but [i]Civilization VI[/i] represents a gigantic step backward from even vanilla CiV.


It’s difficult to convey, but in one game I built a second city to claim a natural wonder I’d found. The very next turn, England contacted me to request that I not build cities that close to them. That was no problem, as I generally expand empires circularly, as opposed to growing in one direction. Everything seemed fine—diplomatic crisis averted—until the next turn, when Victoria declared war on me, saying that she could not tolerate my behavior any longer, and sent almost one whole warrior to conquer my capital. She proceeded to send an entire warrior to punish me for several turns, at which point I grew tired of her nonsense, surrounded London with archers, and eliminated her from the game. As my archers rained doom upon her city, she contacted me just about every other turn offering me a peace deal, and there was still no button to say, “You brought this upon yourself. Now die with dignity; I’ll not receive your diplomats again.”


AI lunacy knows no bounds this time around, and that’s not getting into the glitches, bugs, and other oddities that gamers have now come to expect from new, expensive video games. Perhaps the most interesting of these is when Gandhi is contacted by Gandhi to declare that Gandhi will no longer put up with Gandhi’s aggressive behavior, and that Gandhi thereby declares war on himself. For bonus points, this can happen with any civilization, and to the player, though there appears to be no in-game effect. Aside from that, it’s not uncommon to end a war and immediately be contacted by the loser stating that they’ve noticed the army on their borders, and they’d like to know if this means war. The best cases are when a nation on the other side of the world declares war on the player, and then offers a peace deal a dozen turns later offering up a bunch of gold. It’s bad in ways bizarre and embarrassing.


The focus is said to be on the multiplayer experience, but it was notoriously prone to desyncs and crashes upon launch, and the game, for this reviewer, has always been best single-player. Maybe the AI doesn’t always offer the best challenge, but there are few things more rewarding than starting a new Civilization game on a lower difficulty—to get accustomed to the new systems—and gradually work back up to King or Emperor. For years, I was stuck at Lord difficulty in [i]Civilization V[/i], and then I made the breakthrough of managing my city specialists; the next thing I knew, I was up to Emperor.


1UPT (One Unit Per Tile) worked very well in this game’s predecessor, although there were some flaws that had to be ironed out. It was up to the Community Patch Project to fix the civilian traffic jams that irritated everyone, but this time around the civilization traffic jams appear to be there by design, not by accident. Missionaries and apostles are the worst offenders, though there were many occasions throughout the reign of CiV that it was necessary to declare war on someone because their missionaries stood blithely in the way. Given the religious fervor on display by nearly all the world leaders, it’s sure to be a problem through every playthrough.

About to get my head kicked in on CiV.

About to get my head kicked in on CiV.


One advantage the predecessor had with 1UPT was that movement costs were clear and easily understood. Planning an attack against a city surrounded by jungle on one side and mountains on the other took tactical work, and it was fun for that reason; it was a genuine and fairly real-to-life representation of why the United States didn’t stand a chance in Vietnam. Building roads across the empire didn’t just connect cities; it was crucial to allow armies to get where they needed to be in a reasonable time frame. Much has been written about the changing of Workers into Builders, how roads are constructed by Caravans, and other gameplay changes, but there were always going to be such changes to the formula; it happens every game. Remember when each city was a mess of roads because every tile had to be connected to the city for its resources to be used? Change is fine. The real problem here is that it’s almost guesswork, moving armies across the world and over various terrains, and the caravan-constructed road appears to have no effect on movement cost.


It was once feared that culture and policies were doomed to become an alternative technology tree and that, based on the trends of [i]Civilization V[/i], everything was ultimately going to “become a technology tree.” Civics policies certainly did so, and each civic gives the player a few civic policy cards that can be activated. Government types have returned, too, and different government types, in addition to providing their own bonuses, allow for different combinations of cards to be used. For example, the Classical Republic government allows for two Economic Policy cards, but no Military Policy cards. It’s a neat, modular system that provides lots of ways to ensure that the government is maximized for the land and people.


Cities no longer occupy a single tile, and this is certainly a change for the better. It’s “the” feature of [i]Civilization VI[/i], just as 1UPT was “the” feature of CiV. Rather than simply building a Barracks, one must select a tile within the city’s borders and build an Encampment upon it, after which a Barracks can be built in the Encampment. As a nice touch, units then constructed by the city then appear on the tile that contains the Encampment, rather than the City Center, which makes tile selection all the more important.

Graphics have changed from the realistic style of V to a cartoonish style heavily reminiscent of [i]Civilization IV[/i], largely regarded as the apex of the series. The UI is the best yet for a Civilization game, though information can be a bit hard to find. Whether one likes or dislikes the style will be a matter of preference, but the Fog of War is absolutely terrible. Rather than lowering the brightness on tiles not currently within view of a unit, here they are colored brown and bereft of distinguishing details, a look that is drawn from medieval maps. It looks absolutely [i]terrible[/i] to have a sea of brown wash over the land like it’s [i]Dragon Age: Origins[/i].



The terrain is more important than ever. It became extremely important with the advent of 1UPT, but now it’s of critical significance—[i]the[/i] deciding factor in the game. Placing districts upon a tile obviously means that tile cannot have a refinement constructed by a builder, and there are interesting ways that the districts and improvements work off each other. A bit of logic is all that’s really needed to take advantage of this, though. Don’t throw an Encampment right in the middle of a bunch of Farms, for example. Rivers, it has been noted, are important once again, instead of simply being the early game movement hindrance they were in the last entry; in Civ IV, of course, rivers were vital for forming free trade routes between cities. In CiV, they were an irritant that slowed movement through the early game and then dictated whether the city could build a Water Mill. That’s basically what they do here, except it’s more complex than the Boolean question of whether the city center is on a river.


The district concept doesn’t change the gameplay nearly as much as 1UPT did, and the result is that this feels like the sort of addition that would come via an expansion. Whether the player builds a Barracks or designates a tile to be the military district and [i]then[/i] builds a Barracks isn’t very different from simply building the Barracks. It’s a cool idea, and the synergies between the terrain, districts, and improvements offer plenty of possibilities for maximizing productivity, but it doesn’t actually represent a fundamental departure from how cities are constructed.

In fact, the whole District thing is pretty much the meat & potatoes of the game. Beyond that, it’s just Civilization V with worsened AI and changes to city-states and religion. Well, I say “changes” to religion, but it wasn’t really changed; the only difference is that you can now only construct religious units like missionaries in a city where you’ve made a religious district and plopped a temple or something there.

It was when I was building my third Commerce District that I realized what was going on. This isn’t anything even remotely new; it’s just a slightly different way of doing it. See, in ages past, it was always best for the player to have a few specialized cities: one that focused on culture buildings, one that focused on economic buildings, one that focused on military units, and, most importantly, one that focused on production. There’s an obvious flaw in the system here, isn’t there? That’s right, because Production is a generic resource that is used to build economic buildings, military units, culture buildings, and pretty much everything else except missionaries. And that is where Civilization 6 screws up.

The only way they could have made this District system truly shine is if they added a few new currencies to the game. Why not? There are already several: Science, Production, Food, Culture, Gold, Faith, Great Person Points, and probably some others I am not thinking of at the moment. The obvious flaw in this problem is that an industrial city–that is, a city that focuses heavily on production, subsumes all the others. Production is king, because production is literally used to build all the other things. What good will it do the player to have a bustling Cultural District if it takes 57 turns to build the next cultural building because the city’s a cultural powerhouse, not a production powerhouse?

A city that focused on culture, for example, will have a bunch of culture buildings that it has built over the last 60~ turns to produce 31 culture per turn. That’s a bit high, but whatever. It’s not important. If that city comes under attack because some long-standing ally like Genghis Khan decided to straight-up betray you–as he tends to do–and your army is going to take 5 or more turns to get there, then that city is gone. All of that culture will do nothing to cut down on the 24 turns it takes to build one freaking Crossbowman. If, however, it was  Production City, then it would be able to produce those 7 culture buildings in 35-40 turns and would be able to produce the crossbowman in 3 or 4 turns. It’s the core of how the game is designed: Production is King, because Production is literally what allows the player to increase everything else. Production is at the heart of it.

Need to build a Market to increase Gold? Then you need Production to build it. Need to build an Amphitheater to increase Culture? Then you need Production to build it. Need to build a University to increase Science? Then you need Production to build it. Need to build a Crossbowman to pick of Gayghis Khan’s army? Then you need Production to build it. This is the nature of the game, and, as I said, I’ve been playing Civilization since my senior year of high school. Before that I was busy playing in a rock band and dating the hottest girl at the school, so you’ll excuse me for not nerding it out with Civ 1 and 2.

With each new release, I begin at the lower difficulty settings to familiarize myself with the new mechanics, and I work my way back up to Emperor or Deity–whatever the hardest difficulty is named. I’ve got a video somewhere of me easily claiming a Domination Victory on Emperor in Civilization V, and that’s no small feat, considering the entire Happiness system of V is meant to discourage Domination Victories. Of the victory possibilities, Diplomacy is the easiest by a huge margin; without even trying, it’s easy to become Allies with most of the city-states in the game by the time the United Nations is formed, and every time the vote occurs the two civilizations who ranked highest receive 2 additional delegates; it becomes a matter of three or four more sessions, at the most, before the Diplomacy Victory is won. Cultural Victory is probably the hardest to pull off, but primarily because it’s so freaking boring and tedious.

The point is: I know how to play Civilization games, and I’m damned good at them. I love Civilization V the most because it finally added a tactical layer to the game, making it much more in-line with chess in being a combination of strategy and tactics, and yes–I’m even including Civilization IV: BTS in that estimation. I think a lot of people who say that Civ IV is the best would be very surprised if they went back to it and tried to give it another go. It’s terrible compared to V. Don’t get me wrong. BTS was perfection itself when it was in its prime, but we are a long way from that. The ridiculously overpowered religion dictating all diplomatic efforts was a particular problem, never mind the Stacks of Doom.

Civilization VI aims to prevent this problem of Production being King… by forcing players to specialize cities whether they like it or not. I still ended up with an Industrial District in every city, because otherwise build times were absolutely ridiculous. It comes back to that point above: What is the reason for having a Cultural City if it takes 25 turns to build the next Culture building, if I can specialize it in Production and take 17 turns to pump out all the cultural buildings?

There isn’t one. It’s just a broken gimmick and a half-baked idea.

The only way it could have worked is if:

  1. The new currency Conscription was added to the game. This is basically Production,but it can only be used to build military units and military buildings, in the same way that religious units can only be purchased with Faith. Valor, Bravery, Conscription–whatever Firaxis wanted to call it. This way, there’s actually a point in specializing a military city. It would produce more Valor, and since Valor is used to build military units and military buildings, it doesn’t hurt the city to specialize in it instead of Production.
    1. As an addition to this, obviously, military units could still be constructed with raw production. The Encampment District would specifically allow x per turn Valor to be generated, and additional construction of buildings could be done with either Valor or Production. Districts, of course, are built only with Production. Each Armory increases the Valor yield of the city by +2, each Barracks by +1, and so on. A Swordsman can be built with 180 Production–or however the hell much it costs–or with 5 Valor Points. The same rule would still apply that only one unit can be constructed at a time–the city couldn’t build a Swordsman with its Valor while building a Commerce District with its Production.
      1. Or why couldn’t it? Isn’t that the point of building the Districts, after all? This would actually be a fantastic way of handling it, and giving the Districts actual utility versus being boolean triggers that allow the production of specialized buildings as they are now. Why can’t I use the new Valor resource to build my Musketman while the City Center uses its Production to build a Commerce District on the other side of town? However, Production could not be split: one could not use 30% of the Production to build the Swordsman and 70% to build the Commerce District; each currency can only be used for one thing at a time. This makes the Districts far more valuable, as not only would it be faster to build a Swordsman with Valor, but using Valor to build the Swordsman also frees up the City Center to use its Production to build something. Come on, Firaxis, how did you guys not come up with this?
  2. The new currency Artistry was added to the game. This is basically Production, but it can only be used to build cultural buildings and cultural units. The game is not comprised only of Great Generals, and neither is Planet Earth. There should probably be normal Artist, Musician, and Writer units that can be used in much the same way as Missionaries, except that they generate one-time cultural bonuses or one-time tourism bonuses. Obviously, all of these units would be stackable with each other, but not with themselves. We don’t want to increase the roadblocks, traffic jams, and choke points. An Artist can occupy the same tile as an Archer and a Missionary.
    1. Similar to the above, the Artistry being produced in the city’s Cultural District could be used to build a Musician or a Concert Hall while the Valor in the city’s Military District could be used to build a Swordsman or an Armory and while the City Center could be using its Production to construct a new Holy District.

The Culture Tech Tree needs to be completely reworked so that it’s… not a tech tree. C’mon, Firaxis. This was the concern we expressed when we saw the Civic Policies of Civilization V! This is precisely what we said: “It’s cool, but we’re worried that culture is going to become just another tech tree.” And voila–the next game releases, and culture is just another tech tree, and tied strangely to government systems and civic policies. I realize that the connection between government systems, civic policies, and culture has been in place for a very long time, but it’s time to separate the things, especially now that Culture Victory is a serious thing. There is no logical relationship between a people’s culture and their governmental systems or their civic possibilities. I realize that you need a gameplay currency that allows for the progressive unlocking of governmental systems, and that it didn’t go over so well when they were tied to technology as they were in the past, but that should tell you that you’re barking up the wrong trees.

As an anarchist, I would actually argue that you’re looking at it backward, as governmental systems are the primary stifling force against cultural growth, but that’s another matter.

I don’t have an alternative system for the Civic system here in VI, but please get rid of the tech tree that it has become. That was exactly what we were worried would happen after Civilization V. I’m sure you can still find posts about it in the CivFanatics forum.

Map clutter has to go, too. Holy crap, why is the map so freaking cluttered? It is borderline impossible to tell what anything is, and I had resources sitting on my map for hundreds of years going unused because:

  1. I’m honestly not sure whether there’s even a benefit to grabbing yet another resource of tea or cows. In previous games, this information was presented clearly and unambiguously. “Build a pasture = +1 Production.” It’s a no-brainer, even if I had a billion cows already. And even though I never build mounted units, except the occasional Knight, I have dozens upon dozens of horses.
  2. The map makes it terribly unclear whether the resource has been improved or not.
  3. And never freaking mind searching the map for non-descript icons washed in the hideous brown of the Fog of War to see if there is some coal or oil I could grab. Who on the development team came up with that? “Hey, let’s wash the entire Fog of War in shit.” “What do you mean?” “I mean let’s take all the color and replace it with the color of shit.” “Wow! You deserve a promotion!”

Civilization V was a bloody mess at launch, too. It was, in fact, the last game that I bought on launch day, until Dragon Age: Inquisition came along and reminded me keenly why I stopped buying games until they’d been patched a few times. After lots of patches and a few expansions, Civilization V proved to be an excellent game–my favorite in the series, though I think I have fonder memories of IV. If you take my advice and add some new currencies to actually give value to these districts besides making them pointless gateways to other buildings, then I think Civilization 6 could go on to rival Civilization IV: Beyond the Sword. And fix the Fog of War. It’s ridiculous.

But that’s all the Districts are now: gateways that determine what type of buildings can and can’t be built in a city. They’re methods of forcing specialized cities onto the player, even though nothing was done to curve the awesome power of Production–and thus every city gets an Industrial district and becomes specialized not in Culture but Industry & Culture, not in Military but Industry & Military, and not in commerce but Industry & Commerce. It’s a gimmick that limits what the player can do, rather than giving the player new ways to improve.

And that is the very definition of “bad game design.”



Why Can’t Games Work?

I hate Apple products. I hate everything about Apple. But I’ve gotten a new appreciation for their old tagline of “It just works,” because… PC games don’t. It’s gotten to the point where I prefer reviewing Indie and low budget games for Cubed3, because they are so much more likely to work correctly than AAA games. It’s completely unacceptable. I’ve been saying for years that console gaming is fucking retarded because they’re nothing more than gimped, uncustomizable, unupgradeable PCs, but developers’ total inability to release working games on PC is really making me do a double-take at console gaming. Their games can be pretty fucked up, too, but it seems like PC has a higher “this game doesn’t work” rate.

I’m currently reviewing Darksiders II: Deathinitive Edition for Cubed3, and I’ve gotten about 2 hours into the game. This isn’t the first time I’ve played Darksiders 2, but it is the first time I had to play it, to review it, and I’m not particularly excited about that because the non-definitive, and therefore inferior version that was sold for years, bored the fucking hell out of me. I never even got past the first world.

Detour: Definitive and Complete Editions

I recently purchased Mortal Kombat: Komplete Edition on Steam for like $5. By all rights, this game shouldn’t exist. I remember when DLC was first discussed by PC gamers a decade ago, and we expressed the worry that they would release games as incomplete, and would then sell us DLC that completed them. Now they’re doing exactly that, and they’re not even trying to hide it. Mortal Kombat: Komplete Edition means literally that everyone who purchased the game had to buy all the DLC to have a complete experience, and that’s not okay. DLC should complement the experience, not complete it.

We’re not arguing semantics here, because look at Batman: Arkham City and how the Catwoman sections were treated. Parts of the main story, critical to completion of the main story, were sectioned off and sold to players. We’ll come back to this topic one day, about why in the world developers think they’re entitled to be paid twice for one copy of a product, but for now let’s just bask in the glory that is the fact that we were sold an incomplete game for full price, and then had to buy shit on top of that if we wanted to complete it.

Complete Editions are tacit admissions that we’re getting fucked over, robbed, and cheated by games that are being sold to us incomplete. Definitive Editions are bald-faced admissions that we were, until this version, being sold an inferior product. None of this is okay. I don’t care how developers and publishers–and confused gamers who don’t understand whose side they’re on–think that this is okay. It’s not. Back to the main point.

Ah, That New Game Smell

A few weeks ago, I was looking into starting my YouTube channel for DiMezzo Gaming–and I’m still going to do that, but it’s going to be a little while. I don’t want to launch too many things at once. The first video will be me standing there. Something shorts out off-camera, electricity buzzes are heard, and then grey-black smoke wafts upward. I wave the smoke into my face with a gesture, close my eyes, and euphorically say, “Ah… That new game smell…” I’m still going to make this video, but it’s going to be a few weeks. Between house shopping, car shopping, reviewing for Cubed3, talking with literary agents, launching this site, and running my I.T. firm, I’m a tad busy right now and can’t devote the time to YouTube that would be warranted by opening a channel.

It was Tomb Raider that spurred this idea, though I don’t recall now what issues I was having with it. Oh, yeah, I do. It wouldn’t run for more than ten minutes. The framerate steadily dropped until it was running at 10 frames per second. Despite my joking about framerate, I actually do care a bit about it. But it’s consistency that I care about, and it doesn’t really matter to me if a game runs at 30 or 60 frames per second–as long as it is stable at that rate. Tomb Raider (I’ll update this post when my Cubed3 review is posted; it’s with the editors right now, and they’ve got quite a backlog of reviews from me) is not stable.

Mega Man Legacy Collection was completely unplayable, showing me only a black screen and what might have been a Wingdings font in white. Research indicated that installing a particular Windows 7 update would resolve the problem–and it did, but it should never have been necessary. I intentionally refrain from updating my Operating System; I own a tech firm, after all, and no one has seen more damage caused by Windows updates than I. Even with this update, it still crashes a lot.

Then there are games like They Bleed Pixels, which work flawlessly. And who could forget the legendarily awesome Super Meat Boy, which also works flawlessly? Even this stupid piece of shit works. There is also the glorious Orcs Must Die! 2, so incredible that it has spurred me to take part in my first-ever preview series. All of these games work.

Darksiders II: Deathinitive Edition doesn’t, and it doesn’t seem that I’m the only person with this problem. I have no idea what’s causing it; it did work just fine. But now it doesn’t. So you can imagine what kind of review the game is going to get. I show no mercy to games that don’t work, and Darksiders 2 was never particularly good in the first place. I held nothing back on SDK Paint, and I’ll hold nothing back on Darksiders II. Because the asinine argument about hardware and software types making compatibility a problem is not valid and has not been valid since 1999.

We have two types of CPU, two types of graphics card, 3 types of RAM (that matter: ddr2, ddr3, and ddr5), and one type of sound device. Everyone is sporting AMD/AMD or Intel/Nvidia. I’m in the former group; I love me some AMD. But hardware is no longer an issue, and it hasn’t been in a very long time.

Fuck Off, Square-Enix

On November 22, I purchased Tomb Raider from Steam for $19.99. On November 25, Square-Enix released a bundle on Steam, and the bundle contained every single Tomb Raider PC game and all the DLC available for the price of $19.99. The version of Tomb Raider that I bought, of course, contained no DLC. If there were pre-sale announcements, I might have known that the game I was about to buy would shortly be sold with ten other full games and all DLC for the same price, but no such thing exists regarding Steam.

After researching the issue about, three things struck me as obvious. First, this would not have happened if there was a pre-sale catalog that allows players to peruse upcoming sales and, perhaps, wait to purchase a game if it’s going to be available cheaper. I understand why publishers wouldn’t want to do this–why tell players that they’re about to knock 75% off a game, when they can sell it today for full price and you’re generally left with no recourse? But this is incredibly anti-consumer, and that isn’t a mentality we should allow developers and publishers to put into action.

Secondly, there should already be an official system in place for dealing with this, because this is not the first time this has happened to me. When I bought the Legendary Edition of The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, it went on sale less than two weeks later for 75% off–a difference of $30. I was not anxious to replay Skyrim, and I certainly would have waited. When I bought the Game of the Year version of Batman: Arkham City, it went on sale that very weekend for $5, causing me to lose out on $15 because I didn’t know. I bought Portal for $2.99 and Portal 2 for $4.99, and days later they were bundled together for $2.99. In the short span of about two months, I could have saved between 50% and 75% and still had the same gaming library I have today–with a bank account some $120-150 heavier. When you’re purchasing your own games to review because you refuse to take part in the behind-the-scenes back-scratching, these numbers matter.

The long-term effects of this behavior have been obvious: users across Reddit report that they won’t even purchase a game on Steam unless it’s 50% off or more, because the odds that it is about to go on sale are extremely high. Players are left guessing entirely in order to prevent paying double what they have to in order to get the game, and they solve this problem by refusing to ever pay full price; they’ve been burned too many times and have burned away too much money because sales are not announced priorily. If, on the other hand, players knew, beyond any doubt, that Fallout 3 is not going to drop 50% in the next two weeks, they will be more likely to go ahead and buy it, because 2+ weeks starts getting into the timeframes where many players would rather go ahead and enjoy the game now and pay a bit more. But buying a game on Steam at full price has become a gamble, because consumers have no assurance that it won’t go on sale the moment after they click “buy.”

Thirdly, this is not actually the responsibility of the distributor to handle, because this is not retail. If this was the world of retail and Wal-Mart was putting games on sale in order to get rid of some of its stock, I would fully agree that any issue with price drops and bundles needs to be taken to Wal-Mart. That is not, however, the way Steam works; Valve doesn’t have a stock of game keys, and they don’t arbitrarily decide to lower the price of games. In fact, Valve has no control over what bundles and prices are listed on the Steam Store. Steam is merely the distribution channel. Publishers are the ones who create the bundles, who set the MSRPs, and who initiate the sales.

When this happened, I did research into the matter, and the general consensus appeared to be that most people “knew of” someone experiencing this, contacting Valve, and having the issue handled satisfactorily, but there were not very many forthcoming firsthand accounts of this happening. Seeing as I thought the matter through and realized that the interaction took place almost entirely between myself and Square-Enix and that Valve/Steam was simply the vehicle through which that interaction occurred, I opted to contact Square-Enix and Valve, but I admit I only contacted Valve because the Reddit users suggested it had been successful.

Within 48 hours, Valve responded to my support request by issuing a refund on Tomb Raider. Because the sale was Limited Time Only, Valve bypassed the otherwise-mandatory 4-7 day waiting period to receive funds acquired through refund, and I was immediately able to turn around and purchase the Tomb Raider bundle. So basically, they “took back” the initial purchase, gave me back my money, and sold me the bundle. Except… they didn’t really, did they? No, they just cleaned up Square-Enix’s mess. And kudos to Valve for that–I have a great deal of respect and love for Valve overall. I greatly appreciate their willingness to fix something that was, by all rights, Square-Enix’s responsibility, and Valve earned +1 Respect that day.

Yesterday, December 2 (the day after the bundle sale ended, it’s worth mentioning), Square-Enix replied to my support request, saying:

We apologize for the trouble. We would like to clarify that unfortunately we cannot offer you a refund for this game under any circumstances. We do recommend approaching the place of purchase for a refund. We understand that you are not happy with the Steam’s lack of notice of pre-sale advertising and this feedback will be forwarded to my superiors.

This is in flagrant disregard of the fact that I told them I did not want a refund, and that what I wanted was for them to address the issue by giving me keys for the other items included in the bundle–which they most certainly could do. They’re the fucking publishers, mate. They’re the ones with the product keys. They’re the ones who own the right to distribute the product. That’s what a publisher is. And let’s be absolutely clear here: they received the money for the purchase. There might be some sort of delay between when Valve takes my money and when it gets to the publisher, but make absolutely no mistake: this is not retail. Steam is not being reimbursed for copies of the game they purchased from Square-Enix, as would be the case, usually, in the retail world. Steam is merely acting as the agent through which Square-Enix sells its games almost directly to consumers.

Seeing as Valve and their excellent customer service and general customer-oriented mindset had already satisfactorily handled the issue, I replied back to Square-Enix:

I see. Well, that’s okay. I mean, I’m working on the review of Final Fantasy V on PC for a gaming site aggregated by OpenCritic, MetaCritic, and Gamefaqs, so I’ll just “let slip” of your anti-consumer practices during the review. Have a good day.

And while that’s certainly a bluff on my end, it serves a few purposes. First, I want to see how it affects Square-Enix’s treatment of me. I have routinely see developers and publishers change their attitudes fast when they learn that I’m actually a reviewer for an actually aggregated gaming site, that they’re not just fucking over “any old customer” but one with a voice that actually gets heard by lots and lots of people. You have my word that I have NEVER allowed a publisher or developer to actually give me special treatment for this; when they have attempted to, I have spit in their face for being the wretched pigs they are.

For example, Nintendo and I had an issue over a piece of shit shovelware “game” called SDK Paint on the Nintendo Pee-U. I contacted them as a concerned consumer, suggesting that they pull the title from the eShop because it didn’t fucking work. Like it literally didn’t fucking work, and I was the only reviewer to catch that because I was the only reviewer who covered it with the fucking integrity to do more than pop it open for thirty seconds, verify that it functioned, and bang out a quickie. Instead, I actually spent nine hours with that abomination, and it honestly crashed like clockwork every ten minutes. This means (because the issue is a known bug, and it was then ubiquitous) that none of the other 3 “professional” reviewers even spent ten continuous minutes with this software they scored as average.

Nintendo replied with a lot of bullshit, suggesting that I power down and reboot the Pee-U, and unplug it for 30 seconds, trying a different user profile, and all of that asinine stuff that I don’t have to try because I own an I.T. consultant firm and I’ve got a pretty good handle on this whole “technology thing.” And, as I told them in the initial message, I had already tried the standard troubleshooting steps; it was a software issue. I can identify a software issue a mile off; anyone who has been in the field for seven years can. Around the time I replied “Nevermind,” I’d updated my email signature to include a reference to the review site, and the tonal shift in Nintendo’s message was immediate. While their first message had taken more than a day to arrive, every message they sent after that came within minutes, and they were far more cordial, up to and including offering for me to ship my Pee-U to them at their expense so that they could verify there was nothing wrong with my console. They jumped through a lot of hoops to keep me from writing a review that said “Nintendo allowed this non-working shit software to be sold in their eShop.”

But that’s exactly what I wrote, because that’s exactly what they did, and the average consumer who bought SDK Paint wouldn’t have gotten the offer from Nintendo to diagnose their console at no cost; the average consumer would have been told to ship it in and pay a $75 diagnostic fee, and then it wouldn’t have done any good because the simple fact was that SDK Paint didn’t work.

Endemic to the Industry

I mentioned earlier that I have a habit of rejecting review codes when they are available. This is particularly true with free-to-play games. I admit that I don’t always reject review codes; it really depends on the status of DiMezzo Gaming’s finances, to be honest, how expensive the game is, and what the review code entails. I don’t like reviewing Free to Play games, because they present a bit of a problem for anyone with integrity.

When I reviewed Magicka: Wizard Wars with two other reviewers, we used review codes that gave us something called “Press Kit”. After getting into the game, it almost immediately became obvious that this Press Kit gave us a shitload of overpowered weapons, armor, and enough gold to buy literally everything in the store. After a bit of arithmetic, I learned that the review codes we were given equated to about $120 of free shit per player. That meant that we weren’t getting the experience someone playing it for free would get; someone could only get an experience on par with ours if they were willing to shell out enough money to otherwise purchase two full-release console games. I was appalled.

So I created a new account, a free account, and poured no money into the game. The findings were staggering. While my Press character routinely racked up 20+ kills with less than 5 deaths per match, my free character was almost exactly the opposite, averaging 6 kills per match and 17 deaths per match. The difference was overwhelming. I was no longer steamrolling people and earning more points than the rest of my team combined. I was still leading my teams, but the margins were extremely narrow, and it was nowhere near as enjoyable.

For all intents and purposes, we had been bribed.

I am going to be brutally honest in every direction; it’s kinda my thing. So when a developer goes for broke by giving the press a special package of candy valued at more than $100 that drastically alters the gameplay experience, I am going to take that bitter taste left in my mouth from the candy and remove it by forcing myself to get rid of all of it, and to instead play the game as the average player would. And when idiotic consumers pre-ordered Arkham Knight and a Season Pass despite knowing damned well how WB handled Arkham Origins, I’m not going to feel any pity or sympathy for them, and I’m going to say that consumer responsibility must enter into the equation at some point. I am on consumers’ sides, because I am a consumer, but I will gladly choose honesty over loyalty–because sometimes, in order to be truly loyal to people, you have to tell them what they don’t want to hear: what they need to hear. Yes, if you got burned on Arkham Knight and its Season Pass and you had experience with the PC version of Arkham Origins, it is your own fault.

Back to Square-Enix

While I won’t actually mention the anti-consumer shifting of responsibility that Square-Enix has displayed over the Tomb Raider matter in my review of the PC version of Final Fantasy V, that’s partially because it isn’t necessary. Final Fantasy V shows Square-Enix’s disdain for consumers directly; I don’t need to go into long diatribes about Steam and consumer rights. The PC port of Final Fantasy V is INFERIOR to the mobile version. That tells you everything you need to know. Don’t give it a free pass to be a shitty port because “hur hur hur its final fantasy v tho so u cant give it a 3.”

Bullshit. I just gave it a 3. Because the PC port has no reason to exist. And if it absolutely must exist, then gamers deserve more effort than that. So look out, Square-Enix. You have riled Aria DiMezzo, and she’s going to systematically take you to task for it. You better mind your Ps and Qs, because I’m looking for you to fuck up. I won’t fabricate shit, obviously, but I will use every single one of your mistakes against you. I will highlight every mistake, every failing, every screw-up, and I will broadcast them to anyone who will listen. When you slip and fall, I will be there–laughing and pointing. Every time you do something stupid, every time you show your outright contempt for gamers, every time you spit in our faces, I will be there, keeping notes, because you may be a AAA publisher right now, Square-Enix, but things change. Look at Atari. Look at John Romero. Look at Nintendo. Look at Microsoft. You, EA, Ubisoft, and WB are on borrowed time, and the rise of the indie scene is going to overthrow you. Watch your back, Square-Enix, because consumers won’t blind themselves to your behavior forever.