U.N Denies life saving Cholera Vaccinations to Yemeni's in dire need

Recently reported by the New York Times, in a lengthy article which I have linked here, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/world/middleeast/world-health-organization-cholera-vaccine-yemen.html The UN has suspended all plans for any aid in providing the life-saving Cholera Vaccinations. This is murder plain and simple, if the Yemeni's die, Syria gets the land. The US and UN are working to make sure no Yemenis survives this crisis.

They are people same as you and me, men, women, children, being bombed, shot, starving to death and now dying of a preventable disease. Few talk about this small country, yet it has done no wrongs, and is now being torn apart. This is a genocide on the scale of what the Nazi's did to the Jewish people. Yet, most news outlets remain silent, the stories are rarely given much attention and while everyone is on about saving Syria. Yemen is being destroyed all to be given to the Syrians.

All it takes is 15 minutes on google to see this is the truth. These people need help, and we must not be silent.

Standing Rock under fire

I am sure as I type this late Sunday evening my fellow gamers are enjoying many of the great recent releases such as Mafia III, Watch Dogs 2, Battlefield 1 and countless others. Yet, as we sit in our cozy gaming zones, people fighting for the simple right of clean water are being attacked. They have been attacked with force that is supposedly non-lethal, yet in the temperatures at the Standing Rock site a blast of water can lead to the flu and any number of other potentially deadly ailments; add to that the tear gas lobbed at them and the rubber bullets fired upon them, some at point blank range and even in the head, this all leads to possibly fatal results. The mainstream media CNN, FOX and ABC have even reported that the Water Protectors struck first, which is a bold lie. They have never retaliated, or done anything except to throw back the tear gas that was first thrown at them.

Multiple reports on social media outlets Facebook and Twitter, report that the "non-lethal" rounds were even fired at the wounded in the site's triage center. Reports indicate that over 20 wounded Water Protectors have been rushed to the ER, most in serious condition; one elder even went into cardiac arrest. This is government sanctioned murder, the people attacking the unarmed activists are fully aware of the fatal repercussions of their actions. President Obama and President-Elect Trump have remained silent on this issue, most likely due to their pockets being lined with profit from the oil companies attempting murder on the innocent native's.

I am as excited as you are, about all the game's out now and about to be out, yet we have to find the time to also focus on important issues such as the massive human rights violations taking place at Standing Rock. If like me you're eagerly awaiting the latest Final Fantasy, remember that series is about good standing up against evil; just like Star Wars and the many other fandoms that our communities adore. ( Update 11-21-16. The wounded total over three hundred, with no reports of causalities thus far; however twenty six are in serious condition and have been transported to the hospital, some even had to have limbs amputated due to injuries sustained at the hands of the barbaric mercenaries. ) Visit http://standwithstandingrock.net/ to find out how you can help!

Why have we forgotten how to appreciate what we have?

When great achievements in gaming like No Man's Sky are being torn to shreds by the mainstream media, and by a larger than ever community of gamer's; I wonder why is it so hard for most to enjoy the product that exists. Why do we have to latch onto the idea of what could have been so tightly, that we totally lose sight of what we have? No Man's Sky is just one example of a game being ripped apart, all simply based on preconceived ideals of what a game should be. Which makes little sense, especially when your a part of such an ever-evolving art form. 

I do understand being misled by advertisements and pre-release hype. Believe me, I totally share your pain in that kind of frustration; yet, even in that frustration, we can not lose sight of the most important fact. Were we truly being misled, or were we given a great depth of information on a product that was unfinished? Video games are art, game markers are artists, and when you are making art you will have many ideas that may never make it into the finished product; there are no two ways around that, for one reason or another, things are left out. As an artist myself, I know the tremendous dilemma of what to leave in and what to remove. You will notice in the beginning of the article I did refer to games more as products than pieces of art. This was intentional as the line in our culture seems to be quite blurred, a game console is more of a product than a game is; although ultimately this has more to do with our use of the English language, the greater meaning of words due to how many meanings words can have. Yet, it was important to bring up that idea of a product vs. art to point out the difference in development. A game is very much a work of art, this means it is being made to meet the artist's vision; now in many ways's a console fits those qualifications. However, there is a very important reason why we have to make a distinction, between something that is more art than product or vice versa; the reason is that when we lose sight of what something truly is, we lose focus on how to properly assess what that something is.

Art is created to meet a vision that the artist has to ultimately provide an escape, something that the artist thinks will move, inspire or just entertain the viewer; ultimately a console is designed to facilitate these ideals, which is how it becomes more product than art. I wanted to point out these distinctions, because the fact is we are judging art far more like a product, than we are as true art. Judging a console as a product is a good thing, it contributes to better quality control and can improve the final product; yet when you judge art as a product, even with good intent, it destroy's more than it could help. During a game's development, I see nothing wrong with voicing our opinions and saying what if you do this, because ultimately that can create better art. Yet, we have to remember that once art is created we do have to judge it for what it is. Technical flaws are a grey area due to how patches and games work today; I will say that at the very least judging a game based purely on technical merit is a bit more fair. Still that does no service to the gaming community trying to decide what game they want to play. People look to reviews to judge a game, instead of watching a review to see if the game is right for them. This is not really most people's fault, when reviews fail to word or write clear enough to provide a distinction between a game that is bad to them, and a game that is just bad; we will no doubt be confused. It does show that most mainstream critics do not respect the medium, if they did they would be more careful with their wording and their general way of going about business. If you're employed by a mainstream company that reaches millions, you have a responsibility to either improve your craft and be accountable for bad reviews that are more or less, just pure nitpicking.

We have a herd mentality, we follow what people we perceive to be respectable and intelligent. After all a critic surely would emphasize that he did not enjoy the game due his own sensibilities, rather than imply the game was truly bad right? Well sometimes it is not their fault entirely, they have deadlines, they have to meet certain expectations right? Well, when a game is released to meet a deadline needing a little bit of cleaning up, much like perhaps a review, the faults are acknowledged, apologized for and fixed. So why when a critic has misjudged a game based only on what he likes, does he hide behind the cloak of "it is an opinion." How arrogant do you need to be when presented with clear facts as to why your review was at the least worded poorly, at worst dead wrong, that you refuse to even consider the fact that you are wrong? I mean surely if you're firing such harsh and misdirected criticism at art greater than your own, you can take some sharp, deserved and directed criticism of your own work. I realize that I opened myself up for a pretty deserved barrage of conflicting or differing opinions of my own, which is the point. I want to start a conversation; if my only intention was hearing the sound of my own voice, well I would just talk to myself some more. Our culture has a major issue taking accountability of our actions, which is why if proven wrong we need to admit we are wrong, if only for our own growth.

We have seen the kind of games that this culture's mentality creates, some are great truly and I can see no fault in many great games like The Witcher III, that clearly tried to ensure they answered the criticism leveled at the industry. Yet, what kind of message are we sending as the gaming masses about games like No Man's Sky or The Order 1886 for example? Many gamers clearly loved both games for the same reasons that many despised them for; which is part of free will you know. Everything is subjective we do not all enjoy the same kind of art, we never will. We may find art that we enjoy like others do, but for every person that shares our opinion, there is another that finds our opinion harmful, annoying or anything in between. Yet when you can clearly see that the industry is hurting creatively, it is easy to understand why. New ideas are tried and criticized, far more than they are admired for having the courage to be different.

Artist's can only take so much pressure, sure pressure makes diamonds and as an artist, I get that; but, if the goal is merely to entertain, and the game is not broken in the least and many find it to be really enjoyable, who is right? You could say that it does not matter, and to a point, that is largely true. Perhaps if we were just discussing message boards like Reddit, and how trolls love to rip things apart in front of an audience; but, we are not. We are discussing why as a herd, a great number of us have forgotten how to appreciate what we have. When like it or not your the largest source of information for the masses, and you encourage or egg on nit picking like we have seen with No Man's Sky or The Order 1886, you need to take accountability. We used to deal with game's being legitimately broken, like bugs that keep you from finishing the damn thing! Which can still pop up now and again yet, now these things can be fixed; most of the time they are fixed pretty fast, and more often than not these problems are totally blown out of proportion. A fire is lit by the media proclaiming a game a failure those who simply do not enjoy the game, are misled into thinking the game is purely bad.

You can argue it is just an opinion, yet we have seen the death of creativity as we knew it in the gaming industry, is that not proof enough that perhaps we need to rethink things moving forward?

Why are single-player games being forgotten?

Recently during an interview with GameSpot, EA executive Peter Moore had this to say. "very few people actually play the single-player on these kinds of games. That's what the data points to." These kind of games are shooters, and the game in question is Star Wars BattleFront.

This trend in the gaming world, truly grinds my gears... Not so long ago, about 8 years ago to be exact. Multi-player features were seen as the tacked on feature, the thing that was mostly left untouched. Now why is that? Because frankly, back then the multi-player features were tacked on. Sure there were some games that had great multi-player experiences, but those were the exceptions. Countless other games simply tacked on a basic multi-player mode, and these were left untouched. Why? Because little effort was put into them. Now the same can be said about some single-player features of today.

Do you see the connection? Gamers play good games, it does not matter if it has online, single or multi-player. The reason a gamer may skip the single player experience, in a game like Battlefield 4 is that it was tacked on. But, guess what? I still played Battlefield 4's campaign, I play all single-player campaigns. Do you know why? I prefer single-player experiences. And I am not the only one. The real reason gamers skip the single-player portion of some games, is that all the effort went into the multi-player.

But I will give you three huge examples of games, that balance both single and multi-player experiences. Gears of War, Killzone and Halo, regardless if you like those games, they both had great single and multi-player features. Both the single and multi-player components got the same level of polish, neither were tacked on. The moral of the story, is to polish the entire gaming experience, and not just the most popular aspect.

When a game has both multi and single-player modes, if one is not given the same level of polish, gamers will feel cheated. There is this horrible notion, that there are more people who prefer multi-player games. It is not true, even my friends who are die-hard online gamers, still enjoy single-player games. I do not know a single gamer who only plays one kind of game. While I am sure there are gamers out there like that, they are the minority. 

Most gamers enjoy variety, I know I do. The gaming industry is reading the data wrong. Gamers are not skipping single-player games cause they don't prefer them, just like they weren't skipping multi-player games back in the day. No, gamers skip certain games based on the game's quality not the kind of game it is. Although there is recent data, that could suggest gamers would skip a multiplayer only game. Which I also do not think is true.

But, if you take a game that had a single-player mode, make a sequel and drop a major feature to save money. You may piss off a good number of gamers. Am I excited for the new Star Wars Battlefront? Yes, and I am going to buy it on launch. But I am very disappointed that we have lost out on the possibility of an incredible campaign feature. 

But I am equally saddened, that the gaming media choose to slaughter a great single-player game this year. The Order 1886 is still one of my favorite games this year, and I have replayed that sucker at least five times now. That game may have been short but it was a great single-player experience. And because it was on the shorter side, and lacked online play, the media choose to sandbag it. Is a great game for everyone? No, but for fans of great single-player shooters it is a terrific game.

The gaming media may want you to believe that gamers are not into single-player games. They may sandbag a single-player game that has flaws like any other game, just to make a point. And it is this wheel of constant negativity that bothers me the most about the industry. I do not care that the industry is based on making money. I am not bothered by the preorder and DLC trends. What I am bothered by is the shortsightedness that is bringing the industry down. 

Every major site that does any kind of gaming review, always decides when they dislike a game to blast it to pieces. And most gamers don't care and defend it as just their opinion. If someone is discussing a game is one thing, but if your writing reviews for a living, you should learn to be more professional than some random blogger. 

Yes, a review is just an opinion, but the power of the major media sites is too huge to ignore. They set trends and kill sales. And some gamers may say, they are keeping us from wasting our money on a bad game, but that is rarely the case. The constant stream of negativity only keeps gamers from experiencing good games, cause they were led to believe these games were bad or broken. However, the only real issue with most of these games, is that they were not the reviewer's kind of game. 

Single-player experiences are being left behind or forgotten in some cases, not because gamers have forgotten them, but because the industry has neglected them. Whether that is mainly from the industry misreading trends, or the negative spin of the gaming media, is kind of a toss up. Getting back to the catalyst for this article, Peter Moore's statement was idiotic, but also not unexpected.

We have been seeing this kind of mentality for a while in the industry. And it is a shame that a single-player component in Star Wars Battlefront, was a casualty of this mindset. But there is good news. Single-player games are here to stay, and there are tons coming out this and next year. While the media likes to make these things into some big deal. The truth is it's just spin. While some things in the industry have changed in recent times. For the most part the heart is still the same. 

The only real issue in the gaming world, is the mass amounts of negativity that is constantly spewing over all the fun. This is an industry and community based around escapism and fun. And people seem to forget that. It does not matter if a game is good or bad, all that matters is if you have fun.         

Where did they go, and why did no one protect them? Gaming preservation halted by the ESA

The "EFF" ( Electronic Frontier Foundation) has been trying to take steps to preserve gaming history, recently, however, the "ESA" (Entertainment Software Association) has done its best to shut down these attempts. What the "EFF" is asking for, is to allow game enthusiasts, museums, and academics certain exemptions, from the "Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s anti-circumvention provisions" so that they can modify certain games to be playable after the servers are shut down or, the systems to play these games become unavailable. What the "EFF" is simply trying to do, is to allow games to be archived and preserved for future gamers and research. The "EFF" contacted the Copyright Office to ask for this exemption, needless to say it did not take long for the "ESA" to send the Copyright Office a letter to try and stop the "EFF".

The "ESA" states that any modification is a form of video game piracy, which is simply untrue and a complete exaggeration. What the "EFF" is trying to do, is keep games playable, games that may become impossible to find or, that need hardware that is unavailable. This is not to create loopholes for piracy, this is about preserving our gaming history and culture. While the "ESA" would try to make you believe their reasons are about piracy, they are in fact only trying to stop this to protect profits. Simply put, the archiving of games using the "EFF's" methods, is not profitable. This is the only reason the "ESA" is against the "EFF's" proposals. Now I disagree with what the "ESA is doing, I do understand trying to protect your earnings, however if these games are no longer produced they are not losing a single cent.

I can understand they do not want things to be given away freely, they do not want to lose out on a chance to make money. The "ESA" is simply trying to protect the industries bottom line. Regardless of the reasons, if the "ESA" does not want our history preserved in this way, they need to find some other way. If they are going to put a stop to the good work the "EFF" is doing, they need to supplement the work with their own preservation measures. Preserving gaming history is the most important issue in our community today. I hate that in 5 years time, some of the games I have played and loved, these wonderful experiences could be gone forever. And while my only concern is for my fellow gamer, I can understand the needs of the industry. 

I do believe much like film, music and written works, that game designers and creators deserve to get royalties and to be compensated for their phenomenal work. And I can understand why people like the "ESA" would not want games to be freely available. So, find another solution, help preserve gaming history and help the industry continue to thrive. Give the people who want to preserve the gaming communities culture, an alternative to archive and protect gaming's history. Would it be amazing if we could freely access classic games? Hell yes, it would be awesome to just download a game I used to love, and be able to play it whenever I want. Nevertheless, I know that is an unreasonable request to place on the industry.

My passion for gaming preservation is why I am a supporter of "remasters". While some people see these remastered ports as a cheap cash in, I simply see them as a way of keeping great games playable on new hardware. I actually enjoy playing most of these re-releases, most of them have been very well done and they do more good than harm. Still, this is not the best way to preserve our games, because it only preserves a tiny portion of our history. Film, music, written works, and even comic books are seen as being worthy of preservation, why is gaming not treated the same way? These other art-forms have been protected for years, yet when someone tries to apply the same protection to gaming, they are rarely taken as seriously. One day some of the games we love may be gone, and we will think, where did they go, and why did no one protect them?

What saddens me the most, is that the majority of gamers are so busy trashing every new or popular game release, that one of the few issues that really matters is pushed to the side and forgotten. Instead of talking about protecting our history, we are busy fighting among ourselves about which game sucks the least. There was a time when gamers just talked about their love of gaming, and I miss that time. Gamers used to talk about the games they loved, we would give each other recommendations about the latest and greatest game we got. Now all I hear is the extreme negativity, about nearly every game that comes out. Where did the fun go? Where did our passion for this incredible industry go?

Gaming has always been a source of fun and good times for me. As a gamer I know I am so lucky to be in this time, all the fantastic technology we have at our fingertips is staggering. The games also only seem to be getting better. Yet all I hear is about how the new game sucks. I think if out history was preserved if you could see what gaming was like 15 years ago, today's gamers might see things a little differently. Especially when you are able to play the games you have so many wonderful memories of. Because then your able to see the memories you have, can be better than the actual experience. Still, it is also good to replay those games, so you can relive those feelings that game gave you. And reliving those experiences can be incredibly meaningful, this is why I believe so strongly in gaming preservation.  

So if the "ESA" has any better ideas on how to protect gaming's legacy I'm all ears, however, if they have no better alternative stand aside and let these passionate gamers save our memories. This is not about "video game piracy", this is about letting the gamers of tomorrow experience the games of yesterday. While I understand the "ESA's" motivations, I also know if they have problems with this solution they need to give us an alternative.

For information on video game preservation and more head to the "EFF's" official site https://www.eff.org/ 

Here is also a list of other groups or organizations focused on gaming's preservation or gaming history. 

Video Game and Arcade Preservation Society http://www.arcade-museum.com/vaps/   

European Federation of Game Archives, Museums and Preservation Projects http://www.efgamp.eu/

International Arcade Museum http://www.arcade-museum.com/

Hardcore Gaming 101 http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/

Unseen 64 http://www.unseen64.net/