The Will Smith Zombie game

 

I know I heard about this game somewhere. I don't know if it was at an conference of some sort- (although in hindsight, I seriously struggle to believe this is the kind of thing Geoff would allow to touch his annual celebration) all I know it that Unturned was in my head before it hit the silly pages. Umm... Wait- no, Unturned is the blocky zombie game, isn't it? Undawn- there we go- totally forgettable garbage, I should have known! Still, it really is wonderful that after only a few months The Day Before has it's sequel and they managed to score Tencent as a publisher and Will Smith as a celebrity endorsement- what a glow up! At least- considering the game in question is every bit the most bargain bin generic uncultured zombie trash waste of time game- I can only assume it is the 'long anticipated' Day After.

Undawn is what happens when you have a studio run entirely by the boardroom. I know we like to joke about with some of the least creative developers in the Industry right now but I always insist that some of the artists manage to ply their trade before the entire work is largely ruined by executive meddling. Assassin's Creed has some of the most talented world artists in the industry, hands down, Rocksteady may have sold their soul but they didn't flog off their incredible animation talents nor their connections to top-tier voice talent- and as for the Saints Row Reboot... umm... you see... that game... it... was fully voiced. Which is more than you can say for the game Undawn, which some may spy as Will Smith's grand return to the limelight.

Return from what, I heard you blatantly not ask? Well allow me to undermine your intelligence by reminding you that Will- well, he's been on a bit of sabbatical, honey. Ever since committing assault on stage, at the Oscars, in live recording, in defence of a woman who would then go on to throw him under the bus by saying 'I don't know why he did any of that- we haven't even been a couple for ages!'. That was pretty much the brakes on Wills career for a bit as he did the classic thing of disappearing from the lime light until everyone forgot what he did and he can come slinking back to make a name for himself bit by bit. You know- like Kevin Spacey! (Ohhh- actually maybe that's not the kind of comparison his team is looking for.) How about... current famed Twitter-denizen OJ Simpson? (Nope! Nope! Definitely not!) Uhh... Mel Gibson, the Anti-Semite! (Yeah, that's about the best comparison he could hope for, to be honest.)

I'm racking my brains trying to think of literally any other thing that Will had done cementing this as the age of his comeback- there is no way in hell that Undawn is his return debut, is it? I mean there were the various apologies, his public mocking by Jada, nothing in the way of projects- I must have missed something, let me check. Good god- his IMDB reads only Undawn for all of 2023... the only people who wanted this man were the crappy mobile-dev team under Tencent likely built with the intent to sell to a Chinese audience- considering the clear quality deficits that any self-respecting gamer with access to literally anything else would scoff at. Ain't that just sad... how the man has fallen. But hey, maybe there's a soul somewhere in the game if you look deep enough? I mean, we are talking about a Will Smith endorsed product here, the 90's king of charisma and cool! Surely he saw something the world didn't, right?

No, of course not- did you even look at this travesty? It's straight average Korean-app store cookie-cutter garbage all the way through. Basic ass third person shooter gameplay slapped atop 2D pictures of idol-looking women in skimpy outfits- only this time there's also a Will Smith stuck in the middle of them sometimes. And how about the game itself? Will Smith's likeness made it to the game, but unless my man was acting on his worst off-day of all time that is not his voice. It seems they got a rough sound-alike to voice over the very few lines that his character even has as a basic quest giver, but then they couldn't even hire that actor to do all of his lines. That right, some of these lines are literally just dead air whilst you read text- because basic quality standards are a foreign concept to this studio, apparently.

For me the most notable part of the game doesn't even involve Will Smith at all, actually- it's rather when you happen across this one girl during her off hours and upon approaching her are forced into an excoriating music video whereupon this harpy croaks out the most AI generated drivel to make it out of the 2010's. As if sudden music moments in video games weren't awkward enough, as though I still don't have nightmares about Dragon Age Origin's Leliana singing purely in the backing track as she stares me dead in the eyes from two feet away- here comes Undawn to supplant that crippling phobia with something much worse. Bad singing in a video game. Oh, and this is justified as her 'quirky thing she likes to do on nights off', if you're wondering. Girl sings an entire hooky country ditty she cooked up her own brain-damaged noggin as a hobby. Maybe she should take up knitting- that way she'll only be in danger of harming herself.

But the craziest part about all of this- Undawn isn't even new. As I hinted at earlier, the game launched in the middle of 2023 and has only just been discovered now by a totally baffled public. Which might be why the game has already been internally acknowledged by Tencent as a flop generating a bit under 300,000 on a budget of... wait... hang on, a budget of 140 million? What the- look up screenshots of this game right now and then come back and tell me where that money went! Nah, I'm sorry this is a red flag to the IRS- this is clearly a cartel running a fake game studio to try and cover up their money laundering- ain't no way this is legit. You cannot spend 140 million on a game that looks worse then my spare-time learn-to-Unity projects; that just ain't possible. Undawn is a front for a burgeoning drug empire- I'm certain of it. 

If the intention was to overshadow Will Smith's previous indiscretions with a disaster big enough to overshadow them- that probably backfired a bit when literally no one played or even reported on the game. And now it's just another curiosity of this ongoing period of turmoil which is the Smith dark ages, a perpetual valley of rakes that Will is stepping on time after time in his fruitless attempt to become a household name once more. Disgrace and disappointment that he was, at least there are worse and less deserving people out there willing to spend, can what I only in good faith assume was 139.8 million dollars, keeping the man employed. What nice guys these devs are, giving the starving artists of the world something to gawk out in pure disbelief as they finally succumb to malnutrition- good job, Undawn- be the nightmare you want to see in the world!

Pokémon Unite

Oh no, it's happening again

"What if you play League of Legends- and you're immediately hooked?" Said the lady with the pretty voice in that advert I've seen so many times it's burned into my retinas. Just like that damn Nevercake advert, I feel like I've seen more ads for LOL than actual gameplay through Youtube marketing efforts alone. And why won't the algorithm just drop it and see the obvious; I'm not a MOBA player, never will be! I just don't have it in me to play a heavily competitive team-based arena grudge that's heavy on the moment-to-moment strategy and mastering 'mains'. The last competitive game I got down with was Overwatch, and even back in those days I never liked playing ranked for more than a couple times a month. I'm just not that competitive type game player. I mean sure, I played a little Battleborn when it first launched but we all remember what became of that game, don't we? (It died. Horribly.) I just don't have a MOBA heart in me. Or so I said to myself.

Seems that maybe the lady from the ads knew what she was talking about a lot more than I ever gave her credit for, because here I sit with a confession to make: I may have fallen for Pokémon Unite. Yes, the MOBA. Turns out all it took was for a brand I have some sort of nostalgic connection with to take the plunge and I would just end up falling into the trap hook-line-and-sinker. (I'm weaker willed than I thought) To be fair, it started under duress! They dangled a limited edition Zeraora at me and I just couldn't let that pass me by. That's a literal Mythical Pokémon which is part of this game's base lineup for some asinine reason; I wanted him! And so like the Pokémon rube that I am, I logged onto the game to see what it was like, acknowledged that the controls felt a little better to play then I expected, and now I'm an addict who's letting his Pillars of Eternity II playthrough quietly slip to the wayside so that he can play more Unite. Do you know how messed up that is? Probably, it should be fairly clear.

So long story short, I'm a hypocrite. Pokémon Unite has been a lot of fun and I'm starting to really get the appeal of this whole MOBA thing, it's a lot more accessible than I originally thought. (Or maybe I only think that because it's still the introductory weeks and this game is literally being marketed to Children. Whatever the case, I don't feel too proud of myself when I score another MVP badge.) I find the hand-holding built into the UI rather comforting, (It'll tell you how tough a Pokémon should be to play as well as what lane they're typically best for.) the maps are familiar and bright (Though I'm slightly upset that only Quick Match has multiple maps right now) and the idea of sticking Pokémon in a MOBA space fits so much better than I realised. They have literally over 900 different Pokémon to throw into various roles, be they mobs, bosses or new playables; this game could have growth potential indefinitely! Whether that potential will be readily met, however, is anyone's guess.

As far as the gameplay is concerned, Pokémon Unite plays like any MOBA you've played before with some small Pokémon twists. Once you've picked your Pokémon, equipped their utilities and placed your chosen item, you are sent off to the races as a level one weakling. From there you can feast on mobs to increase your level and get access to more abilities, as well as gain points which you can then 'bank' at the enemies' goal. (And if you're playing an applicable Pokémon, certain levels will 'evolve' them as you might expect) The struggle becomes a back and forth of defence and attack as you try to protect your own goal and pick off your opponents, the MOBA dance of death. Here and there some special mobs will spawn that grant bonuses upon being slain, such as the basic specials who will give you a boost to an attribute, the bigger specials that might buff the entire team or throw themselves hurtling towards an enemy goal, or the centre special (who tends to be Zapdos or Regigigas right now) who will give all the team 20 points and temporarily make all enemy goals insta-score zones. (So no more waiting around to bank points all vulnerable-like)

For my part I happen to think that the core gameplay, however appropriated from it's contemporaries it is, can be endless fun all on it's own, but I do think that right now the game has a serious lack of driving force for the more achievement-focused player out there which is going to become slowly more apparent once this game moves out of the honey-moon phase. What are the things that are going to keep bringing players back beyond the thrill of entering the arena again? Right now there are some challenges that are limited for the first few months and exist mostly just to get new players to try out all the different modes, and I'm sure new challenges will role in decently regularly, but that's just the fluff ontop of the cake; what about the core progression? You can't expect character level to be the only thing people grind for, can you? (That would be crazy, right?)

Of course, the real progression train they want people to get on board with is the acquisition and boosting of held items in order to provide that little percentile boost which starts to make all the difference in the later levels. The only problem with this being the problem pointed out by MoistCr1TiKaL (I hate typing that name and I know he does it on purpose) wherein you can literally buy the boosts for these items, thus creating a pay-to-win atmosphere. In fact, this has been a big topic of debate over the last few weeks, sparked by Charlie, (Mr Moist) which some are saying has the potential to kill this game, and I concur. The biggest mistake someone can make in these companies is operating under the impression that their name gives them immunity, because unless they've spent decades fostering the exact type of community that will put up with their machinations (like sports games have) they're in for a rude awakening.

You see, nothing turns a relationship more sour than talking about money, it's like the shortcut speedrunner route straight to rocky grounds, and if someone who loses a match of Pokémon Unite is steaming, thinking about the money their opponent must have spent to get that boost- well, you can see the seeds of discontent being laid, no? Marvel's Avengers is a game that thought it could get away with flooding microtransactions just on the strength of it's name alone, and that game didn't even have pay-to-win Microtransactions! What was the result? An awful first impression that has irrevocably tainted the game so that even after a straight year of substantial free content, that game is struggling to justify it's existence due to poor player numbers. That isn't the sort of future I want for Pokémon Unite, because I kind of like it.

Of course, I would throw in other suggestions such as character progression trees to encourage players to specialise, and maybe a little bit more general customisability in the vein of how League does things, because those cosmetics have sailed many a fan-led crusade over in that community. But for humble beginnings I suppose that Pokémon Unite is doing well enough, considering that I can't get enough of the game and it's starting to seep into my psyche. I love seeing these little Pocket Monsters expand their horizons into newer fields and would love it even more to see them excel, the more diversity that hits this franchise the better for everyone in the long run. Just- be that little bitter better, guys, you're so close that it would be a tragedy to let it all fall apart now. If by this time next year Pokémon Unite is a ghost-town, I'm going to be distraught.

PUBG Axed in India

 Another Nation shuts it doors.

So I talk about the proliferation of Chinese money rather regularly on this blog. Like too regularly for what should be a gaming themed nonsense blog, so that either says something worrying about me or really worrying about the industry. I'd like to think that this all extends from an apparent distaste I have towards the very concepts of 'monopolies', not only because they usually spell harm for the community, but also because I'm a sad individual who hates to see anyone else succeed too much. (Screw you, Disney! Why don't you take your share of crippling despair once and a while?) Honestly, as a consumer it's quite a different affair to be trying to scrape some enjoyment out of their entertainment products when they exist within the grip of a monopoly, because everytime something cool comes your way it immediately becomes suspect. I'm always thinking, "Okay, so this wasn't made for the consumer, but to benefit their supremacy, so in some way this new game/feature/hotfix is going to start twisting my arm for money and I've just gotta figure out when." As such, China's increasingly solid grasp on international online gaming is turning into something of a substantial turnoff for a guy like me.

And perhaps it is unfair, like they say, to equivalate the actions of the Chinese Government with that of the Chinese company Tencent when they are officially separate entities, but I think the amount of control that government exerts over Tencent is apparent for all to see. Otherwise why else would it be that the second Tencent starts to get controlling stakes in anything the product in question begins to warp to the nauseating standards of the Chinese government? Suddenly Top Gun can no longer display the Taiwanese flag, Rainbox Six Siege has a big back and forth over images of skulls in their maps and PUBG has to rebrand itself 'Game for Peace' and create a whole new Chinese-only ecosystem where defeated players get back up and wave before disappearing. (That one's just creepy) And it seems that the Indian Government are one's who take this correlation very seriously, given their distaste for China.

Now once more, this here ain't no political blog by any stretch of the imagination, but it hardly takes a seasoned political analyst to spot that India and China do not like each other. To a serious degree. (I'd even go so far as to say a worrying degree, if I wasn't afraid of coming across a little alarmist.) And in the realms of Entertainment this has already been made soberingly clear between the two giant nations. Most notable with the recent ban on Tiktok by the Indian Government which was originally supposed to be mirrored in the US before that fell apart because Tiktok is apparently immortal. That makes perhaps the biggest and most profitable social media platform of the day suddenly blocked off from 1.3 billion potential users. (I'll bet that was a hard pill to swallow.) But such is the cost of trying to aim for the two most dense ecosystems in Asia, you get either China or India; securing both is becoming increasingly unlikely. 

Recently the animosity has spread to gaming because out of the blue it seems that India has taken a swipe for the battle Royale game which started the movement all those years ago; PUBG. Now PUBG's involvement with China has been one of biggest points of contention surrounding the game given that the controlling stake of Tencent has proven so influential on the development team. As of yet the public hasn't been made of any way in which such a relationship has affected the wider international audience (At least not directly) but they went and made an entirely separate version of their game specifically to get around Chinese censors, so there's an obvious collaborative effort there somewhere. As such it's hardly a surprise that India, in their desire to swipe at Chinese international domination, would eventually settle on PUBG's door.

The effect this will have both on PUBG and other games around it is where I'm really interested in this story. Afterall, suddenly the question of where your money comes from can be in the equation for whether or not you are allowed to operate within a country, and that could prove to be a serious concern for a lot of companies going forwards. More and more often a lot of studios are beginning to accept Tencent's significant promise for revenue under the presumption that the momentary potential backlash would be vastly undercut by the profit; but losing India is really going to throw that into doubt going forward. Epic games are supported by Tencent, as are Supercell and Riot games; will potential bans be heading their way too? (I certainly don't favour Supercell's odds.)

Though it must be stated for the record, India have officially stated that the reason for this ban has nothing to do with financially attacking a potential competitor and is much more about blocking apps that are "prejudicial to the sovereignty of India, Defense of India and security of state and public order." (Whatever that means.) To be clear, this is the same argument that India and the US used to ban Tiktok, although there I'd argue there was perhaps a little more water. Tiktok was farming data from devices on which it was installed at an alarming rate (alarming= a little bit more than it's contemporaries still do) and thus it's algorithms were, and probably are, some of the best in the industry. I don't know if any concrete evidence has been uncovered to reveal that PUBG is doing anything similar but I feel like that would be the sort of revelation someone in my position would hear about. Not to call the Indian government liars at all, just to throw a little shade.

Curiously, however, it seems that India are following the US' shoes with their handling of Tiktok, in that there are talks of a recent merger between PUBG's developers and Krafton, a south Korean company, which could pave the way for an overturning of this ban. PUBG have reportedly severed ties with Tencent in the region as an act of good faith and if the gods are smiling down on them then PUBG mobile could be back up and running by early 2021. Does this mark the dawning of an age where developers will have to choose their International partners? Perhaps not just yet, as 'Game for Peace' is still up and running, so it does look like both sides are being played at the exact same time. (Although, I've heard some say that GFP is unrelated to PUBG but still linked to Tencent so consider me royally confused.)

Ultimately this is another in a long line of Video game restrictions hitting our industry with questionable intent. As a consumer I am reasonably miffed whenever anything like this comes our way, for fear of it becoming a trend, and I can only imagine what sort of effect this is having on Indian gamers who just want to play their favourite game. Censorship in general is a practise that is rarely pursed for the 'moral' or 'safety' reasons that are claimed and we as the consumers are the one's ultimately stuck paying the price after it's all said and done. That being said; screw the overbearing reach of Chinese censorship. (So I guess you could say I'm off two minds here.)

Fortnite: Vs the world

Let's get read to rumble

Something's happening here, and what it is, ain't quite clear. The gauntlet has been officially thrown and now the world's most recognisable game of all time; Epic Games' Fortnite, and two of the biggest tech companies in the world; Apple and Google, are going to war. I mean- doesn't that just sound like the most epic anime showdown of all time? It's like Goku vs Broly, Jotaro vs Dio, Aang vs Ozai, Spongebob vs Squidward; all those times 1.3 trillion. (Apple's estimated value at the time of this writing, for reference.) For a game as big as Fortnite to be cast as the underdog in any situation is eye-turning enough, but for it be in a duel to the death against Apple, I'm sorry but it's popcorn and Marshmallows time. I'm straight itching to watch these titans tear each other apart in the court of law. I'm only sad that it's seemingly impossible for both sides to lose the lawsuit. (Is it? I dunno, LegalEagle hasn't uploaded a video on this yet...)

So you've already heard the news right? Sure you have; but I'm starting from the beginning because I just love to tell a story, even better when it's non-fiction. First off, we have to talk about how App stores work. (I know, exciting stuff) So if you're interested in getting into the ludicrously lucrative world of making a app for mobile devices, you'll have to get used to the fact that it'll be sold on someone else's storefront. Whether you're on IOS or Android, it's a well known truth that you have to play by the rules of Apple or Google respectively in order for your app to sell to the millions of folk around the world with a mobile device. On Android there is the choice to offer your app directly, but it still won't get as much traffic as it would on the Google store installed in most phones, and on IOS you literally cannot use a non-Apple-approved app. (Unless you jury-rig your device, but I don't want to get into that right now.) So basically, the default mobile stores are the toll keepers that every app developer must pay in order to get where they need to, due to the solitary nature of the devices there's no direct competition, and all the bargaining chips are situated solely in the mega tech companies' court. So as you can imagine they exploit the hell out of it and charge a 30% commission on all in-app purchases.

30% is a pretty heft kick to the groin for anyone to get over, and when it's in a nonnegotiable format such as sitting in the hands of a monopolistic entity- well, it's hard not to feel taken advantage of. I mean, that's like if Steam were to start charging 30% commission in order to sell your games on thei- oh wait, they do charge that. (And we wonder why Epic came along...) Obviously, as this is such a bitter pill for the companies to swallow, they practically invariably refuse to eat that cost themselves and instead pass it onto the customers, so that's why things tend to cost a lot more on mobile apps than on the website. (The more you know.) What's more, Apple's terms of service forbid developers from redirecting traffic away from the Apple store in order to circumvent commission, which leads to situations such as with Netflix's mobile app wherein you simply cannot subscribe through the app. They don't tell you why or where you need to go, they just expect you to figure it out. (Luckily Netflix has the brand familiarity to do that, whereas many other brands simply do not.)

It is within this ecosystem and under the purview of these rules that Epic Games chose to function in order to offer the mobile version of their popular Battle Royale; Fortnite. All the game was missing was portability, and with this release came a whole new wave of player engagement and retention for the folks over at Epic to enjoy. Que the claims of Fortnite addiction gripping the youth due to it's accessibility and the, much-more-real, issue of kids playing Fortnite in class with their phones. (I wasn't even allowed my phone in class, what's up with that?) So it was a successful move into a new market, good for them, let's fast forward to today. Not too long ago Fortnite decided to surprise the world with a shocking announcement; the in-game premium currency, V-bucks, would be granted a permanent 20% reduction in price. (Which, seeing as how this is in-game currency who's value is determined solely by Epic games, is pretty much meaningless when you think about it.) So far so nothing, but there was a little change up to the way that the mobile app demonstrated this deal. You see, whereas everywhere else folk would be treated to the discounted price, on mobile they would be greeted with two prices, the original one and the new one, with the more expensive option labelled 'Apple App store'. It was basically Epic showing people an obvious choice and saying "Which would you pick?"

That's ballsy one might say, very alpha; but also completely and undeniably against the rules that everyone else abides by. Thus it was pretty much inevitable that this little stunt would end up with Fortnite getting justly booted from the app store post haste, probably whilst Apple were scratching their heads and going "What did they think would happen?" But 'Oh! You fell into my trap card, Kaiba!', Epic muttered as within moments of getting pulled from the app store they were granted the legal precedent to clap back. Hardly a few minutes after the fact there was a video uploaded to Youtube retelling the classic 1984 parody advert that Apple made in their genesis, only this time with Apple as the grey tyrannical entity and the colourful cast of Fortnite as the liberators. (Very crass and on-the-nose there Epic. Do not approve.) As well as, in a move with a little more weight, a lawsuit filed against Apple by Epic for unfair practises. (Big moves!)

So obviously this whole affair was orchestrated to the nines, with Epic being their same slimy, sneaky selves in order to lure Apple into granting them the basis for a lawsuit. (As their claims wouldn't be nearly as strong without having been personally affected by Apple's policies) But if we ignore the grossly deliberate way that Epic planned all this out, there's an interesting conflict here which has the potential to touch a lot of people. They allege that Apple's iron fist on who gets on their phones is in direct contrast to healthy competition and thus grounds to be forcibly penalised within a court of law. Whatsmore, in offering themselves up as lambs to the slaughter here, Epic have managed to rally App developers behind a shared interest (getting this extortionate commission rate lowered) as well as Apple's customer base. (As There's sure to be plenty of kids absolutely distraught about not being able to play Fortnite for the forseeable future.)

The lawsuit, which was penned suspiciously legible to non-lawyers, feels catered to be as much an impassioned speech as the end of a crappy melodrama as a declaration for legal war. They even make a point to call out Apple's apparent hypocrisy as being a company that said it stood against the stifling of innovation only to become that behemoth all these years later. (Hence the eye-roll inducing Youtube video.) I feel as though the scope of their transgression did get a little bit out of their control, however, as Google also booted them off the playstore, leading to a much less flowery and little more delayed lawsuit thrown Google's way too. So does Fortnite stand a chance? Maybe. Afterall, we are in a political environment of folk who all seem to talk about breaking up the big tech companies, could this be a prime excuse to take a swing at that? We'll have to keep an eye out to see if any independent parties start weighing in on this matter, as I think this has the potential (and I'm sure this is what Epic is going for) to become much bigger than a simple commission dispute. This could be the start of the major curbing of Apple's growth.

So this very much is a David vs Goliath level showdown here today. A real Zuko vs Azula, Joseph vs The Pillarmen, Yugi vs Kaiba, Finn vs The Lich King, situation. (Did Finn ever actually go up against the Lich king? I can't remember.) Now don't get me wrong, there are no heroes in this tale to rally behind. Epic definitely broke the rules in order to fuel this lawsuit, and they're 40% owned by Tencent, so one could construe this as an attack on American business' through a Chinese proxy. But I'm sure Epic would deny that and spout some nonsense about them 'fighting for equality and freedoms' whilst simultaneously smothering the PC marketplace with exclusivity culture, so I'll not accuse anything formal. (You're a real class act, Epic.) At the end of the day, however, when you strip everything away this is just one mega rich corporation taking a swing at another, and in that light I think it's hardly controversial to say 'screw the lot of them and I hope this somehow ends off turning sour for all parties'. But if that, admittedly unlikely, scenario never happens, then I'm fine to just sit back and watch the fireworks like the stereotypical car-crash-watcher that I am.

Cyberpunk Tencent Edition?

STAHP! Bad, Tencent!

It seems that the undeniable success of Cyberpunk 2077's marketing campaign, whether that translates to strong games sales or not, has lionised a good many imagineers out there who were just sitting on their perfect cyberpunk fantasies waiting for the tech to catch up to their dreams. Looking around at the state of the industry it isn't hard to see that there has been something of a renaissance for futuristic, Sci-Fi-esque and even straight-up Cybperpunk titles coming at the gaming public from every which where. You have indie titles like 'Ghostrunner', (Mirror's Edge with cyborg ninjas) Bigger budget affairs like 'Watch_Dogs Leigon' (Ubisoft's latest confused attempt to create commentary about- sticking it to the man? I guess?) and absolutely diddly-squat out of Square Enix despite, you know, them literally owning the license to the single most beloved gaming Cyberpunk licence of all time; Deus Ex. (Just tell me what sort of profane demonic rituals I have to perform in order to see a proper 'Human Revolution' sequel and I'll do them!)

But where there are a good dozen or so creators who's long dormant ideas have been liberated by the newfound attention that CDPR have fuelled into this genre, there are those with the eyes to see opportunity from this situation, but whom are woefully lacking in anything resembling talent. Enter Tencent. You remember these guys, right? Pretty much every major censorship debacle that has struck the gaming industry over the past 10 years can be traced back to them and their 'maybe-they're-more-than-just-friends'-type relationship they've held with the Chinese Government. (With the exception of the 'sexual torture' scene that was planned for Outlast 2. That scene was scrapped because they were bade to by 'the whims of their intentions'. Yeah, I call the Australian government 'my intentions' sometimes too.) We have the time when all images of skulls were removed from a map in 'Rainbow Six Seige' at their behest; that time when they got a Blizzard competitive player fired alongside the two commentators there for standing up for his home country of Hong Kong; and the time when they assumed chief financing over 'Top Gun 2' and thus forced them to remove the Taiwan flag from Tom Cruise's famous jacket. Those are the sorts of goons you've got running things over at Tencent.

They aren't just a company known for rolling and dangling financial support over people's heads in return for hoop jumping, however, they are also a cynical husk of a company that tries to actively taint the creative landscape of the industry by forcing themselves into other properties because they lack the imagination and skill to invent their own. (No, it isn't a 'means' thing. They're one of the biggest conglomerates in the world; they're just that pathetically untalented that they've not an original idea since their pox-ridden company was founded) Gamers found this lesson out most famously when Tencent partnered with Blizzard to offend and astound Diablo players by announcing the money-gouging spin-off 'Diablo Immortal'; and more recently were reminded of these antics when the same company pulled it again with 'Pokemon Unite'. And no, you can't really avoid these guys even if you're trying. They own Riot games, Miniclip, Grinding Gear games, The Clash of Clans people, parts of Ubisoft and Paradox and so many more.

And yet with all of that apparent 'experience' in the industry there are precious few 'original' projects that these people have got their hands behind. Nothing interesting that was spurheaded by them and has the potential to, not only grow into something substantial, but also have a positive reflection on the industry. But after their most recent announcement, people will now have to come to the conclusion that practically nothing has changed in that regard and that they are just as creatively-void as ever; expect now it's for being a derivative scumbag rather than just a repugnant leech. (So I guess that's an upgrade?) And yes, just as the title of this blog and my 'subtle' indications have implied; the target of Tencent's brand new copy and paste job is none other than the Cyberpunk genre. (Watch your ass CDPR; Tencent's coming for ya!)

'Code: Syn' is an attempt at hopping onto that ol' Cyberpunk train long after it's left the station and without any remote clue of the thematic norms that the genre typically promotes. (Such as anti-corportism) In fact, it seems like a game, that's apparently slated for Consoles and PC, that has been constructed with literally no grasp of how modern video game marketing works. Let me start with their reveal trailer that dropped just a few days back; what an absolute waste of a reveal, do these guys not have a marketing department? (Yes, I know it's meant to be a tech demo. It still doesn't make it any less impressive) The introduction of the world of 'Code: Syn' felt about as dry as an investor call, complete with flashes of uninspired Cyberpunk tropes, (such as neon holographics and distant Asian influences) unenthused narration that sounded like the voice had been constructed by an AI and an action-packed indepth dive into- the customisation system? That- that's your idea of putting your best foot forward?

It's not hard to see the attempts to ape the Mike Pondsmith inspired adaptation, it practically exudes from every single pore of 'Code: Syn'. You can see the monolithic skylines inspired by the Ridley Scott 'Blade Runner' vision, the push of technology that is meant to be 'futuristic' but not removed from the current day, and they even replicated the retro-futuristic angle in the 80s-inspired vehicles that are teased. (Although 'Code: Syn's vehicles are considerably less high quality both in design and fidelity.) In fact, even the thumbnail for the Youtube video showcases a young-looking Asian woman who appears to be wearing something that very much resembles the, now-iconic, Samurai jacket. (As I said, not one original thought has been generated) In fact, the only way in which Tencent have diversified their vision from CDPR's is through the same way that they've always done; horribly misplaced sex-appeal.

Now don't get me wrong; exploiting sex appeal doesn't just have it's place in Cyberpunk, it's actually one of the ways in which the themes are expressed. But whereas CDPR explore this knowingly and aware of what they are depicting, not as an endorsement but as a condemnation; Tencent are typically clueless. (In the same way that 'This is Vegas' was envisioned as a critical commentary on the seedy commercialism of Vegas, whilst intending to have the player partake and fight for it. Confused commentary is confused.) One of the first main character models they teased was clearly just a cybernetic Harley Quinn from her Suicide Squad condition complete with an automatic weapon and jiggle boob physics. (classy) Another is the Samurai lady from the thumbnail, only with skin tight leather and no gun, for some reason. It's clear that Tencent think this is what's going to get butts in seats, so to speak, and thus this is where the effort went; but even then they've half assed it with overly-cluttered designs that lack the purpose, context and heart which everything in Cyberpunk 2077 was lovingly imbued with. If there is one thing I can give 'Code: Syn' over Cyberpunk 2077, though it hurts me to admit it, it's that 'Code: Syn' has cybernetic pets and that's pretty cool. Robot bear? Sign me up. (No really. I wouldn't pay 2 cents for this game.)

I could waste the next week of my life individually picking out every bum note from this reveal and spitting on it with gusto, but I'd rather just forget this travesty were ever referenced and go back to watching that Cyberpunk B-roll on a loop again. (I have a problem. Send help.) Let this serve as a learning moment for any company who feel the desire to ride a trend rather than pursue something they are passionate for and have ideas within; stop it, you're just wasting your own time and everyone else's. Unfortunately, morbidly curious fool that I am, I will be keeping a close eye on Cyberpunk dime-store-edition, so when it flops it's way into stores you can bet I'll be there to hiss from a distance. I suppose we can pick up on the extent of Tencent's disgrace on that day, until then.                                                                               

Pokemon Unite

Aha hahahaha. I can't, I gonna die.

I can't remember the last time I've been so inundated with blog topics, but trust me when I say that this takes priority over them all! So a while back there was this little impromptu stream from The Pokemon Company which, whilst not technically a Pokemon Direct, drummed up a sufficient amount of excitement and hype to pass as such. There were some Pokemon Go updates, some new mobile Pokemon games announced, and a really cool challange for Pokemon Sword and Shield that coincided with the release of 'The isle of Armor' wherein community to had to have 1000000 players slay a special raid-den Zeozora in exchange for a free shiny Zeozora if we hit it. (And we did, by-the-by, so we can expect that boon in our Pokemon Home apps come next Monday) But there was one topic on Which The Pokemon Company were less than forthcoming, a secret announcement that they wanted to push forward to a week later stream. To yesterday, in fact. What could it be, the crowd wondered... Maybe even that Generation 4 remake that some people apparently really want and I can't comprehend why. (I got my Gen 3 remake, that's all I want.)

The days were tense in the leading week to this second stream; filled with naught but wild speculation and the dying cries of golden mythical Zeozoras. (Because I refuse to believe anyone legitimately killed the shiny silver ones; those guys were on a whole other level.) People wound themselves up so tight in anticipation for some impossible announcement that all the enthusiast Pokemon boards were alight. What could be so important that the Pokemon Company sought to separate it from all the other announcements from the other day? Why did it deserve a stream of it's own? Is this the next mainline entry? A deep-dive into The Crown Tundra? Whatever it is, it must be something incredible to be worthy of all this build up!

And then we got 'Pokemon Unite'. 11 straight minutes, of 'Pokemon Unite'. "But what exactly is 'Pokemon Unite'" I here you ask. Well, dear friends; let me illuminate you. Imagine an incredibly overcrowded genre of games that's taken up by the dominance of two big titles. Well call these games, MOBAs. Now imagine Pokemon up in there. That's it, 'Pokemon Unite' in a nutshell. It's  a MOBA. That's what everyone was waiting for and losing their minds over in anticipation. This is what The Pokemon Company felt was worth delaying an announcement for! Dedicating 11 consecutive minutes to! A battle MOBA. Now I'll be honest, initially I found this incredibly funny, (and I still pretty much do) but time has matured me a little and now I'll only laughing at the idea instead of also laughing at the fans who got their hopes up. (But seriously; you think they'd announce the next game during the content cycle of their current one? Get real!)

But let's look at this honestly for a moment; A Pokemon MOBA. From a franchise built on the back of accessibility and pick-and-play fun, to a genre of games characterised by their taxing gameplay demands and tactical leanings. Any other franchise and I'd call that a curious step forward but here I'm just left thinking that TPC have severely misunderstood their audience. Add onto that, the fact that the MOBA genre is almost synonymous with gatekeeping and toxicity (Yes, I've heard that LOL has been working on that recently but the reputation is set in the bedrock by this point) and you have such a puzzle match for a kids series that it's honestly just comical. Maybe that's just me, however, as it seems everyone else was just plain mad. Afterall, there's got to be some reason why the footage within which this reveal was made (Which amusingly still isn't even titled 'Pokemon Unite', meaning people had to actively learn about this elsewhere and then seek this video out) has been downvoted to the phantom zone.

Even now, I can't rightly say what in the heck must have been going through anyone's mind at the time of imaging, deciding, planning and then marketing this missed-swing of a game. (There were failures seemingly at every stage of production) Pokemon has always been a franchise that has ridden off of providing the sort of gameplay experience that you can't really find elsewhere, which is what has allowed them to pull off honestly egregious practises for so long without anyone really batting an eyelid. (Selling two versions of essentially the same game, anyone?) But this time they were jumping head first in the big leagues, likely with limited knowledge of what they're getting into, and they're likely expecting to scoot by on name recognition alone. And you know what; it just might work.

Pokemon is big, guys, I mean you already had an inkling of that but until you actually look into the topic it's hard to really understand how literally globe trotting it is! If there were any brand capable of roping in a plethora of kids to joining the contentious MOBA community, it's this one. And honestly, I can't blame them. I'm curious what a Pokemon MOBA is going to look like and I'll bet you've scratched your heads during this wondering something similar. Additionally, the team made the choice of labelling this title with the eyebrow raising label they've invented called 'Free to Start', which means there's nothing to loose from just a little precursory glance. (It always starts with just a look.) They also certainly won't be running out of characters to add anytime soon so it won't be lacking in potential. Yeah, maybe fans are just upset about the presentation and the idea itself isn't entirely awful, maybe we should give this a ch- wait, they partnered with who to make this happen?

Obviously Gamefreak have no involvement with this latest attempt to squeeze the dusty teat of the Pokemon cashcow, they can just about make the same game for the past 20 years, throw them a MOBA and the entire studio might collapse in on itself in a singularity. Instead, The Pokemon Company, decided to work with a team called TiMi Studio who specialise in making online mobile games and, crucially, are Chinese. (You can probably see where this is going.) Which means that in order to make the partnership work, and to sell it in China, TPC have entered a working partnership with the Chinese government's most poorly concealed propaganda machine; Tencent. Yep, Tencent is the outreach program that China uses to sanitise anything going into their country and subtle influence elsewhere. They've censored movies, video games, and seeing as how Pokemon is a fictional kids series there's probably nothing to censor th- Sike; China has already got the name of one Pokemon changed so that it's translation features no roman characters because that country is that desperate to limit western influence that it wants to ensure it's citizens won't even recognise other languages at a glance. (Bet they're really bummed that Japan literally nabbed their alphabet now. Full isolationism denied)

Let me put you under no delusions here, Tencent is a tool for an autocratic government and you can argue about whether or not that makes them literally close to the Chinese government (Epic games certainly seems adamant on insulting everyone's intelligence in that regard) but you'd be a liar to claim that there's no connection whatsoever. So does that mean disastrous things for the Pokemon franchise now that Tencent has a direct line? Of course not, China don't need a partnership to make demands off of Pokemon; they've caved from mild suggestion in the past anyway. But it does represent an enabling of a frankly gross element in our industry that reflects badly upon the Pokemon brand. Anyone who does business with Tencent is promoting something sordid, whether directly or not, and that's not the sort of industry that anyone want's to cultivate. So let me leave you with one simple message, one directed at The Pokemon Company; think harder about the future your paving towards with the roads you blaze today.

What the heck is Valorant?

Where'd this guy come from?

Am I the only one who was completely blindsided by a game that everybody seems to be talking about? I mean, one day it was all just "Hey, Resident Evil 3's coming out soon" and "Final Fantasy 7's gonna be great! But only if you have a Playstation cause if you don't then you can wait until April next year. Hah hah, screw you."; and then before I know it this Valorant is getting shoved in my face and people are just like "Yeah. What are you, a Boomer?" Now I feel like I can't turn around without hearing about this game and I still have no idea where it came from. I mean, this isn't an 'Apex Legends' situation wherein the game dropped by surprise and caught everyone off guard, this is the kind of title that you get actively shamed for not knowing about, as though everyone's embarrassed to admit that the title is new for them too. And that isn't just me projecting, (it is me projecting, but it's not just that) this game broke the Twitch most streamed games listing pretty much the day the closed beta launched. All this and I still don't even know what this game is, so what gives?

Well, let me be the most unoriginal scum in the world and parrot the initial reaction that practically everyone and their blind elderly Nan has already deduced; it's Counter Strike but Overwatch. I know, I know, description through comparison is like the absolute soul of laziness, but there is no better description. Aesthetically this game is built upon a cartoonish design this is intentionally crafted to make the visual timeless (It works for Kingdom Hearts afterall) whilst also putting enough individuality behind each hero so that they can be told apart from each other from their silhouettes alone. (I mean, they still don't look even nearly as unique as the Overwatch cast, but it's baby steps.) Whilst from a gameplay perspective it simply exudes 'Counter Strike: Global Offensive' with tactical gunplay, fiddly aiming, and a default POV so wide it's designed for the pros.

And that's probably the biggest take away from Valorant; it's a game designed for Pros. More specifically for ESports. It's apparent from the menu-to-gameplay time, the design of the lobby, the construction of the HUD and the light graphical load designed to be able to run on almost anything. Now personally I never really like it when games go out of their way to aim themselves to an Esports crowd without growing that naturally, although that might just be because, as a crappy amateur writer, I'm allergic to contrivance; but this title's picking up quite the crowd already so I may be in the minority. Perhaps this is exactly the sort of hero shooter tactical hybrid that people are looking for right now in this age of heroes. (That's probably the title of a crappy mobile game, isn't it?) Whereas other titles that have tried the same thing ended up pushing too hard, like Evolve, maybe Valorant has slid into just the right number of palms (or maybe just the right palms) to launch strong.

I say that because already we can hear the rumblings of big streamers jumping aboard the bandwagon. Summit, Shroud even Dr Disrespect have either played or spoken about the game on their platforms. (Dr Disrespect was being critical, but just getting the name out there is enough to build audience recognition. Plus it's sort of his brand.) This is the sort of rise that actually somewhat mirrors the dawn of Apex Legends, or even Fortnite (albeit, in a much more streamlined fashion) to the point where certain questions might arise, such as; is any of this forced? Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt the game itself is serviceable and has earned fans from that right, it is made by Riot Games afterall; I just have reason to believe that some sneaky tactics might have been deployed to make this game's debut splash as wide as it currently feels.

On the launch of it's beta, Valorant peaked at an knee-wobbling 1.7 million concurrent viewers on Twitch and on the first day it accumulated 34 million hours watched. (Which is frankly just ludicrous) So you may be wondering how exactly such a huge global gaming event occurred? Bribery, to put it bluntly. Knowing that the allure of a brand new big budget game was going to drum up excitement, Riot partnered with Twitch in order to come up with something to keep people watching, and this ended up materialising as a Twitch drop set-up. Basically, as viewers tuned in to watch Valorant, they would be given the chance to earn a free closed beta key, provided that their Twitch and Riot accounts were linked. This alone drove a great many folk to try and game the system, with unconfirmed claims that some people would set-up 50 Twitch tabs to improve their chances.

Now there isn't anything inherently wrong with what Riot was doing, besides the way that it blatantly inflates the viewership numbers on the promise of access to a unfinished title with one-in-several-million odds. But this is just the way the game is played on any marketing machine. The problem really comes in the amount of success it has warranted the game, because now this title has come from being an relative unknown to a household game practically overnight and that's a lot of pressure to be under. Remember that this is a game that's riding the 'this is a beta, please ignore bugs' stage of it's life-cycle and yet they're playing for marketing points that are equivalent to a AAA multimillon dollar blockbuster. Needless to say, all eyes are on Riot Games right now and if this game launches to the wider audiences with anything less than a flawless landing, that's going to cause quite the early ripple. Already there are some folk, myself included, who are approaching Riot with a raised eyebrow over this 'coerced viewership' situation, and that's not the sort of mistrust you want to cultivate, really ever, let alone before the title's out the door.

But there's another dimension to this whole issue, although it's a little out of my technical wheelhouse so forgive me if I'm not being as concise as I could be. Online PC games all require their very own form of anti-cheat system in order for a healthy ecosystem to be formed, and that's just a universal given due to how easy it is to inject code on a PC. Valorant, however, takes that a step further than is perhaps necessary with their implementation of Vanguard, a system which installs a 24-hour checker that boots with one's computer and runs with Kernel privileges (the highest level of privileges affordable on a traditional computer) Now this could be nothing of any consequence, Riot's head of Anti-cheat seems to insist so, but seeing as how Riot is owned by Tencent who are themselves a corporate stooge for the Chinese Government, that gets some questions being asked. Riot insist that this is a necessary step to stop cheats designed to boot before the Anti-cheat boots, but clearly that's proven ineffectual as cheaters were being banned off of the closed Beta by day four, so why are we still entertaining this system if not for more nefarious purposes. Okay, so maybe neither Riot nor Tencent have anything overtly predatory planned with root access to people's computer (despite Tencent being known meddlers) but what about third party hackers who just happen to notice a root-kit leading into your computer's core systems? Basically, right now the installation of Valorant is the technological equivalent of making oneself immunodeficient, and if this title takes off in the way that Riot is pushing for so desperately, this could be the start of a very worrying precedent for how games are permitted to treat the devices we install them on.

So what is Valorant? A new competitive title with designs of internet immortality through merit of becoming an Esports title, but perhaps also something a little darker. I hear that the game itself is fine and hardcore FPS stans seem to enjoy it, so perhaps it's inevitable for this to be the new Overwatch, but is this perhaps not the future for Esports that gaming deserves? At the end of the day, I don't even really care about Esports and thus Valorant will never land on my radar in a substantial way, but I think it's important to wonder about regardless. But by all means, if keeping ahead of the times is worth all that I've discussed so far than don't let me stop you, just never say that you weren't ever warned.

The future is Mobile!

The Mobile infantry marches on.

Great news everyone! Provided that by 'Everyone' I'm specifically referring to the many employees of Activison Blizzard. Despite everything that those companies have gone through over the past couple of years, (Or more, what Blizzard have gone through, Activison have a relatively smooth ride) it seems that this company has earned a brand new accolade to stick on their wall now that their mobile sales have managed to eclipse both their console and PC sales. (That's right folks, we're living in the upside-down!) A development like this obviously comes hand-in-hand with that most Activison of threats; it's now only a matter of time until the company starts shifting it's primary efforts to the mobile field. (Please forgive me if I fail to jump for joy.)

This, most wondrous of updates, was imparted upon us all by Activision god-emperor: Bobby Kotick, in an investor call. (Where else?) He noted how their mobile outings, specifically 'Call of Duty Mobile' had managed to grow awareness in that brand and how they expect that to have an impressive effect on this year's revenue. He also expressed some optimism for the future of their other brands; which is likely a direct reference to 'Diablo Immortal' so we can maybe expect to finally see that title come sometime this financial year. All and all the message is clear; not only have their mobile ventures been successful, but they stand to boost the profits of the projects they actually devote time and money towards, so you can expect they're not going anywhere anytime soon.

This huge success shouldn't really be a surprise to anyone either. Call of Duty Mobile did gangbusters upon it's debut, racking up numbers of over 100 million downloads within the first week. (Those numbers beat out 'Fortnite'. You heard me right. Fortnite lost to COD in terms of download numbers. I don't even know how to process that information.) Even beyond just the raw numbers, 'Call of Duty: Mobile' also managed to earn the studio the accolade of best mobile game of the year from the Game Awards, despite considerable anecdotal evidence to support that Activison were knowingly misleading their audience in order to bump up microtransaction sales. (One may consider that evidence and say it's not too compelling, but I would remind them that the exact same tactic was used for 'Apex Legends'; these guys are are nothing if not consistent.)

Activision has already begun taking huge steps in moving their production over to their mobile efforts, with having cut 800 jobs last year for that pursuit. Heck, they even purchased King, creators of Candy Crush, in order to sink that practically unobtainable Boomer crowd. (At this point Activison seem to be actively after total mobile market domination!) And with this shift to mobile it's only a matter of time before the company also starts to shift over to the markets that appreciate Mobile games the most; Asia. Or more specifically, China. For years now Activision has contracted a China-only version of their flagship Call of Duty franchise known as 'Call of Duty Online', and their mobile port which did so well was actually handled by 'Tencent Holdings Ltc', the Chinese company responsible for Blizzard's woes last year. People often fret about what might happen to their favourite franchises if they started to succumb to the influence of the famously oppressive Chinese censors, and Activision-Blizzard may become the poster child for that in the years to come. (I think the real test will be Diablo 4, check to see if the censors manage to exorcise that entire game before release.)

As someone who's only gaming-adjacent Mobile app is Pokemon Home (And that's only because the colourful folk over at the Pokemon Company decided to lock the Global Trade Service behind the mobile app) it's particularly distressing to see this trend emerge in gaming, and I shouldn't have to explain why. Whenever a big game developer decides to approach the mobile market it is inevitable that they don't do so for the advantages that a smaller, portable platform provides but rather to take advantage of the significantly lowered standards that the mobile community have. That's what allows for mobile games to launch borderline unplayble and still pick up a dedicated following, (like the IOS releases of 'Fortnite' and 'PUBG' did) to place hard paywalls in the middle of gameplay (Like Warners did with 'Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery') or to actively scam their audience with misleading events and lootboxes in the same year that you win the award for 'Best Mobile Game'. (That's called a 'call-back'.)

I fear what will happen should any one of these more unscrupulous companies decide to follow the money and jump to sole mobile development; I mean, could anyone blame them for doing so? Surely we all remember how, after the release of MGS V and the very public break-up with Kojima, Konami decided to take all of their storied brands and redevote themselves to the medium that had never done them wrong; gambling machines. (I still wake up in cold sweats when I remember that seraphic Snake Eater remake before remembering that was all just for their damn Pachinko machines.) Of course, that was only a temporary measure and there are rumours that Konami do want to branch back into actual game development once more, (No, 'Contra: Rouge Corps' does not count) but their little 'break' cost us 2 years of potential games and I do not appreciate that.

Then again, perhaps I'm being a little alarmist about this whole thing. Konami decided to shift themselves towards gambling machines because their company had a active foot in that market for a good number of years, it was a viable business move for them to step away from a market that was currently costing them more then they had the potential to make, whereas Activision and it's ilk are primarily gaming companies with no substantial 'second option'. Even when the mobile market kicks off (Note I said "When") it would be silly of anyone to cease console and PC games completely in order to solely feed mobile gamers, but I know the gaming industry well enough to recognise that it won't take much for those companies to start importing the more successful (and avaricious) mobile monetisation tactics to the games that the rest of us play. Afterall, EA is famous for that kind of crap.

I know it's not really fun to go and rag on the gaming industry for the dour future that we're all heading towards (and which we all have a part in) but I feel it's important to have an understanding of how our lovely industry functions. As with anything that is solely driven by financial incentives, however, this remains the sort of issue which the average gamer holds no recourse to influence. You don't like the way things are headed? Too bad, you're along for the ride all the same, and they know you're not going to leave because you have literally no other alternative to go to. (You know, aside from the Indie market. Or CDPR.) So there's your dose of depressing for the week, I promise that the next blog will be on the entirely opposite end of that particular spectrum. (Unless I mess with the scheduling again. I tend to do that.)

Strict restrictions from the Middle Kingdom!

Times up!

At this point you may have cottoned onto the fact that I, lover of games that I am, do not see myself as the most outspoken fan of the Chinese Government and their need to assert themselves around the globe. In fact, I don't like the idea of any government body inserting their ideals into matters of art and entertainment as it's a relationship which, historically, had never ended well for any party involved. (Least of all the consumer.) So colour me concerned when I hear about a sweeping restriction shackled onto the act of gaming by a government that is renowned for it's oppressive tendencies, even if the apparent intention is for a somewhat admirable cause.

That is the mindset with which I approach the news that the Chinese Government is imposing a curfew on gaming time for minors in an effort to fight against the effects of Video game addiction. It is a policy that sounds dubious on announcement and somewhat unenforceable with our current knowledge about how video games are distributed and played, but seeing as how this is China we're talking about, I wouldn't be surprised if they don't just announce the policy and let fear do the work in managing the populace. Although it must be noted, this policy only goes into effect for those under the age of 18 with presumably no restrictions imposed upon those that are considered adults. (Beyond having to play heavily censored China-only versions of international releases.)

This curfew isn't anything to be sniffed at either, specifically when it comes to it's specifications. Firstly, minors are forbidden from playing between the hours of 22:00 and 8:00, and they are limited to 90 minutes of gaming on weekdays with 3 hours on weekends and holidays. (No word if that restriction is by day or cumulative.) Ostensibly this is meant to curb Video game addiction, which officials claim is 'damaging to children's health', but these are likely the same officials that claimed the same about 'Peppa Pig', so I'd put serious doubt into the expertise and wisdom of these individuals. Also, a little fun thing to note: Despite claiming that Video games harm children, the government has not put a blanket ban down on children playing games because they know how much money they stand to lose from cutting off the most lucrative revenue source in their populace: dumb children. (Really doing it for the kids, huh China?)

To their credit, a phrase I would never thought I would use directed at the Chinese Government, this is a legitimate issue that they seem to have taken a stand against. The most prevalent and extreme cases of video game addiction, (You know, the one's involving people who neglect food and sleep in favour of gaming) tend to come from the Eastern world of gaming with us hearing a lot about these cases coming out of Japan. Now, of course Japan is almost night-and-day in social structure when it comes to China, but there are some fundamental cultural ques that run similar. Namely, the overbearing work ethic that stretches out individuals and wrings them dry through back breaking labour from working age till death. (Not to sound critical of such a practise. For one in my current situation, perpetual labour almost sounds like a paradise.)

One could throw on the 'amateur pyschologist' hat on all day and make assumptions as to what births and nurtures such an addiction, but I would guess that the shape of that society likely plays a significant role. There is certainly a degree of ostracizing that happens to those that aren't laser focused on their studies and those that fall behind are rarely caught back up as no systems really exist to accommodate for that. In this way it can be easy for those who struggle in their studies to fall into bad habits in which they never pull out from. Those who spend all of their time playing video games instead of interacting with the world are shunned, causing them to recede further into their seclusion and exile and eventually become outcasts. (A process I am more than familiar with.)In Japan, that is just one of the many reasons why organizations such as the Yakuza are never short of recruits. They have the opportunity to pick up any and all who fall to the wayside and give them a place to belong and a purpose to work toward. I couldn't claim that the Chinese Triad (or whichever name the organization goes by today) do the same, as I am not as familiar with the way they operate, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if there isn't a mirror in that process to some degree.

The Chinese Government are ostensibly throwing this ban into action with the intention of stopping the gaming habit from forming early and becoming a problem that they don't have the tools to fix. Some could argue that it is a solution, but from where I'm sitting this looks like a classic case of battling the symptoms and ignoring the sickness. Although, I can't say that I'm quite surprised of that approach coming from the Chinese Government; afterall, they are the ones who concocted the One-child policy (Now a two-child policy) in order to combat a hypothetical overpopulation issue. A sweeping and extreme social policy which has resulted in a wholly new impending crisis wherein a third of their workforce is rapidly approaching retirement age simultaneously, a situation that has the potential to cripple many of China's industries.

I doubt that this gaming curfew will have such a drastic effect on Chinese society, however I do foresee a potential negative striking the modern gaming market. (Although you could see this as a positive depending on your point of view.) You see, I've spoken before about how the modern video game model (games as a service) turns your spare time into a currency and tries to gobble up as much of it as possible with recurrency incentives out the wazoo. In the long term this model is unsustainable for many reasons, but chief among them being that there are only so many hours in the day, this means that live-services are already competing with each other on such a high-bar that any game which isn't an instant hit will become dead wood for the company in matter of months if not weeks. This new policy from China accelerates that process tenfold.

Children who only have 90 minutes to play a game for that entire week no longer have the free time to throw around on whatever game comes their way, (Or rather, whatever game they can bug their parents into buying) which means that they would have to pick and choose to the extreme. Seeing as how China currently makes up the largest pool of gamers in the world, (Somewhere near 800 million individuals as I recall. No, I'm not sure how many of them are Children) this could result in a huge blow to Video game companies who were just starting to draw up plans for launching themselves at the Chinese market with the lifting of the console ban. And that isn't even taking into account the effect this will have on long-form games like MMOs and RPGs. Who knows, maybe a generation who grow up without the time to invest themselves in these grand sprawling adventures will find themselves easily bored with games that don't offer instant gratification once they grow of age. This could shatter the RPG market in China and really hurt those franchises which do well in the East like Dragon Quest. Of course, that would theoretically have a knock on effect for the western markets, due to the prevalence of the Chinese player base, resulting in a crash for the RPG market. (Of course, all that is hypothetical but certainly within the realms of reason.)

If your curious about how this new policy will go down with the public, (I.e. will it incite public backlash) the answer may already be in the wild. You see, this may be the first time that such a stipulation has made it into law but the Chinese have dabbled in overbearing restrictions before. Just look at Tencent, the government scrooge that J. Allen Brack claimed was entirely autonomous of political influence. When the gaming regulator was first announced and the Chinese government started putting heavy restrictions on gaming (The Government uses 'gaming' as a whipping horse whenever they need to fool people into believing they're working on public safety) Tencent were some of the first to capitulate by limiting playtime for under 18's to 2 hours a day. (Clearly that wasn't enough in China's eyes.)

Just like with every dumb decision the Chinese 'public servants' make, this is sure to have a rough effect on the wider gaming industry. International gaming companies have been bending over backwards to try and fit into the narrow margins of 'safe gaming' that the Government keeps shifting, but right now they may have just shrunk those lines a tad too much. If things keep going in this direction and China ends up banning all non-native video games, we may have an actual exodus on our hands as money-hungry executives scramble over themselves to relocate to the middle kingdom, taking the majority of the gaming industry with them. Is this the likely future of the industry? Maybe not, afterall that example is worst-case; however, if there is one thing that I'm beginning to understand lately, it's that one should never underestimate the capacity for situations to worsen.

Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-China

Warning: If you are a member of the Chinese government; there is nothing to see here, carry on.

I hold a considerable amount of respect for the particular type of activism posited by the gaming community. Whenever we are faced with an unfair or unjust scenario, we have a tendency to speak out and fight back against the offending organizations in the places that hurt them most. Of course, sometimes in our fervour our sights can get a little off-target, but recently we've reached the point where we can affect actual change with enough support from our end. This way we have been able to prove to gaming companies that ours is a voice to be heard and that we have real power in the decision process. Almost every fight that the collective gaming community has fought have been ones that it is feasible to win. However, I find myself doubting whether that is the case with this new foe that has earned the ire of gamers. That is because this week, gamers have rallied against the most powerful country in the actual real world, 'the People's Republic' of China.

Maybe you've caught wind about this in snippets and thought; "Wow, China's in the news a lot recently. I wonder if it's all related?" To which the answer is yes, it all very much is. That is why it can be hard to explain everything in a cohesive manner. Nevertheless, I will try and promptly fail, so bear with me. (Oh, and a lot of this is general world news, so if I get some details wrong blame it on my disposition against watching TV news. BBC makes my eyes bleed.) Very basically; there was a 19 year old man who was vacationing in Taiwan and ended up murdering his pregnant girlfriend. (Gruesome, I know, but this is only the background right now.) He ended up fleeing to Hong Kong before being arrested by police. Taiwanese officials then asked for the man to be extradited back to their country, however this could not be achieved due to the lack of an extradition treaty between the two countries. A bill was drawn up; however, Taiwan, which is treated as a puppet-state by China, added a clause that would rope China in and allow them to enforce a lot of their imposing censorship laws upon Hong Kong and extradite anyone to the mainland for punishments.

At this point, the specifics of the story go into the background of Hong Kong as a city, and the weird area it sits in as an independent entity and another extension of China. This goes back to 1997, at least, when Hong Kong was transferred from British rule over to China after an expiration date, and likely a lot further back with all kinds of backroom dealings. I'm no expert of all the minute details happening over there, but I am a believer in personal freedoms and understand that surrendering more control to the most powerful tyrant in the world is a good way to lose those freedoms.

The people of Hong Kong rallied against the bill and took to the streets in order to voice their displeasure on the world stage. That is the state of strife that has existed in Hong Kong for the past few months now, and despite the time that has elapsed in which the government could have killed the potential China deal, not enough has changed and the riots are still getting worse. Very recently a protester was shot and wounded by the police, and this is just the beginning of how bad the situation could end up. I don't intend to incite any undue fears, but the Chinese government do have a history of dealing with protests in a very brutal fashion. Remember the Tienanmen Square massacre that definitely happened? China says it didn't.

But what does any of this have to do with gaming? Well, I'm glad you asked. You see, there is this little game that goes by the name of Hearthstone; it has a modest following and even boasts some competitions with quaint prize pools. Okay I'm being facetious, Hearthstone grandmaster tournaments are some of the biggest events in E-Sports and have some of the grandest prizes. For those that like such things, I.e. not me, your yearly highlight is likely these legendary card game matches that are sponsored by Blizzard themselves. This is probably the reason why the livestreams that broadcast these events pull in millions of eyes from all over the world, all fans excited to see the best of the best duke it out for extensive prize pools.

One such contender was a fellow who goes by the name; Blitzchung. I will admit that I am unfamiliar with this man or his style, but he was good enough to win some prize money through these events so I'm sure he had some sort of following prior to last week's conundrum. What conundrum? Oh, just the livestreamed interview with Blitzchung that ended with him donning a gasmask and speaking these words in Mandarin: "Liberate Hong Kong. Revolution of our age." Hailing from Hong Kong, Blitzchung expressed how his involvement in the movement back home had got in the way of his Hearthstone preparation and he felt it was his duty to spread the word about Hong Kong on the biggest platform that he could.

The consequences were swift and harsh. Blizzard promptly removed Blitzchung from their Grandmaster tournament, seized his prize winnings and banned him from the tournament for a full year. They also thought it prudent to fire the two commentators who were present for the message and who ducked under their table when he spoke. Apparently Blizzard had concluded they must be involved due to one declaring "Say the eight words and then we'll end the interview" before his declaration. In explanation of their actions, Blizzard cited a vague clause in their TOS about 'not bringing dispute upon oneself or Blizzard' before calling it a day.

This, understandably, left a whole number of people very confused as to what just happened, and more importantly, why? The man was a citizen of Hong Kong, after all, so why would an American Company take a hard line stance about him making a political statement related to his home? Sure, they could be dissatisfied about being used as someone's platform on Blizzard's Stream, but that would only warrant a slap on the wrist, not this salt-the-earth approach. Well, the answer is quiet simple, really. Prepare thyself for business talk.

You see, Activision was bought by Vivendi back in 2008 in order to merge their subsidiary, Vivendi games, with Activision's subsidiary, Blizzard, so that they could benefit off the success of World of Warcraft. In 2013 Activision Blizzard announced their plans to buy back their shares from Vivendi and become independent, however they would need a considerable pool of money for that. Luckily, like Satan himself, Chinese company Tencent swooped in and funded the transition for an undisclosed amount. To this day, Tencent still hold 5% of Activision Blizzard's soul- I mean, stock.

In the years that have followed, Activision Blizzard have held a close, exclusive, relationship with China. Even releasing a Chinese exclusive Free-to-play version of Call of Duty which had a crappy Battle Royale system back before even Fortnite was a thing. It shouldn't come as any surprise, then, that Blizzard would be willing to censor China's attempt to seize control of Hong Kong without a moment's hesitation. "But isn't that a little bit conspiratorial? Why would the Chinese government use one of their private companies' influence to silence dissent on their political actions? I mean, I know that their censorship is legendary, but this would be taking that concept a bit far." Well, if you don't believe me, just take a look at another example of this very same thing that happened in the same week. (Amazingly.)

NBA (The real one, not 2K's travesty of a game series) has always been as big in China as it is in America. In fact, some hopeful players have come from the scene in China to America in order to make it big. The populace enjoy it too, with matches and official merch being provided to their millions of Chinese fans due to a very lucrative partnership between sports companies who's names I don't care enough to look up. That harmony came into question, however, when the manager of NBA's Houston Rockets sent out an image on his private twitter account reading "Fight for freedom, Stand with Hong Kong."

This fallout was even more apocalyptic than the Hearthstone's. The tweet was deleted in hours with the manager issuing an apology shortly afterwords. CTrip, China's biggest online travel website, burned all of their NBA related tickets and travel products; Dicos, a Chinese fast-food chain, suspended all marketing and publicity activities and Wzun, a skin care brand, straight-up cancelled all of their cooperation with the NBA. (That one was probably for the best. Who the heck wants skincare products with Dennis Rodman's face on them?) Then there came a slew of public statements from big NBA stars which amounted to little more than kowtowing as spineless spokespeople rattled through a laundry list of things they love about China whilst mentioning how deplorable the manager was. Rumor has it that he's going to be on the chopping block too in the next couple of days. (He and Blitzchung should start a band.)

All that is pretty wild anyway; but, believe it or not, there was yet another issue of international censorship last week, although this one came from a very likely source; South Park. Matt Stone and Trey Parker's comedy series is well known for causing controversy with it's irreverent satire and often poe-faced commentary; and their latest episode: 'Band in China' was no different. (They should win an Oscar for the title alone.) In the episode, Randy Marsh decides to expand his new business, 'Tegrity farms, into an untapped market with plenty of potential customers; China. Unfortunately, Randy's business produces and sells Cannabis, which is highly illegal in China. He finds himself being thrown into a Chinese work camp, get tortured relentlessly and have Piglet and Winnie the Pooh as prison mates. (Current Chinese dictat- I mean, President- Xi Jinping is very sensitive to the fact that people compare him to Winnie the Pooh. As such, the regime has banned Winnie the Pooh in the whole country. I'm not joking.)

The B-Story follows the children as they start a band (again), only to have a manager come in and tell them to change a lot of their act in order to better fit the Chinese market. (Holding a mirror to the way that American companies capitulate to the demands/whims of Chinese audiences. Just look at the cringeworthy China-only additions to Iron Man 3 to see what I mean.) Predictably, the episode ended up being banned in China. Actually, the entire show was completely erased from Chinese Internet sources. Forums, social media, and streaming sites were scrubbed of all mention of 'South Park'. Matt and Trey noticed all this (and were likely expecting it) so they took to the show's twitter page to issue a statement. (I wish I knew how to insert Tweets, but I'll just quote it.) "Like the NBA, we welcome the Chinese censors into our homes and into our hearts. We too love money more than freedom and democracy. Xi doesn’t look just like Winnie the Pooh at all! Tune into our 300th episode this Wednesday at 10! Long live the Great Communist Party of China! May this autumn’s sorghum harvest be bountiful! We good now China?”

With all this context is mind, suddenly the Blizzard situation doesn't look so crazy, but that doesn't make it all any less disgraceful. Everyone who's anyone has started to voice their displeasure at Blizzard for bowing to the Chinese government, and you can bet that Reddit is the battleground for a lot of it. The forum had to be temporarily shut down due to the influx of messages, but is has since returned with all the memes, rants and denouncements that you would expect. (Including the beautiful image below that was posted by one u/Lawlow_lofi.) People want Blizzard to know that they are disgusted with their actions and stand by Blitzchung in solidarity (although I have noticed that the majority of this movement seems to be directed rage towards Blizzard rather than support for Hong Kong.)

Even people outside of the consumer market have weighed in, although not always verbally. Outside of Blizzard's office the company has a garish black statue that features the companies' values engraved into the floor. Some unknown Blizzard Devs, who seemingly disapproved of the removal of Blitzchung, stuck paper covering over the plaques that once read "Think Globally" and "Every Voice Matters". Even none games-industry folk have started to weigh in. United States Senator Ron Wyden tweeted; "Blizzard shows it is willing to humiliate itself to please the Chinese Communist Party. No American company should censor calls for freedom to make a quick buck." and Marco Rubio echoed similar sentiments. Does this classify as an international incident yet?

The general feeling, right now, seems to be that; those who support Blizzard are indirectly supporting the Chinese regime, and it honestly does feel that way. Many Hearthstone Vets are announcing that they're walking away from the game in disgust and Overwatch and WoW players are slowly picking up on the trend too. Modern Warfare fans seem to have completely ignored the fact that they are contributing too, (Activision and Blizzard are partners) but they already had to deal with the 'Survival mode' controversy last month, if they had to take anything else into account their brains might just explode!

All of this may not last longer than a week, except for those with a history for holding a grudge. (like me) But until the white hot fervour cools down and everyone goes back to pretending none of this happened, consumers are fighting dirtier than I ever seen. By far my favourite act of defiance has been people painting fan art of Chinese Overwatch character Mei as a symbol of the rebellion. Blizzard's Overwatch is a huge source of revenue for the company, and it's one of the few games that is allowed to be sold in China completely unchanged. (PUBG was re-named 'Games of Peace' and forced to take out the blood and rework all death animations to show players getting up and waving.) Protesters, realizing this, have drawn Mei wearing the banned gasmasks that represent the protests and donning pro Hong Kong attire. The ends of this is to turn Mei into a symbol of the protest, thus invoking the wrath of Chinese censors and forcing them to ban Overwatch in China, kicking Blizzard's bottom line right in the unmentionables. Now that's playing dirty and I absolutely love it! (Above image from u/Fish-IP)

Ultimately, I'm proud of the gaming community for taking a stand against these repressive practises, even if I think that it's an argument we'll never win. China is one of the most profitable markets in the world and arguably the most influential, what they say goes and the rest of the world are powerless, or unwilling, to stand up to them. We're talking about a regime that has been complicit with untold amounts of on-record Human Rights violations in direct response to it's own one-child policy alone, and has now introduced a two-child policy to start the cycle all over again. A regime that butchered people in one of the most brutal police actions in recorded history, (I'm talking about Tienanmen Square) and then just pretended that it didn't happen. A country who's President, Winnie JinPooh, decided to make himself president-for-life, and no world leader so much as batted an eye. I've often semi-joked about how Disney will be the first corporation to become a world-ruling sovereign entity, well, China's already half way there. They have the power and will to do whatever they want, however they want, and a small-scale, likely short-lived, consumer revolt isn't going to make them think twice. It's a fight that us gamers have no chance of winning. But I've watched enough Anime to know, that doesn't mean it's not a fight worth having.