Blog

Animal Crossing: A Unique Game that Can't Be Played All at Once

Everyone knows the feeling of getting a new AAA game. You run to the store at midnight (or first thing in the morning), wait in line, get the game before racing back home. Primary thought on everyone’s mind at that moment: “well, there goes my social life for the next few days”. Maximum a week usually, that game will dominate your time as you seek to complete it. But you will, that’s the point. Even with huge games like Bethesda’s Fallout or Elder Scrolls series, you will complete at least the majority of it in a relatively short time period (you will also become a hermit and your friends and family will begin speaking of you in mythological terms). The Animal Crossing series isn’t like that. Simply put: it isn’t like any other major video game release out there.

For the purposes of this article, the majority of my comments will be directly based upon my recent experiences playing Animal Crossing: New Leaf for the Nintendo 3DS. I have played every Animal Crossing game released so far, but there are a few things in New Leaf that I want to focus on. Plus, it’s the Animal Crossing game that is freshest in my head.

So let me summarize what happens in an Animal Crossing game: you play as a young human who moves into a town full of bipedal humanoid animals. You are given a small house and few possessions. There are stores where you can buy things, clothing stores where you can design new clothes, a museum where you can donate bugs, fossils, fish and paintings. In short, the town feels alive. It is full of things to do. The catch: you’re a broke foreigner. You have to make friends and acquire currency… because you will be in debt in this game. A lot of debt. Hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt.

Tom Nook is the creature you will owe so much money to in these games. He may not be a villain in the traditional sense but rest assured: he has grown fat off your blood, sweat and tears.
Tom Nook is the creature you will owe so much money to in these games. He may not be a villain in the traditional sense but rest assured: he has grown fat off your blood, sweat and tears.

So it’s kinda like The Sims. Kinda but not really. There is another catch with any Animal Crossing game: they all take place real-time, whether you’re playing or not. That means that right now in my Animal Crossing game, the town is waking up and starting to move. Doesn’t matter that I’m not playing. Just as it is 8:11 as I write this, it is 8:11 in my game. Kinda crazy when you think about it.

Just like in real life, there are different seasons in Animal Crossing. I will have to wait till December to experience December in the game. No other game does this.
Just like in real life, there are different seasons in Animal Crossing. I will have to wait till December to experience December in the game. No other game does this.

So what does this mean for gameplay? Essentially it means I can binge-play all I want but time is going to prohibit how much I can do. There is only so much one can do in a day, this is true in both life and Animal Crossing. This makes Animal Crossing unique. Even in the Sims series, one can always fast-forward or slow down time. There is that degree of control. Here, no. If you say you’re going to meet someone in the game in eight hours and then forget to show up – that experience is gone. Furthermore, they will remember that you weren’t there and be angry at you the next time you talk to them.

Sounds a little too life-like, doesn’t it?

Good news: it still feels like a game. While certain aspects render Animal Crossing as a second-life simulator, this is still a different life than most of us will ever lead. In Animal Crossing, you spend your days catching fish and bugs. You dig up dinosaur bones. You run errands for friends. You can buy new things at your leisure, even when massively in debt. You don’t need to eat, you don’t need to sleep. Oh and Animal Crossing: New Leaf adds something extra to the formula – you’re the mayor.

As mayor you fund public works and can enact ordinances to shape your town and all of its inhabitants.
As mayor you fund public works and can enact ordinances to shape your town and all of its inhabitants.

This gives more power to the player. Not much more mind you, that damn raccoon is still going to own your money and your soul before you can possibly pay off your debt. Still, it’s nice to see a game changing up the formula and adding new gameplay mechanics. The time limitations come into play here as well. For instance, in my game I have just enacted my first ordinance, which was a desire to increase the amount of money you get from selling items (very useful when paying off debt). I enacted it yesterday morning. It took effect this morning, exactly 24 hours after I enacted it. So I had to wait a day… which makes me want to play today because I want to see exactly what it is that I just did.

The stores in Animal Crossing are not open 24/7. This also slows progress as you can collect so much at a certain time but sell nothing. Being mayor allows you to extend the store's hours, should you so choose.
The stores in Animal Crossing are not open 24/7. This also slows progress as you can collect so much at a certain time but sell nothing. Being mayor allows you to extend the store’s hours, should you so choose.

Playing an Animal Crossing game is incredibly relaxing. Maybe it is the fixed time that renders the effect but I honestly think it’s more than that. Part of it comes from the fact that, even though it is so close to reality, (especially if you’re a recent graduate with debt filling your life), there is no time table. Play Animal Crossing if you want to experience a world run by money but not dominated by it. Despite the passage of time, my character will never die. He cannot get hurt or have his ambitions ruined. Everything he works for: he achieves. In short, that makes the Animal Crossing series the perfect propaganda for capitalism.

If that’s true than that makes Tom Nook the 1%… funny how much shared hatred is in there.

How it feels being several hundred thousand dollars in debt... to a raccoon.
How it feels being several hundred thousand dollars in debt… to a raccoon.

Thoughts? Comments? Am I full of it or onto something? Let me know now in the feedback section of this article.

Who won E3 2013?

Sony. I’m going to go into a breakdown in a second but seriously: Sony. This does not come from a fanboy, I have never owned a Sony console before. It should be pretty obvious from my previous posts that my personal favorite is Nintendo. However, of the three console manufacturers, Sony clearly had the best overall presentation. Does that mean Nintendo and Microsoft sucked: no. This has been a great E3 overall with many exciting announcements. Below are the highlights as well as my reasoning process in determining Sony as the winner.

The Good:

Microsoft highlighted their E3 presentation with what had been sorely lacking at the Xbox One reveal: games. A short list includes Battlefield 4, Call of Duty: Ghosts, Destiny, Dragon Age: Inquisition, Thief and Watch Dogs. Microsoft’s best highlight went beyond just touting their upcoming game library. Without a doubt, the reason anyone is talking Xbox One right now (in a positive light anyway) is to discuss the console’s strong opening list of exclusives. In total, seventeen exclusives were unveiled for Microsoft’s next generation system. True, some games like Titanfall are only console exclusives (the game is also coming to the PC) but still that is a huge list for Microsoft to be proud of. If Xbox One can manage to hold onto these exclusives, they will have no trouble finding people to buy their system… if (talk more about this a little later).

Titanfall comes from the creators of Call of Duty, arguably the most influential game developers of the past ten years. The fact that it is skipping the PS4 is huge and not to be overlooked.
Titanfall comes from the creators of Call of Duty, arguably the most influential game developers of the past ten years. The fact that it is skipping the PS4 is huge and not to be overlooked.

Nintendo had no surprises for anyone this year. Their upcoming game library is heavy on the 1st party support and light on the 3rd party. Audiences were treated to first looks at Mario Kart 8, Super Mario 3D World, Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, Sonic Lost World, Bayonetta 2, and Super Smash Bros. What, I said it was predictable, I didn’t say it wasn’t good. Yes, Nintendo is still looking lousy with the third party support but they have survived on their own development teams ever since the Nintendo Gamecube. With a lower price tag than the other two systems and the most freedom (with regards to used games and no DRM) Nintendo is looking in good shape to finally fix their Wii U selling problem… you know, once the games are actually out.

Mega Man highlighted the first three newcomers to Super Smash Bros. If that doesn't make you want to own this game than I don't know what will.
Mega Man highlighted the first three newcomers to Super Smash Bros. If that doesn’t make you want to own this game than I don’t know what will.

The Bad:

I know I’m behind schedule with my next Special Address (focused on rape culture, misogyny and video games) but this needs to be mentioned. During Microsoft’s E3 press conference, the game, Killer Instinct was showcased. Now anyone who has ever seen a Microsoft press conference will know two things are bound to happen: there will be a new Call of Duty game showcased and every line of scripted dialogue that attempts to emulate actual video game lingo will be absolutely horrible. This year took the latter to a new height. It stopped being just horrible in terms of delivery, it became horrible in content. So here is what happened: one of the games’ developers invited a woman on stage to play. Here is the dialogue that transpired:

Man: “Come on you got to practice before you get on stage in front of millions of people.”

Woman: “I can’t even block correctly and you’re too fast.”

Man: “There we go. Just let it happen. It will be over soon.”

Woman: “You have a fight stick!”

Man: “One more. Wow you like those?”

Woman: “No I don’t like this.”

Okay… so I shouldn’t have to say much about why that was unacceptable. But crap like this is the reason I am writing my articles and why millions out there are also writing and educating and trying to make a change. It’s not okay. If you think: “ah, all in good fun” – yeah, it wasn’t meant maliciously but right now that doesn’t matter. Here’s an idea for this guy: how about you teach her to play next time beforehand. Or what – did he not want to get embarrassed by a woman in front of millions of people?

The presentation in question where the incident occurred. Note: this had absolutely nothing to do with Killer Instinct. Not a video game's fault that that guy is a jackass.
The presentation in question where the incident occurred. Note: this had absolutely nothing to do with Killer Instinct. Not a video game’s fault that that guy is a jackass.

Okay, last bad thing: no further plans from either Sony or Microsoft to support backwards comparability. Hope you enjoy your PS3 and 360 cause you’re not going to be able to get rid of them. This is the best argument for returning to the PC: every time they upgrade a computer, you don’t have to re-buy all of your old games. Seriously, why is Nintendo the only one supporting this?

Why Sony Won:

I didn’t talk about Sony’s press conference under the good. I would have except it would have made this section redundant. Yes, right now Microsoft is leading with overall video game content (their exclusives can’t be ignored). Sony doesn’t have much in the way of exclusive game content right now… but that doesn’t mean it won’t change. Here’s the thing about exclusives, they don’t always stay exclusive. Remember when Rayman Legends was a Wii U exclusive? That changed before the release. Why: because the Wii U isn’t selling well enough to warrant Ubisoft taking a profit loss to release a game exclusively for it. Game developers want to make money. That’s what drives everything. Right now the Xbox One has a lot of exclusives and some of those it can hold onto (the ones made by companies directly owned by Microsoft) but what about the other ones? They didn’t do a great job of it last generation. Remember Mass Effect? You can enjoy that on the PlayStation 3 now.

Point is, the Xbox One needs to be successful right out of the launch. If it isn’t, Microsoft may very well lose a lot of their “exclusives” to Sony. I should point out that it will be hard to beat PlayStation 4 at launch for two reasons: first off – MONEY! While the Xbox One will cost $500, the Sony PlayStation 4 will only cost $400 (and the Wii U currently costs $350 at maximum). This means the Xbox One will be the most expensive system this generation. Last generation the Sony PlayStation 3 was the highest costing and their launch was… not great.

Here’s the other reason:

Sony's K.O. punch of E3 2013.
Sony’s K.O. punch of E3 2013.

Microsoft has been vague (at best) on their conditions of used game restrictions, need for constant internet and DRM implications. Sony has not been. Furthermore, they have come out as the exact opposite in many of the areas the One has been most criticized for. This does not look good for Microsoft. Not good at all. While Nintendo has (wisely) bowed out of direct competition in favor of their own market, the PS4 and One are going head to head. Right now, there is no reason to own both (anyone who buys both should please send extra money to me, clearly you have it). So, as Optimus Prime once famously said: “One shall stand, one shall fall.”

I know, that was way too nerdy… I’ll stop now.

Sidenote: Project Spark seems to be the most intriguing game that no one is talking about. I recommend everyone go on youtube and check out the videos, it looks really cool!
Side note: Project Spark seems to be the most intriguing game that no one is talking about. I recommend everyone go on Youtube and check out the videos, it looks really cool!
Further side note: there is a new Battlefront game coming. Awesome.
Further side note: there is a new Battlefront game coming. Awesome.

Thoughts? Comments? Am I full of it or onto something? Let me know now in the feedback section of this article.

Don’t Judge the Original by its Remake: GODZILLA

With 2014 bringing the second remake of the 1954 classic, Godzilla (Gojira if you use the original Japanese title), to western audiences, I figure it’s a good time to talk about what happened in 1998. First off, a lot of good things happened that year: media giant, Google was founded, Bear Grylls became the youngest man to ever climb Mt. Everest at 23 (wonder what he drank to celebrate at the top) and The Big Lebowski was released on an unsuspecting public. All of these things were pretty awesome. Then there was Roland Emmerich’s remake of Godzilla.

Let me say this now and get it out of the way: I am a huge Godzilla fan. I own and have seen all of the films multiple times. I own over two hundred Godzilla themed pieces of merchandise. I could tell you trivia from any of the 28 films. I… I’m just going to stop right there. Needless to say, it’s a passion that I’ve been hooked on since I was a little kid (watching Godzilla movies on the Sci-fi channel made being sick fun). Now the common opinion held by most diehard Godzilla fans is that the 1998 “remake” is a disaster of epic proportions and an insult to the name, Godzilla. I agree with this opinion. I don’t think Roland Emmerich’s film is the worst I have ever seen by any stretch (I don’t even think it’s the worst Roland Emmerich film I’ve seen – that honor goes to The Day After Tomorrow) but I do think it might possibly be the worst remake I’ve ever seen and I would agree with this statement: If Godzilla (1998) is the only Godzilla movie you have seen; you have not seen a Godzilla movie.

Godzilla is ranked by film historians as the second most influential film to ever come from Japan. The only film held above it is Akira Kurosawa's Seven Samurai.
Godzilla is ranked by film historians as the second most influential film to ever come from Japan. The only film held above it is Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai.

Now if you’ve seen the 1998 movie, you might be thinking might now: it’s about a giant, radioactive, monster that attacks a city and fights the military – that sounds like Godzilla to me. And it does, it does sound like Godzilla. But it’s not. The biggest failure of the remake lies not in its cast, special effects or choice of location but rather in its genre. Godzilla released in 1998 is not the same genre of movie as the 1954 original.

But wait, you say, aren’t they both giant monster movies? No, the original Godzilla is not a giant monster movie. Allow me to elaborate my point.

A giant monster movie can be defined by a few key ingredients: the presence of a giant monster, the presence of destruction, the presence of military and a human subplot that usually involves scientific exposition and a love interest. Nearly all giant monster movies have these elements (or at least manage a 3 out of 4). There can be one addendum to the presence of destruction: it is always destruction without consequence. What I mean by that is: buildings are destroyed, people are killed but the consequences aren’t felt more than five minutes after you’re done watching the scene. There is no feeling of loss, rather a different sensation of “oh, wasn’t that a cool explosion!” This means that all giant monster movies are supposed to be fun to watch. They are films of pure spectacle. Let’s talk about Godzilla (1954).

I don’t know if it’s possible to have fun watching this movie. Ishiro Honda’s Godzilla is an event film. It focuses on the human drama of people forced to suffer through a disaster. In this case, that disaster is spelled about: Godzilla was made to be an escapist’s portrayal of the 1945 atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This film was made just 9 years after the bombs fell. That’s incredible to think about. Also consider this fact: in the years following Japan’s surrender, their cinema was not allowed to make films that portrayed America as a villain. These films would have been considered propaganda and in breach of the terms of Japan’s surrender. So what do you do when you wish to make a film about the horrors of nuclear war without directly involving the nation that bombed you? Use a giant monster… and fill that movie with loads of veiled anti-American sentiment.

The American version of Godzilla was heavily altered to remove all Anti-American feeling and greatly reduce the sense of tragedy. The character of Steve Martin (Raymond Burr) was also added in to further distance the audience from the horror of what they were watching.
The American version of Godzilla was heavily altered to remove all Anti-American feeling and greatly reduce the sense of tragedy. The character of Steve Martin (Raymond Burr) was also added in to further distance the audience from the horror of what they were watching.

The 1998 movie does not have a trace of this subtext. Yes, Godzilla is created from nuclear fallout in both films, yet the function is different. In 1998, it is just used as explanation (in accordance with the giant monster movie formula). How does this thing exist: radiation. In 1954, radiation and nuclear fallout wasn’t just exposition, it was the theme of the whole movie. Godzilla itself served as a metaphor for the horrors of nuclear war. Losing that took away Godzilla’s identity and is the main reason why diehard Godzilla fans don’t consider the 1998 remake to be a part of the series.

The genre and scene construction of the 1998 film make it a far better remake of Jurassic Park than of the original Godzilla.
The genre and scene construction of the 1998 film make it a far better remake of Jurassic Park than of the original Godzilla.

If you still don’t believe me about how different in genre these two films are, please look at the picture below:

1367810478_26675f878e

This scene takes place after Godzilla’s rampage. These children have survived the initial devastation only to be found to have fatally high radiation levels. Yep, they managed to not be crushed in falling debris or perish in the fires (there are scenes of that happening to families) but they will still die anyway because that’s how atomic destruction works. Is there any scene like this in the 1998 remake: no. This scene pictured above is not the only of its kind in the original, either. I know I don’t need to hammer the point anymore but, in terms of genre and effect on the audience, Schindler’s List would be a more faithful candidate for remake than the 1998 film.

Okay, so how did this happen? How did the 1998 remake fail so completely in capturing the spirit of the original? Simple answer: Roland Emmerich doesn’t like Godzilla. He has said as much in multiple interviews. He doesn’t understand the movies, he hasn’t seen a lot of them, he doesn’t like what he’s seen. Great candidate to remake the vision, right? Hollywood screwed up (to the point that Toho Studios nearly sued them).

Now, in 2013, production is underway on a new remake. This time Gareth Edwards (of Monsters fame) has been asked to direct. Rest assured, he is a Godzilla fan and has stated multiple times his desire to return to the tone of the 1954 film. Personally I’m a little weary: the film has experienced time in development hell, going over multiple script rewrites and includes two additional monsters (shouldn’t need other monsters for the first film). However, Edwards is a fan… so I guess that’s something.

This image is from promo art released for the upcoming remake. At least this time it looks like Godzilla.
This image is from promo art released for the upcoming remake. At least this time it looks like Godzilla.

So if you’re in the mood for a powerful piece of film making, check out the original 1954 Godzilla. However if you’re only acquaintance with the king of the monsters came in 1998… you may be in for a surprise when you go into the theater next year. You might be about to see your first Godzilla movie.

Movie triva: Lucasfilm didn't like the 1998 Godzilla's tagline of "Size Does Matter" as they felt it was an attack on Yoda. After the film was released, Phantom Menace marketing released this... and when Phantom Menace is able to make fun of your movie's plot, you know you screwed up.
Movie trivia: Lucasfilm didn’t like the 1998 Godzilla‘s tagline of “Size Does Matter” as they felt it was an attack on Yoda. After the film was released, Phantom Menace marketing released this… and when The Phantom Menace is able to make fun of your movie’s plot, you know you screwed up.

Thoughts? Comments? Am I full of it or onto something? Let me know now in the feedback section of this article.