Kombat Kontinues

Kudos!

I often remark to myself about how evergreen fighting games appear to be in comparison to other genres of game that we take for granted as always sticking around. You can take a look at series' like Call of Duty and figure that every game franchise out there has plodded along, spitting out entry after entry, with no relief. But for every Call of Duty there's a DOOM, which went on a such a giant Hiatus after 3 that people honestly thought that franchise was good and buried, or Wolfenstein, which suffered from the same agonizing wait for fans. Or maybe even franchises like Resistance, which still haven't resurfaced from the depths of existence to delight it's fans once more. Action adventure series God of War went through a total reimagination before it could come back to our screens, horror franchise Resident Evil didn't take quite as long off but there was a time when it's future looked iffy. By comparison, most fighting games out there seem utterly steadfast in their dedication to keep coming out.

And I mean that in the best possible way, mind. This isn't a situation like for most sports games where each title becomes progressively less innovative until we reach the point where those games periodically remove a feature each entry so it can be reintroduced a few games down the line as a revolutionary upgrade to the package. (We all know the grift off by heart at this point, it ain't fooling nobody!) Fighting games, specifically Mortal Kombat, have been kicking around since the days where the fighters were rendered with cut-up FMV stills plastered over the world because that was the only way to get vaguely realistic-looking human models in the product. To think we've evolved from an age where a human actor dressed up like Jean Claude Van Damme and had his picture taken doing multiple kicks and punches, to an age where a 3D model of that same character is simply being slathered in a Jean Claude Van Damme realistic skin as pre-order content- well, that's just wild!

When last we touched upon the world of Mortal Kombat, and it's admirable insistence on maintaining some form of a coherent narrative, I'm pretty sure most everyone was wandering where the franchise could possible go next. Mortal Kombat 11 had gone to almost Smash Bros Ultimate levels of expending every last ounce of energy it had throwing everything at the wall. Every character that could feasibly exist was brought back into the fold, with younger and older versions available for fans of either; the story was a time bending assault on the senses that jumped more sharks than the Jaws franchise, and it seemed as though every single loose end met some sort of resolution and was wrapped up. Of course there's always room for the technology to improve, but spectacle games like this are almost always about the scope to go one step ahead, without that scope how does one continue?

But I guess there is an exception to that 'constantly get bigger rule'. Every console generation appears to get one freebie 'reset opportunity' wherein a fighting game can get away with scaling back on the scope of it's title in order to focus on the fundamentals and reimaging them, or reinforce them, making use of the powers of the engine available. Maybe we want a new fluid feeling to the way that hits are thrown and connect, a greater emphasise on visual aplomb or a new level of gore that expands the gruesome ways in which our favourite characters can be 'Finished.' I'll expect improvements in all of these areas as we move on from Mortal Kombat 11's flurry of cast members and bombast into a relatively more sedate 'prequel' game: Mortal Kombat 1.

Indeed, Mortal Kombat 1 is set to be a reboot for the franchise that will reset everything back to square one with all the characters driven back to their primordial states; or perhaps even before such a time given that Scorpion seems to potentially be a living person in this game, as opposed to the undead vengeance driven spirit he has been throughout the franchise. Now those who've been kicking about the Mortal Kombat franchise for a while might furrow their brow at that news striking a long lost memory in their heads, and let me help elucidate as to why that might be. Perhaps those people are confused because this has already happened. Mortal Kombat 9 was a reset for the franchise that framed it's entire narrative as a remake of every previous game's narrative into one conjoined epic campaign which to this day remains the benchmark for quality fighting game storylines. An example the same company would follow again to deliver the indomitable 'Injustice' Games.

So it would seem that this time Mortal Kombat are committing to something of a harder reboot which won't just retell what has been but go it's own way. If I'm reading the rather spare teaser trailer we got, then it might even be a prequel detailing the events of how the tournament came to be in the first place- or perhaps they'll go another direction entirely. There is also the possibility that this story is instead a total world reset following the time bending events of Mortal Kombat 11, and what follows will be treated as a complete fresh start totally free from the tournament altogether. This seems like high concept speculation for a Mortal Kombat game, but Neather Realms love to put as much effort into their action stories as their moment-to-moment gameplay; it's part of what makes their games so entertaining to a fighting game Neanderthal like myself.

Of course, we can't have there be a Mortal Kombat game out in the world without it also involving several cameo characters who touch on popular culture in a way that is endearing and dating for the era of internet around the release of each game. That's pretty much fighting game tradition at this point. And if the leaks that have already hit the internet are to be believed, then we've got a testosterone fuelled 'gun show' coming for this game. John Cena's Peacemaker, shiny metal helmet and giant revolver in hand, will be bringing his excellent wit and earnest 'zealout dumb guy desperate to be the good guy' routine to this world. (Maybe with an Eagley cameo if we eat all our greens!) Then there's a character so iconic his every word and scene is in the process of being turned into memes as we speak, Homelander from 'The Boys'. And finally, cartoon Markiplier himself: Metroma- uh, I mean Omniman. (Very different characters. Different vibes.) A line-up of muscly larger than life characters like that almost seems to clash with the more sedate and mature tone that the teaser implied, but perhaps we can take these leaks as confirmation that the silly bloodbathed undertone of this franchise will very much not be diluted in the pursuit of 'something new'.

As moths are attracted to bright lights, fighting game franchises are attracted to new hardware generations; which is why I doubt anyone is surprised that we're currently looking at a year full of a new Street Fighter, a new Tekken and now a new Mortal Kombat game. (There's actually no confirmation that Tekken 8 is going to make 2023, but given it's competition seems ready to go the team better get a move on if they don't want to get lost in the dust.) Selecting the series you are most interested in is like boasting about your religion in a multi-cultural forum; fights are going to start. Still, as someone who is terrible at all fighting games and just likes to be around for the spectacle, the violent viscera emblematic of the Mortal Kombat franchise will win me over any day of the week. Welcome back, Nether Realm, we've all been anticipating you! 

Mortal Kombat Movie: 3rd times the charm?

 Oh no. Oh no. OH NO.

Oh no. No no. We're not doing this again. Let me check the mirror, have I reverted to being 10 years old again? Because that's the only logical reason for why I'm currently looking at screenshots for the upcoming Mortal Kombat movie. Life wouldn't be so cruel, so exacting, to do this to us once again; now would it? I thought that the cycle goes; fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me; what the heck do we do about third times, huh? WHAT HAPPENS ON THE THIRD TIME?! I gawk because, unlike many folk out there, I've seen the two Mortal Kombat movies and I absolutely hated them. Both of them. Yeah, I hold no 'begrudging respect' for the silly badness of the first one, because whenever that could possibly approach me I just close my eyes and think about Scorpion's hand-hook before realising "No, that movie was the worst thing ever." Or to be precise "It's mostly the worst thing ever. I do agree that the sequel is charmless and worse." So why in all the various pits of Zagreus' family home are we returning there? WHEN WILL HOLLYWOOD STOP WITH THE VIDEO GAME MOVIES? 

Okay. I apologise for the outburst. It's a new day, I caught up with some sleep, now it's time to be a lot more open and take things with a grain of salt. I just think maybe that the movie industry would finally get the message, but I guess theirs is an industry built on being stubborn and going their own way when they're being told it's wrong. It's just- I know that there's an actually good Mortal Kombat movie somewhere in the DNA of this franchise, and that's what drives me nuts. When the latest Hitman movie shows up and completely misses the point of the entire franchise, it doesn't upset me. So you turned Agent 47 into a slo-mo wielding rambo type character instead of the intelligent calculating killer he's meant to be; it's not like there was a good movie idea anyway. (At least; not one that Hollywood would be willing to make. It would need to have intrigue and take it's time, both of which are practically banned practises in the City of Angels) I suppose, it's missed potential that bothers me.

Take the recent Monster Hunter movie for example. That was a adaptation of a pretty story-light series that could have actually benefitted from a little bit of contextualisation. Perhaps in the same way that Monster Hunter Stories attempted to do. They could have made real characters, given them stakes within this world, utilised the amazing setting and it's bestial populace; but all of that would have taken just the smallest modicum of respect and Hollywood, rather patently, has no respect. Instead we got another Milla Jovovich vehicle that, whilst still any better than it had any right to be, still isn't really worth anyone's time and/or money. They nailed the monster's at least, but I think we're quite literally decades past the age when all an audience wants is to see big monsters for a movie to do the rounds. Isn't that why 'Godzilla: King of Monsters' underperformed? 'Pacific Rim' 2; whatever that subtitle was? Insert stupid CGI fest here? Heck, maybe I'm just being grumpy, maybe this Mortal Kombat is really going to surprise me with its-

Why did you make a new character? You have a roster of some of the most memorable characters in pop media and you decided to make a brand new character to be the focal point? This 'Cole', played by Lewis Tan, appears to be some sort of underground streetfighter (think you guys got the wrong franchise) who joins the Mortal Kombat tournament in order to find out the truth about a mysterious tattoo on him that resembles the Mortal Kombat logo. And already I don't care. Most of the Mortal Kombat cast have much more simple and digestible goals, it makes things easier to get your head around because there's just so many characters. Scorpion wants vengeance, Cage wants fame, Raiden wants to protect the world. I understand the apparent need for an outsider to be the audience's window into the world of Mortal Kombat, but it still seems like such an antiquated prospect that I hope won't end up standing in the way of the narrative. If it's anything like Monster Hunter was, however, than I can assume it'll just result in an entirely redundant half of a film.

The rest of the 'normal human cast' includes Sonya Blade and Jax, still just pictures for the moment. Sonya somehow looks even more boring in design than she's always been in the series, which is quite the accomplishment, but given that I've never really liked her character that doesn't come as a huge bicycle kick to the stomach. (I just find her mostly forgettable.) So if she's going to be a main character here, I can only see her getting improved upon. Jax, on the otherhand, looks actually good even with his robot arms. I know that a lot of the Internet has really taken to him looking like Steve Harvey because... I guess he has a moustache? (I didn't know that was all it takes.) I actually think they've done a great job with the CG judging from this still shot, (which, I know, isn't an indication of the overall job, but it's a start) and that is going to be important for a Mortal Kombat project. Ideally there'll need to be a lot of computer effects. (Unless, I guess, these actors are really expendable.)

We also have a shot of Liu Kang and Kung Lao (You know, two characters who would've made just as good main characters) and they look great. Honestly, so far what we've seen of the look of this movie has confirmed that visually the thing is on point. But then again, we are looking at some of the more easier people to portray, as in everyone who's already mostly human looking. Even  Scorpion have been shown without his iconic suit, and Kano doesn't have any of his cybernetics for some reason. But there's no screen so far where I'm staring at it just gobsmacked with how wrong everything is. (Just remember to make Kano Australian. It happened in the movie and now it must be the case everywhere) How is Sheeva going to turn out, or Shao Khan, or the Cyber Ninjas? Heck, we haven't even seen Raiden for some reason, despite the fact we know for sure he's going to be in the movie. So I'll call the visual design a tentative B right now, have to see more (and in motion) for a definitive.

I think my biggest worry comes more from the content of the movie itself, because this could really be make or break. Whereas the involved have claimed that the movie won't shy away from gore, I'm familiar with bare-faced lying as well as the actual brutality of the games, so I wouldn't be surprised if that doesn't play out quite to the level fans are hoping for. Mortal Kombat 8 deftly showed that these games can support a narrative if pressed and things don't even have to get too complicated either. But I worry when I hear things like the director commenting that the movie is all about 'Family' or some such diet Fast and Furious trite. What are you talking about? Just make a super bloody movie, please. Don't let Vin Diesel's elaborate money laundering scheme enter the conversation.

I think it's extremely telling how right now the Sonic movie is considered the most faithful adaptation of our age given how lukewarm that movie is. If that is the bar we're trying to shoot for, then maybe Video Game movies are a doomed endeavour. When I think about stories that games need to tell, usually I think about all the ways in which they can surpass traditional visual media and tell a lot more indepth, personal and long-from stories. Total immersion can push self discovery stories into emotional powerhouses in the right hands, and you lose that opportunity when you transport that audience to a cinema for an hour and a half. But at the end of the day I guess Ed Boon needed a new pool or something, cause we're getting the movie whether we want it or not. At least it might be watchable. Might. 

Mortal Kombat Joker and Fan Feedback

That's nice of you to say; but you of all people should know: There's plenty wrong with me.

In recent years, Netherrealm have been part of a huge revolution for what we consider to be 'fighting games'. At their insistence, modern fighting games must involve customization, a decent story and a least one guest character in order to remain competitive in this market. Since this new regime was established all the way back with Injustice, we've seen strong stories in the Mortal Kombat games, customization making it's way to DOA and Smash Ultimate rewriting the book when it comes to what folk expect out of a 'crossover'. Many think of this as a new golden age of Fighting games and, although their sheer number has waned significantly, I have an inclination to agree. And that is why I became interested when I saw Netherrealm announce their next crossover character to Mortal Kombat, the clown prince; Joker.

As I somehow managed to cram onto this blog before, there are a great many Jokers from throughout the years that all ring with a vaguely different theme/motive/modus operandi and yet they are all still instantly recognizable as the same being. It makes Joker one of the most diverse and malleable characters that one can step into the shoes of, so it makes sense to bring him into the wildly customizable world of Netherrealm fighters. It makes so much sense, in fact, that they already did it with their other two Injustice games. Those two titles went drastically different directions from each other with their depictions of Mr. White, with the first title leaning towards the 'micheieveious' angle of the Joker with the later appearing more 'murderous and pyscotic'. (Although in such an overt manner that many compared him to Jared Leto's lamentable version from Suicide Squad.)

With all that in mind, it was a valid enough train of thought to wonder which direction the team would end up with for this latest entry. Unfortunately, early leaks and teases seem to tease that the crew were heading for a depiction that didn't seem to capture the essence of the iconic character. He seemed off in the subtlest possible ways, his hair was too neat, his build was too bulky and his face too ordinarily-proportioned; he just looked like a prep-kid in fancy dress. Needless to say, these early looks weren't very well received and that left Netherrealm with an interesting conundrum. They had a character depiction that no one was happy with but still had several months until his release; they could cross their fingers and hope the wider rollout would go well or listen to the minority of folk who had seen the leaks and rework things behind the scenes. It wouldn't be until the Game Awards that we got to see what they choose.

As we can see from the official reveal, the team have worked in small ways to improve the Joker design and bring it closer to the most commonly recognized image of the Joker; the one from the animated series. His figure has been slimmed down, his chin and cheeks have been bought out slightly and even his voice is a dead ringer for Mark Hamill's. (It might actually be him, I don't know.) Some might complain about how this isn't too creative from the team, but most just shook their heads and were happy about being provided a design that they were familiar with, and therefore were comfortable with. But the whole thing got me thinking about the idea of fan feedback and going to the effort of 'redesigning'. For Netherrealm the changes weren't that much of a big deal, a few tweaks here and there in a manner that most folk would have never noticed if they weren't looking for it; but some other recent high profile instances have proven far more involved.

Recently you might have heard about of a little impending disaster known as the 'Sonic: The Hedgehog' movie. Another ill-advised video game movie that had the misfortune of messing up one of the key aspects of any adaptation; the main character. Despite having over a decade's worth of 3D material to work with, the studio decided to go with their own unique design that ended up looking horrible and spawning a wave of bad reactions from prospective fans. The studio actually reacted to this backlash, surprisingly, and managed to cobble together a brand new Sonic render to feature throughout the movie that was much more faithful to other adaptations. The only real cost to the studio was delaying the movie and, probably, paying overtime to the animation studio; and the cost was genuine pleasant surprise from the community and a push to actively support this movie. (Whether or not that will actually happen remains to be seen, but by acting the Studio have given this movie the best chance at life.)

Another recent example, which is inexplicably linked, comes in the form the recently released; Cats. This was another ill-conceived idea of realizing a stage production with no real plot into a movie with no real plot and the result was a total mess. (Amazingly.) The real point of contention for most audiences, however, was the choice to remodel the cast as horrific cat-human hybrids. Cats was panned upon release and no one could quite believe how ugly the whole affair ended up being. And the worst part? These effects were conjured by the same VFX studio that bought Sonic to life. Now, there isn't anything inherently wrong with the animation (at least from a technical level) but it was deeply flawed in terms of direction and that was something that every pointed out as they mocked the movie relentlessly.

The studio responsible for Cats were aware of the public issues with this movie in advance, however, due to how poorly the initial Internet reveal went. Universal Studios made it known that changes were coming to the movie to alter the visual effects before the final product came out, though most were unconvinced that anything would come of the changes. Seems the cynics were right this time, as Cats performed so abysmally that Universal prematurely axed their Oscar-push for the movie. Unfortunately, this also partially provided an excuse for the VFX team 'at fault' to undergo significant layoffs right before the holidays.

Fan feedback can be a tricky beast to feed, especially when we are talking about products that haven't been released yet. From the outset it should be simple; listen to the fans, their the one's buying your product afterall, but it's not always so simply black and white. Just because a decent number of folk who saw your product found themselves physically revolted doesn't mean you should immediately change the  final draft. Perhaps they aren't the audience you were targeting (As I suspect is the case for the Sonic movie) and perhaps that extra workload could have unforeseen real-world consequences. (Like the mass layoffs.) It's a tricky beast which requires cool heads in order to tame; and those who make the ultimate choice must always be mindful of one truth: There isn't always a right answer.

Catching the Censorship bug.

Somethings gonna give.

Censorship. Something of a contentious topic in the wider world, especially when applied to creative endeavours. People always like to postulate on the necessity of censorship and the reaches it will go to if left unchecked. As a result, some interesting hypotheticals get bought up on the issue. Does the artists intent come into play when something is censored? Is anything worthy of full censorship or just partial censorship? And at what point does censorship start to impede the fundamental values of freedom of speech? I'm not here to talk about any of those larger examples of censorship you may have heard about in the world however, wouldn't fit my MO. I want to talk to you about censorship as it exists within video games today, mostly between the covering of naughty parts and violence.

For my part I'm an advocate of reduced levels of censorship and regulation. I think that artists should have the right to express themselves in whatever way that they-so choose and bring their work to light even if it does touch on darker topics. It allows for a greater range of discussion and discourse when a narrative is allowed to plump into the darker depths of human capabilities. This is the sort of thing that can really push a story into a realm where it can actually effect the audience in ways they had never thought possible. Who remembers back when Game of Thrones was still good and we were subjected to the scene that has come to be known as the red wedding? Do you remember how you felt? For me, watching it alone in the dark, I remember sitting there in shock until the next show came on. (Which, incidentally, was a making-of for GoT.) After I could bear to get up again, I remember going to by room and sitting down thinking 'I'd love to play a game to calm down but I don't think I can stand to see the colour red right now'. That scene was so brutal and vivid that it displayed the horrific reality of violence in a way that no other 'hyper violent' show or movie had ever done for me before. To this day I've never felt that way after watching a particularly gruesome scene in anything and I think it's a shame.

The reason I bought up that GoT Scene was because I don't think that would have been aired 10 years prior. Of course, it helped that Game of Thrones was still incredibly popular when that scene aired, I doubt that 'Arrow' could have gotten away with a similar scene. But we have come such a long way when it comes to regulating fictional violence that the 'The red wedding' is now a possibility. If we hadn't of made strides to break down the wall of censorship that had been established, we might have never been graced with one of the most powerful and memorable moments of TV. When we come to the topic of the way that censorship has been utilized when it comes to Video Games we find that different walls have been setup that have yet to be challenged, yet alone overcome.

But first lets start at the beginning. You're likely already aware of the origins of Video Game censorship but I love to hear the sound of my own typing so bear with me. In 1976 a little game called 'Death Race' hit the arcades. (No apparent relation to the Stallone movie.) In the game the player was tasked with running over gremlins in a little pixel car. The height of carnage, obviously. This caused a whole slew of controversy as people decried the game whilst claiming the usual: the game would lead to rampant hit-and-cases all over the country! Since then there were several scattered controversies over the years. 1982's Clusters Revenge (Aka sexual assault simulator), 1987's Leisure Suit Larry in the Land of the Lounge Lizards (Which didn't even feature anything sexual, it was just a crappy point and click game.) and, of course, 1992's Mortal Kombat. Midway's Mortal Kombat utilized animation developed from real life pictures to simulate it's fighters, and then worked on blood and gore effects on top. The result was the most horrifying and realistic violence ever seen by man! In the early 1990's! The ensuing chaos is well documented. Everyone and their mother wanted Video Games banned for their violent influence, because video games were most certainly the cause of all evil in the world. Things got so bad that in 1994 the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) was established in order to get ahead of things before government regulation started up.

Since then, Violence has become a huge sticking point for people who dislike gaming. Just look at disbarred attorney Jack Thomspon. (Who's Wikipedia page rather generously lists as 'activist' rather than 'explotation artist'.) Jack made a name for himself by launching a campaign on all things pixellated for years. Okay, that's not entirely true. Back in the day he spoke out against rap music too, but he really hit a stride with all the Video Game stuff. Jack seemed to position himself as an arch nemesis to unstoppable video game titan: Rockstar. The attacks he made against the violence and sexual themes of GTA are legendary. He filed lawsuits against them, funded campaigns and went all out to destroy Take Two through the legal courts. Then he got disbarred.

But before he slipped into obscurity, Jack Thomson opened the floodgates for the cries of censorship that would befall the gaming landscape. Droves of NRA members would accuse games of causing violence, rather ironically. Talks show hosts would film segments on GTA, lamenting the way the game encouraged hedonism and murder (completely oblivious to it's satirical leanings), and then there was that one time when Watch_dogs got in the headlines. I understand that people are afraid of 'hacking' even though most of those people have no idea what hacking actually is, but accusing Watch_Dogs of teaching children how to hack is positively laughable.

Censorship isn't just an issue of the past either. Just recently there was a huge controversy over the censorship spearheaded by an unlikely source: From Sony itself! (Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.) A spokesperson had made a statement indicating that the company was making moves to cut down on the stretch of sexual themes in their games, namely the Japanese Anime-focused ones. Personally, I have rather strong views on this particular branch of censorship but I'll likely write more on that at a later date. At the time it didn't worry a lot of people because, for the general public, their games-of-choice weren't in the crosshairs. That was, at least, until Devil May Cry 5.

Devil May Cry marked it's triumph return to it's series roots by reintroducing the classic versions of popular series characters: Dante and Lady. One scene did raise the hackles of Sony, however, when Lady was swallowed by a demon and had to be rescued by Dante. After she was freed there was a scene wherein she was expelled from the beast naked and defeated. Dante then picks her up and takes her to safety. It should be noted that this was done through a cut scene and the nudity was handled tastefully. Lady was obscured from view and nothing racy was shown. (Oh, wait. There was an inch of but crack in one shot? My bad, call the censors, we need to lock this down!) Sony made the move to add a light flare in one scene showing a glimpse Lady's behind, making a whole slew of gamers raise an eyebrow and say "Really?!"

It's less the act and more the audacity that Sony believed themselves fully within their rights to edit someone else's artwork in order for them to be comfortable with it. The change was small, but the precedent set is incredibly unsettling. Even Nintendo reflected similar remarks (Nintendo!) saying that it isn't their place to decide on the content of third party games. If you don't think it would fit with your policies than don't sell the thing, but acknowledge that you'll be missing out on a stream of revenue by doing so. When the question of censorship arrives, just like with South Park's manatees it is an all or nothing scenario.

The topic of content regulation and censorship stretches to a whole slew of areas that really require their own blog to dive into. I just wanted to establish a baseline to expand from and show you how things are playing out in today's world. In the coming years I think that this topic will become increasingly important as these outdated values start to seriously impact the earned media that the Internet has fostered in recent years. (Which I elaborated more on in my: 'Youtube vs gaming' blog.) From the looks of it, things are going to get worse before they get better as fear mongering starts to lead the direction of the industry. Maybe I'm being a tad hyperbolic but it can be enlightening to imagine the extremes in formative times like these, because we may just reach those extreme sooner than one might think.

The Hollywood/Video Game conundrum.

Get ready for a rant.

Video games are popular. Movies are popular. Match made in heaven right? Only no. Time and time again we see the cinematic pursuits of video game properties crash and burn whilst we can but  just watch shake our heads like disappointed Daedalus'. What is it that makes Video Game movies so universally awful? Is it some inherent incompatibility of the mediums? Poor choice of source material? Lack of understanding of the source material? How about just a blatant disregard to the basic tenants of movie making? All of the above and more I'm afraid.

As a self-proclaimed video game aficionado I've taken it upon myself to watch these blunders whenever they pop up and am always surprised by a complete breakdown of coherence that these projects always display. Either the story stops making sense, or the direction, or the dialogue and so on and so forth. Every time we are forced to endure these blunders, us gamers are left wondering "what went wrong", and "why didn't you just...". Of course making movies is never that simple. Many factors go in to making a movie that the average Movie goer will never see or even think about. Factors that get in the way and complicate and obfuscate. So many factors, in fact, that I'll fairly sure that Video game movies will never capture the heart of their material, never be as faithful as we want them to be. But then the question needs to be asked, why does Hollywood insist on making them?

$116 Billion is your answer. In 2018, Reuters published a revenue report which means that now we can officially call Video games the most profitable form of entertainment in the world. Hollywood doesn't just want that money, it needs that money. Oftentimes, big video game companies will justify their more insidious and money grubbing antics by claiming that the rising cost of video games would outpace their revenue if they didn't. This is obviously a very weak lie. In terms of Hollywood, however, this is more accurate. Hollywood has reached the point where it has more money than sense in it's noggin. They are spending hundreds of millions on too many big budget movies for them all to make their money back and so the industry is hemorrhaging money when it doesn't need to. In May of this year the movies: Aladdin, Rocketman, John Wick 3, 'Godzilla: King of Monsters' and Detective Pikachu all came out in the same 4 week stretch. The biggest loser of that high budget showdown was Godzilla with a domestic take home of $100 million. And May was one of the better months for this kind of box office slaughter. Just look at April when Endgame came out. I don't even need to list any other movies because you already know they all failed in the wake of that juggernaut.

So Hollywood had the idea of bringing gamers into theaters. Afterall, they're used to spending so much more on maintaining their own hobby, so why can't Hollywood get a little bit of that pie? Sound logic on paper, but sorely lacking in execution. Out of all the Video Game movies that we have to look forward to in the coming years, the most promising ones are the movies we have seen nothing of yet, because we know that once we do we'll realise just how bad it'll actually be. The Uncharted movie is rumored to have Tom Holland on board. That's an alright choice, I guess. The upcoming Mortal Kombat movie has just confirmed that it'll be R-rated and feature fatalities. What? Am I supposed to applaud you for doing the bare minimum for getting the source material right? Okay, I'm sounding a little jaded but I have cause. Hitman, Tomb Raider, Street fighter, Super Mario Bros, DOOM, Rampage and Prince of Persia have all been gutted when given the 'silver screen treatment', why should I expect any less from these movies. Also, I've seen the Sonic the Hedgehog trailer so I know better than to expect anything watchable from Hollywood.

Things have gotten so bad that many fans are scared to see what becomes of their favourite franchises when the hit the big screen. the Monster Hunter movie has been smart enough to show us mostly nothing but you just have to read the synopsis to get those alarm bells a-ringing. Sure, they managed to faithfully render at least one Monster. Good job, Capcom have been pulling that off for years now. Then there's Sonic. Oh, Sonic. Look how they've butchered my boy! Nothing about that trailer was right. That design. Enough said. That script. Laughable, and not in the good way. The music. I'm not sure whether to blame Jeff Fowler for putting 'Gansta's Paradise' in or Coolio for allowing it.

Seriously, how did things get this bad. How have we reached the point where Video Game movies are consistently the worst possible representation of their respective franchises. Has it always been this way? Well, yes actually. Who remembers 1993's Super Mario Bros? Follow up question: Who wishes that they didn't? I'd imagine that with the games of the early 90's being as rudimentary as they were, material for a Video Game movie must have seemed fairly sparse. Most games were simple in story and execution, not cluttered with characters, plots and overarching themes. So here's an idea, just don't make a movie of it. But that wasn't good enough for 90's Nintendo when they decided that their plumber needed his silver screen debut. What resulted has gone done as a cinematic war crime and for good reason. In fact, you could say Video Games movies have gotten better since Mario, it was that bad.

I'll go on record to say that, despite their general awfulness, I do harbor something of a soft spot for 1994's Streetfighter and 1995's Mortal Kombat. Yes, they were both comprised of equal parts cheese and ham, but they are at least enjoyable to watch at least once in your life. Streetfighter bought us Jean-Claude Van Damme playing an American marine with a strong Belgium accent; and Raul Julia bringing gravitas and class to some truly crappy lines. Mortal Kombat, on the other hand, boasted a cast of hammy actors coupled with martial arts and a fundamental misunderstanding of the phrase 'Flawless victory'. Out of every video game movie that has released, I think these two had perhaps the most solid premise to build from. Not that they did much with that opportunity, but the final product at least had a right to exist.

Now lets move on to something that has no right to exist. A real pet-peeve of mine. The two Hitman movies. Two! Twice some idiot in a board room was presented with a game fundamentally ill suited to be a movie and went "Why not?". I'll tell you why not: Hitman and Hitman: Agent 47, is why not. Hitman is a game where you play a genetically engineered clone lacking in remorse who specialises in 'causing accidents' to kill his targets. It's not an action game. It's not a spy game. It's essentially a next-level puzzle solver with dozens of variables for the player to consider. The allure of Hitman comes from the freedom of approach, or rather, the illusion of freedom of approach. The player is still given the confines of the area and situation that they have to operate within, but they are made to feel as though all the world is their weapon to work with. The Hitman movies are action movie trash. They have none of the charm, unique game play, or spectacular design of the games they claim to be based on. They are an embarrassment to the Hitman name.

Hitman wasn't the only Eidos game to get a movie on based on it. Square Enix must have been really hard up in the 2000's because we've got 3 Tomb Raider films now. And none of them are good. I know that the Angelina Jolie movies garnered some praise (Or at least the first one did) upon first release. But this was the 2000's. Everyone's taste was wacky in the 2000's. We allowed 'Catwoman' to happen in the 2000's. Nothing anyone from the 2000's has ever said can be trusted. Alicia Vikander's Tomb Raider isn't the worst thing in the world, either, but it just isn't good. I watched it last year and I still can't remember what magical MacGuffin Lara was meant to be after. All I remember is thinking "Well that was a waste of time" once the credits rolled up.

That is the prevailing takeaway from all of these films. They are all just a huge wastes of time and money, and why wouldn't they be? Video Games are designed for the purpose of being entertaining. Yes, occasionally they can challenge you intellectually, but at the end of the day they have to be fun enough to keep you on that controller or behind that keyboard. Films, on the other hand, need something more than base entertainment. They need to have a purpose or a function, else they risk feeling meandering and pointless. I'm not saying that there is no space for a cross over somewhere in that venn diagram but no one has managed to pull it off yet.

Will the upcoming Metal Gear Solid movie be any good? It should be, given that the game was built around feeling like a movie. But then, why even make a movie? If the game already feels cinematic, what is there left to adapt? I suppose they can cut it down to fit theatre length, rip out some of the fourth wall jokes, and steamroll over the hours of lore that helped establish the Metal Gear world. There's your movie. Soulless and decrepit. Slap that in the cinema than act surprised when the audience rejects it and go back to the games. Now, I'm no Soothsayer, but in 5 years or so we'll see just how spot on I am.

Whenever I go off on one like this I feel obliged to remind everyone that I'm not doing it out of hate. I'm doing it out of passion. I don't hate movies. I don't love movies, either. But I do love games. And I hate it when games are made into a laughing stock by movie makers who find themselves heading projects that they don't understand and therefore cannot translate for a wider audience. Everyone suffers as a result. The studio suffers, the fans suffer, the franchise suffers and the reputation of Video games as a whole suffer. It all just seems so much headache for terrible returns. Hollywood is already doing a fine job of shooting itself in the foot in recent years, why does the gaming industry have to put it's neck on the line too? Let's just leave the demon to it's demons; and keep video games as video games.

YouTube versus gaming?

Symbiosis in peril?

After watching a video by the YouTuber MatPat entitled "Game Theory: Is YouTube ruining gaming?", I found myself invested in the topic. (Feel free to look it up to see what I'm talking about.) Therefore I have decided to cover something a little bit different today, still related to the world of gaming but a little bit more meta: I wanted to write about the influence of Media on the gaming industry. Or more specifically, the relationship between YouTube and the games industry, and whether that relationship is in peril.

For some people, like me, I'd imagine that your introduction into the gaming world might have been through a family member or friend. Playing Mario with your father or hitting up the arcade to play 'Time Crisis'/'House of the Dead' with your friends, or having your grandfather leave you with Metal Gear Solid for an afternoon at age 5. (Can't imagine who that last one might refer to.) Children of the today, however, might have a different inlet into gaming, through watching a stranger play games on the Internet. (I'm starting to sound like a clueless BBC reporter.)

Gaming has been huge part of me all my life, or since I was 5 but let's not split hairs. In the world I grew up in, there was not as many ready available tailor-made sources of information to sort through. Yes, the Internet did exist but it was no nearly as omniscient as it is today. (If it was, I wouldn't have had to spend three years trying to find the lyrics to 'Gangsta's Paradise'.) And when you had a hobby as niche as a predilection towards gaming, you were really out of luck. Luckily, where new media hadn't yet caught up, print had our back, and people like me would turn to gaming magazine to get our news about the unreachable world of gaming. It was how we learnt about the games of the future, the impending rise of VR, the space-age 2k TV's that would be hitting shelves next year, et cetera. It was how us gamers discovered out new obsessions for the coming year.

Now, during this time I wasn't a fan of fantasy; that's a whole other story in and of itself, but that particular detail is necessary to establish right away. When reading a copy of The Official Xbox Magazine, (Guess what my console was!) I came across a several page spread dedicated to a brand new huge fantasy RPG. A little-known game called: 'Skyrim'. I read all around that article and avoided it like the plague; fantasy games were, afterall, just not my cup of tea. Of course a kid that was as introverted as I was, has little to fill his spare time with, so eventually I read through every other article 5 times and was left with this spread. Long story short, I was now excited for a game I never would have been usually, but I had a problem. I had never played a fantasy game before, I had no idea what they looked like or felt like, and no idea how I could rectify that. How could I be excited for a game based on wind and promises? Luckily, another OXM magazine came with an interesting article concerning the burgeoning world of YouTube and online Media: "How to make a Let's play." It was how I learnt of the term and the world of strangers playing the games they love online for others to see.

That was my introduction to the power that YouTube and enthusiast media can hold. Through YouTube, I devoured hours of content dedicated to Oblivion, and then a 200 episode, interactive let's play of Morrowind. I became hooked to the passionate personalities who played and presented a game that they genuinely held affection for. This wasn't some tired presenter on one of those awkward gaming TV shows, (Which always held the worst time-slots, by the by.) trying to sell us on games through synthetic line reads and thinly veiled ads. On YouTube, we had access to videos created by the greatest salesmen that any company could hope to have represent them: Fans of the product. There is no equivalent or substitute for genuine passion, enthusiasm and positive word of mouth; and with the rise of the Internet, positive word of mouth could reach anyone around the entire globe. What I have described for you so far is my personal experience of the birth between the close relationship of gaming companies and YouTube.

I have bought both Morrowind and Oblivion twice since then. Skyrim thrice. Mine is not the only story of the power of passionate fans. One term that MatPat used to describe this phenomenon is 'Earned Media', referring an incredibly desirable effect when people are so enamoured by your product that they do the marketing for you; like I described, it is genuine, it is honest and it is convincing. YouTube has been rife with that kind of marketing ever since it's rise to prominence in the early 2010's. Look online and you'll find dozens of YouTube channels dedicated to this type of game or that genre of game, or channels dedicated to the entirety of gaming itself. And, of course, channels who specialize in video game analysis.

This rise of 'Earned Media' reached a point wherein it began to shape much of the gaming world around it. MatPat mentioned the 'PewDiePie' effect, coined when Felix Kjellberg played a lesser known game on his channel; Surgeon Simulator and thus drove huge sales to the game, making it a thunderous success. From my experience, I still remember the effect that YouTube had on Metal Gear Survive. Now of course Konami had a lot of bad press on them before they announced Metal Gear Survive: Their firing of Hideo Kojima, removing of his credit from all his box art, accusations of mistreatment of staff and Metal Gear Pachinko. Never shall we forget Metal Gear Pachinko. But the absolute, unreserved disgust that fans threw at Metal Gear Survive was largely driven by the online community of dedicated Metal Gear fans who saw the cheap cash grab from a mile away. Everything that Konami went through in regards to public relations; the controversy, the ridicule and the abject failure-of-a-game that was Metal Gear Survive, all of that was magnified by the public spotlight thrust on them by the YouTuber gaming community. The kind of coverage that a gaming magazine or show just wouldn't be capable of, for fear of withdrawn advertisers.

It's undeniable, then, that YouTube had become a formidable force in the gaming community. Sure forums existed, both private and public, and Discords have become a thing in recent years; but YouTube is where the PR battleground is held, and if you win there then you've gone a long way for your product. Therefore it was no surprise when companies started picking up YouTubers as spokespeople for their video games. It isn't uncommon now for publishers to ship early copies of upcoming games to YouTubers as well as reviewers. At this point, securing the respect of the Youtuber is much more important then securing high review scores, as a good, personality-lead campaign can drive more sales than a passionless number on a review website. Companies who play the YouTube game well reap the benefits in their reputation; just look at CD Projeckt Red. Now, I'm not going to downplay the quality of their products nor the way the they load the consumer with goodies and benefits merely for the act of buying their game. But I believe the real genius in CDPR's public relation strategy is in their candidness with their audience; a candidness shared by no other popular games company in the world. And how does CDPR communicate that candidness? Through secret messages embedded in one second frames of their YouTube videos. CDPR know that their most staunch supporters are on YouTube and so they speak directly to them; as a result, Cyberpunk 2077 is the single most anticipated game of next year. That's the power of 'Earned Media' for you.

Now, if you've watched MatPat's video on "YouTube is ruining gaming!", Mr Patrick points to this as the way things are, whilst providing foreboding thoughts on the way things may, and have, become. This is because of the symbiotic relationship between YouTubers and game company marketers. Yes, Games companies benefit when YouTubers cover their product favourably but that YouTuber benefits also as their views generate them a profit through the magic of ad revenue. The problem is that YouTube has recently been making it harder and harder to make a living on YouTube by instituting, frankly draconic, restrictions on uploaded content. No depictions of simulated violence, there goes all violent games; No excessive use of profanity, there goes Cyberpunk 2077 and it's ilk; No suggestive images, bye bye Japanese anime games. Breaking any of these rules can cripple earnings off a video, seriously hurting the viability of YouTubers covering these types of games. So what happens to all that 'Earned Media'? It is being actively hampered by the policies of YouTube. Full time YouTubers won't want to risk their livelihoods just to cover something that they love. As a consequence, game coverage suffers and companies who have grown to rely on the 'Earned Media' that YouTube provided, will feel the brunt in the coming years.

The unpredictable element is the effect that this will have on the gaming industry going forward. Matpat believes, whether is seriousness or jest, that this will have an effect on the fundamental development on gaming going forward. And perhaps he is right. YouTube is the most viewed video sharing platform on the Internet and if publishers need to twist their developers work in order to fully take advantage of the platform YouTube provides, then why wouldn't they? Now us consumers have to wonder if this will have an effect on out favourite franchises going forwards. The upcoming 'DOOM Eternal 'will be released in a time when YouTube's new policies are in full swing, whereas the 2016 'DOOM' revival came in the golden age where YouTube was a lot more accepting. 2016's DOOM benefited tremendously from the huge coverage that big YouTubers like Markiplier afforded Id software's game. Will DOOM Eternal suffer without that widespread coverage? I would imagine that Markiplier would likely still cover the game, but what about all those smaller channels who can't afford to take the risk? Will this make DOOM Eternal a failure? Mortal Kombat 11 suffered drastically in sales this year despite critical acclaim, likely due to the fact that most people were discouraged from showing off the game due to it's violent content. Those that did faced the crippling wrath of YouTube in a way that will likely teach them to ignore future Mortal Kombat titles.

So the question arises: Is YouTube ruining gaming? From examples and figures and everything we can see so far the answer appears to be yes. So much of the gaming industry has become dependant on the world of YouTube to further it's brand and now YouTube is threatening that dependence, is it so hard to imagine that companies won't bend over backward to play their tune. A pessimist may assume that this means the end of all rated 18 games or rather their slinking back into the obscurity they came from in the 90's. I'm usually more of a 'wait-and-see' kind of guy but it seems that we have already started to see what is happening and it isn't promising. With the reveal of the next gen, likely at E3 2020, we will see the direction of gaming and then we will know what kind of world gaming pride has wrought.