Take Two have done lost their minds!

 Somebody stop me.

It must be difficult existing as an incredibly profitable and powerful corporate entity, what with managing the finances, organising teams, juggling lobbyists, circumventing tax laws, all the daily comings and goings of the average corporate lifestyle. I can imagine that each company has to handle their challenges with their own unique methods, balancing their own wellbeing with that of their investors, ideally to the best ends for all. And if the pressure should ever get too much, if you should lose the careful cool you've tried to maintain for years in order to perpetrate the false image of intellectual serenity you've erected around yourself like a fort? Well, then you might just slip from the fragile perch of sanity and tumble into an unhinged spree of abusing your power every which-way like a badly written fantasy villain in the last act of his storyline. ("If I can't have the world be under my grasp, then no-one can have the world!")

So Take Two might not be the most familiar to people out there in the gaming space, especially if you base your knowledge of the more corporate angles of the gaming beast by the logos plastered on the front of your games. But Take Two is essentially the big demon behind the curtains that puppets the likes of 2K and Rockstar, basically meaning they're juggling billion-dollar revenue generators under their brand names, so they aren't any slackers in this space by any stretch of the imagination. Take Two covets the sort of power and influence to potentially step on the throats of pretty much anyone they want to, as does any company within the upper echelons of the video game industry, because this is the most profitable entertainment medium in the world right now. (And money obviously breeds power) But whereas we acknowledge the godlike power that these companies dandily wave over our necks like loose-swinging guillotine blades, never actually expecting to feel the sharp cold of the metal's drop, Take Two must have recently become possessed by the spirit of Robespierre because they're dropping heads left right and centre.

They've never actually been the most 'community friendly' over in the corporate equivalent of Mount Doom. In fact, very recently fans of Rockstar games have been tearing out their hair over that fact that Take Two have been mounting a scorched earth campaign on anything online that so much as references a property they own. I'm talking mods, ENBs and even shared save files. All whilst Rockstar bury their heads and pretend that none of this is happening because it's better not to stir the sleeping beast sleeping above them I guess, although the fact that Take Two took down a bunch of superior graphical enhancement mods in the months leading up to Grand Theft Auto's inferior definitive update is certainly curious. I'm not saying that Rockstar specifically put them up to it, I'm just saying that I wouldn't be surprised if some of the leading Rockstar staff let slip the existence of these sorts of mods during a meeting at some point.

Still, as pathetically desperate as that sort of conduct invariably is, it is technically within Take Two's legal rights. (Whenever you are forced to bring 'technical legality' into the conversation you're pretty much just circling the drainage pipe to hell.) Take Two are in no way legally obliged to support the endeavours of their own community in their attempts to, you know, provide extra value to their property free of charge. (Might as well punish the fans for being fans, afterall.) Another thing they have no legal obligation to do is to overreach in trademark filings against any and everyone they can find with a name that sounds anything like something that they own. I'm not talking about direct ripoffs, and most of the time not even competitors, I'm talking anyone. If your birth name just happens to be something along the lines of 'Maximillian Paine', you can expect to be getting a subpoena through your letter box anytime now, things are that crazy!

Eurogamer has been putting in the legwork to document all of this, which is incredibly helpful because the extent of these claims are simply baffling, and it has stretched back to all across this year. The US patent office has filings against a clothing brand called Max Fayne, a Bejing company called 'Starrocks' (hah, goodluck on that lawsuit Take Two) and a Florida axe throwing company called "Rockstar Axe throwing". These, of course, dredges up that most tedious of queries, does naming your company after an incredibly common term warrant your ownership over that word across the world for as long as you want? Of course, usually the answer for this is 'no', but occasionally the right (or wrong, as the case my be) courts have held up such queer rulings, and perhaps Take Two are just looking for a few victories on the smaller scale that they can use to set a precedent.

But if there's one example here that simply screamed to get my attention, one victim which it makes my blood boil to see attacked by all this; it's the videogame 'It Takes Two'. This adorable little couples game (not a 'family' game- a 'couples' game) is the latest title from Hazelight and, incidentally, a 'Game of the Year' contender; but they've been forced to relinquish their trademark over their own game's name because of Take Two's recent bout of insanity. Just to be clear, this does not mean that they have to change their name at this immediate time, and Geoff Keighley won't be forbidden from speaking their name during the awards next Friday, (although that would be surrealist as heck if that was the case) but it does mean that for the moment Hazelight can't defend themselves from anyone who might attempt to profit off of their game's name; which is crap.

It Takes Two is, obviously, an incredibly common expression that has been used in countless songs throughout the year, but Take Two want to act as it's soul proprietor because it kind-of sounds like their company name. This isn't defence of their brand- this is an attack against others in what some more familiar with these sorts of legal proceedings are predicting are preliminary measures, essentially future-proofing any renaming efforts that Take Two might consider at some point. But is all of that worth attacking a small studio with the likes of Josef Fares in there, the man who famously disparaged the Oscars in an apparently-sober rant during the Game Awards some years back? Sure, the guy may have defended EA once or twice, but his company has literally only managed to put out their games thanks to help from EA, it would be more damning if he wasn't thankful towards them. The man is a treasure, his games are said to be really good, and he deserves better. (Oh, on the topic of his games, the only one I've played is Brothers; and that was great!)

Take Two are currently setting themselves as evil puppetmasters hiding behind an antiquated US trademark office to amplify threats at everyone and anyone and it's pathetic. Is this the purpose of trademark law then? To allow grotesque slugs like Take Two to lazily terrorise small business owners with numerous tinfoil claims? It would seem so, given that most effected are being forced to give up their own protections or face an inevitably costly lawsuit against Take-Two's likely stacked legal team, it's a lose lose. There's no real silver lining to take away from this, no 'well at least this might make things better eventually', it's just a real shame for all involved and a deserved mark of shame on Take Two's already spotty reputation. Justice for Josef!

It Takes Two

To make it outta sight?

One fellow who's made quite a name for himself over the past few years in the gaming sphere is one Josef Fares, remember him? He was the guy who turned up to the Game Awards in a heated state and took it upon himself to verbally denigrate The Oscars, for whatever reason, in reverence of Geoff Keighley's event. From there he started to become a bit famous, first in the tongue a check way of being "That guy who went kinda crazy at that awards show", and eventually as "That guy who was perhaps the most honest voice we've ever seen at a tradeshow. And he was funny." As a natural result, the game he was promoting got quite a bit of press and 'A Way Out' became quite a success. Thus seeing the man pop up again for another game, even if he is behaving a lot more professional this time around, has already caused a bit of a stir, and looking at the game he's backing this time: I think it's well earned.

A Way Out, for those who missed it, was a return back to the oldschool days where games could be played in a co-op capacity, because the modern march of game design tends to lean towards monetizable online modes over worlds to share with immediate friends. It even came with a 'buddy pass' system which allowed owners of one copy of the game to gift a free one to a friend so that they enjoy the story together, which was astounding given that this game was published from freakin' EA, of all people. (Who are you and what have you done with the real EA?) The story followed two convicts that wind up bumping into each other and forming a pact to break out of Prison and escape the law together, with the story and gameplay emphasising the ways in which their efforts and actions require the other to really get anywhere. The entire game was built around the co-op play and it really set itself apart as a unique little adventure because of it, thus it makes sense that they'd want to remain with that identity going forward.

'It Takes Two' is the second mono-syllabic three-pronged title from Hazelight Studios and unlike it's predecessor, you can tell immediately that this game has a more happy-go-lucky heart beating in it's chest. Unlike the old school 'prison-movie' aesthetic that the previous title was going for, 'It Takes Two' looks like something you'd see out of a Disney movie. (And I mean that as a compliment.) Immediately the first thing we see is a book with eyes telling us about the world, so the tonality shift is set-up pretty early on; the heart of this game appears to be about adventure-based couples counselling, and I'm sort of intrigued off the bat. I mean there's nothing inherently threatening or intimidating about the concept that this trailer builds and maybe that has something to do with my allure towards platformers, but I could really see this becoming a goto party game with all the fun and interesting environments this debut trailer has dangled in front of us.

So with the concept we're basically looking at a husband and his wife that have hit a rocky patch in their relationship and, through as-of-yet-undisclosed means, have transformed into little toys and are told by the sentient 'Book of Love' that they have to work things out to get home. Of course this merely serves as the impetus; the real meat was, in my opinion, the gloriously imaginative locales that we see them traverse. Every scene has this concept of scale to establish that you're playing tiny characters, but only half of the locations we see capitalise on that typical 'Honey I shrunk the kids' aesthetic, (Although the do capitalise well) the rest is all magical, fantastical locations that glimmer and spark impressively, almost in direct contrast to the comparatively muted palette of 'A Way Out'.

Now when I said that this game looked like something Disney would put out, I mean that in terms of concept and design, although I will admit that the art itself isn't exactly to the heady standards of your everyday Pixar film. But that's a small gripe to adress when you consider the creativity and diversity on display here that threatens to give even the classic platformers from the 2000's a run for their money. We've seen classic garden variety mammals contorted into towering monsters, caves of glittering ice, a blocky minecraft-esque world doused in lava and a dreamy twilight-scape with odd clock imagery everywhere. I even saw a little callback to oldschool Atari thrown in there, so you know there's a labour of passion happing somewhere in the writing room at least. There's little to no overarching theme beyond general whimsy, and that's rather endearing honestly.

Touching on something that I mentioned earlier, I think it's very important for high quality co-op experiences to still exist in an industry that's been trying to be rid of them. Many folk younger and older than I know can recount some of their earliest gaming experiences being those times of cooperation between parents, siblings or friends, because those create the most lasting impressions and forge the most dedicated gamers. I understand that monetarily there lies greater profits elsewhere, but when working with art it's important not to forget the heart beneath it all, and that's something which Nintendo have been rather good with of late. Hazelight are some of the few companies who understand this and nurture it, and that makes them special in my eyes.

Whatsmore, the fact that Hazelight is still going strong is an example of one of the more favourable angles of EA's empire; their support structure. The director himself has gone on record to stand in support of EA and whilst I found that his comments were a little reductive to the bigger picture he was right; EA does allow for great games to be made that never could have been otherwise. No, that doesn't automatically relieve them of all the anti consumer and anti industry practises that they simultaneously lionize, but maybe that scores a few points. I mean they indirectly helped revitalise the co-op sub genre, which is a genre they themselves helped smother, so confused backpats all round?

Ultimately I'm just happy to see Mr Fares and his team come to some level of success for the genuinely great game that they made, they sure do deserve it and they aren't resting on their laurels either. It seems we're on the cusp of this great revival of solid platforming with Crash Bandicoot, Ratchet and Clank, Psychonauts and now It Takes Two, and it might be my nostalgia talking but I think this is a great direction for the gaming world to lean towards. We've had enough with the dour military-style FPS' for one generation, bring back the colour and excitement I say. And as for 'It Takes Two', I think it'll end up being something quite special, I just feel it.