I think I have to be one of the only people for miles around that owns an Xbox 360 but doesn't actually have Xbox live. I did used to have it a few years ago however, but I simply never renewed it and have kept away from it ever since. There were a few reasons I had for doing this such as schedule conflicts, lack of variety (I only really played halo 2), a little bit of addiction, but it was primarily due to the sheer amount of sore losers, back chat, and slagging matches that sort of took the fun away for me.

One of my first experiences online was whilst playing odd ball or rather after it, in the lobby. I one the game by getting the most points with the ball which is the objective of that particular mode. but some one found the need to start calling me all the names under the sun because he thought that he should have one because he got more kills (the most annoying thing was that he sounded about 8 years old). i had many more similar experiences such as complaints about lagging or "noobs" and it just irritated the hell out of me. the straw that broke the camels back and caused me to stay away from online play until present day was an incident during a game with some americans. One of the players (on my own team) decided to start hurling abuse at another player because they weren't as good and kept getting killed. I decided to try and calm the situation by saying "calm down its just a game". The player then began to mock the way I pronounced the word game, saying that it sounded stupid. I told him that as I was from England and the language we were both speaking was English that it was more likely that he was pronouncing it incorrectly (not quite as politely as that though).

Don't get me wrong, I can give and take smack talk as well as the next guy (just ask your mom ;D) but being called an F-ing C word by a 10 year old child you have never even met just seemed a little Unnecessary to me and it was frustrating that I couldn't show them the back of my hand to teach them some manners.

Nowadays I prefer the company of friends and maybe a few beers or something for multiplayer. I still get the back chat but its more like friendly banter because we know each other. If I called a person on the street an F-ing C word, I would get the snot kicked out of me by everyone in a 5 meter radius.

I think if I were to go back online, I would probably have to stick to playing with my mates rather than randoms. its just more fun that way if you ask me. It's only a once a moth or so kind of deal though as we usually go out to a night club somewhere instead plus I don't really see them that much while I'm at Uni.

MSN is the same sort of deal. It started out great, say hi to your mates and see how they are doing etc but again I decided to pack it in after a while. One: people you don't like always talk to you the most and when you block them, their mates tell them which makes things rather awkward. Two, the majority of conversations are extremely dull and go something like this:

: hi
: Hi
: How are you?
: Im good thanx, you?
: im good
: What you been up to?
: Not much really, you?
: same
: g2g now
: k, cya
: bye xxx

Three: the abbreviations became so ridiculous, you needed to literally ask what they mean which defeats the whole object. A few of my favorite examples include; wuu2, lol, lmao, lmfao, rofl, g2g. the list goes on, there is a website somewhere that gives a list of hundreds of them but I cant remember it. And four: those god damned Emoticon things that people download along with every virus under the sun and then the instant they use it in a conversation, they transmit them to you. So yea, I stick to my phone if I need to speak to someone.

The game industry today is just like all other industries. Everyone is facing the sharp end of the stick with all this talk about economic recession. I admit that things are getting tough and its probably not going to stop anytime soon but has anyone considered the fact that this has happened several times before in the past century and it hasn't been an issue until now? rubbish!

Heres how I think the problem should be resolved: people should stop worrying, spend less/save more money rather than buying rubbish like that £300 dress or a new exhaust for your Ford shit-box and get on with there lives. And for god's sake, stop borrowing money that you cant F-ing pay back! It wont go away if everyone gets a loan and then doesn't pay it back because they see an advert on TV about a legislation that negates the money they owe.

Now that I'm done ranting I suppose I need to look into how this has affected the game industry and as a result, will affect me. First of all, the obvious fact is there will be some cuts. Cuts in jobs and cuts in pay. It just cant be helped. But like I said, this has happened before and it may take a few years but things will eventually get better.

we haven't seen it yet but this decline in the economy will eventually start to show in the quality of games which is an unfortunate probability. either that or the industry will suffer more because people haven't been able to afford the games on the shelves that they would have bought 5 or so years ago. To be honest, the only thing I am worried about is getting the job in the first place. I wouldn't be too bothered about working for a fairly low wage. I think i would just be grateful that i got the job in the first place and that I'm not stacking shelves in my local Tesco metro (no offense to anyone that works in Tesco metro, someone has to do it). if the people in industry are upset about any set backs, i would be glad i have a job that i enjoy and i can show my creativity through if i was them.

My own personal definition of creativity is this: Creativity is making something, not because you have to, but because you want to.

creativity is picking up a paintbrush and painting the scene in front of you just because you feel like it. it manifests itself in many forms such as painting, sculpture, film, music, literature and many more. our creativity is one of our fundamental traits of being a human. it separates us from other animals and is what makes life, living rather than existing.

As far as games like halo and Half life are concerned, the Creativity begins at the very beginning with the plot. Details such as why is the world in this state are explored and ideas develop. Artists try their best to depict what is described to them in a visually pleasing manner in the form of concept art. the visual style of the game is decided and level and character design begins. It might be a narrow minded way of thinking and am probably wrong but once this process is complete the creativity is minimal as the artwork dictates what will be modeled and programmed into the game.

In order to show off my own creativity I think i need to find a particular genre that I enjoy working with. Im particularly fond of the survival horror genre and i have so many ideas that haven't been explored yet. I also really like the way the Art work is stylized. I love the dark eerie caverns with limited vision or the foggy forests with surprises around every corner. lighting is another thing that interests me in this genre. I want to show how the atmosphere can drastically change just by changing something as simple as lighting.

Gameplay is like a set of questions. What obstacles are in your way?(enemies, tasks, quests) how do you overcome those obstacles? (kill, complete, unlock) why do you need to overcome those obsticles?(the goal) Where is the goal?

I think Gameplay is the way those questions are answered. But answering them in a way that is interesting and possibly unexpected. driving a car around a circular circuit is not very fun as far as games go so why not add some obstacles? other drivers, debris, weapons, turns, chicanes even a loop and you have a the starting point of a game (sounds like mario Kart) Gameplay is making the journey from the start of the story to the end of the story as interesting and original as possible so that just as you get comfortable, you find out you need to unlock a door or kill a boss and it is important because it is what stops people from putting down the controller and keeps them going to the game shop for more.

I don't really watch that much TV but some of the stuff i watch includes comedies like the Mighty Boosh and scrubs as well as more serious stuff like band of brothers. I suppose what attracts me to these shows is that i can relate to some of the characters especially the cooky miss understood ones from the comedies such as JD (scrubs) and Chandler (friends) who often make jokes to get through awkward situations. The more serious characters such as lt. Richard Winters (band of brothers) are more complex and i think what attracts me about them is that I picture myself in that situation and wonder how i would react or whether I would even be able to function. As far as films go, i again, go for the more light hearted comic type films. ones that relate to me are often the ones i prefer. American pie is one all teens can relate too and the more recent Super Bad is another brilliant film that relates to the younger generation.

These traits in characters are all a combination of scripting, acting and appearance. I think these factors all play an equal part in any successful TV show, film, book etc. Super Bad is a good Example to use. The script depicts the mentality of a high-school student perfectly. the language they use and the way it is acted is fantastic and by making the appearance completely normal, it is very convincing.

I'd be the first one to admit that I am a bit of a Nintendo fanboy. Nintendo in my view have always been on top when it comes to ergonomic design. The SNES was Probably the last console they produced that didn't consider the shapes of the human hand. As early as the N64, Nintendo have produced controllers that are both comfortable and practical. As far as the console itself goes, I would have to say that the easiest to use was the N64 or possibly the SNES. plug the console in, turn on the TV, whack the cart in and flip the power switch. BISH, BASH, BOSH. simple as that. i must have been 4 or 5 when i first got my SNES and despite it being quite dangerous by todays standards, i set it up and started to play it with barely any help. The worst it has to be said for me was the PS2. when that tittle screen came up it was like someone tried to speak Portuguese to me or explain molecular biology. That was the first time i needed help with setting up a game

As far as aesthetics goes, I would say that although Nintendo have produced some nice looking consoles such as the game cube and WII, The Xbox 360 is the winner hands down. its sleek sweeping lines suggest almost sports car like looks. The controllers are pretty awesome as well. Its just a shame they always bloody brake!

I suppose in the future its impossible to tell how we will interact with games but judging from the success of the wII, we will probably end up flailing about like maniacs in our living rooms. I wouldn't count the controller out just yet though, I think it has a few years left yet.

Other then the obvious examples such as sports games, I have always thought of games as stories that are acted out by the player. I think the story line is a definite factor that most people take into account when buying a game, especially hardcore gamers. A strong story line helps immerse the player into the game which I have always thought was the purpose. This results in greater longevity and enjoyability in all areas of the game. However, the story line alone cannot hold a game together and it must be complimented by decent gameplay and visual effects.

In most cases the story in a game happens to the player as they have limited choice as to what happens and the beginning, middle and end are ultimately the same. There are a few titles on the market today that lean more towards the player making the story happen rather than the story happening to the player. Fable 2 and Fallout 3 spring to mind. These particular titles allow the player greater freedom as to what happens and when it happens. There are a number of alternate endings in both titles as well as side quests that can be done rather then the main story. This trait is becoming more common in games today as it can potentially double play time because the player wants to whiteness all endings.

I have always had an interest in RPGs that allow the player to customize aspects of the game such as characters and weapons but games like second life and World of Warcraft have never really interested me. I don't see the point in living an alternate life when you have your own. i suppose I could also say that it mite have something to do with the lack of story. I may be wrong with this but as far as I'm aware, these examples don't have a story behind them and simply rely on quest type missions for the entirety of the game which doesn't interest me. When I read a story, eventually I want to hear the end.

An art director is the main man when it comes to the art aspect of a game. They decide factors such as stylistic qualities of the game and have definite control over the way the final outcome looks. The Art director also has a long list of responsibilities. They have input into recruitment of the art team, must make regular checks on the team to make sure they are both conforming with the style and direction of the game as well as being within any limitations that they may have with technology which the art director must also be aware of. They must keep track of the production schedule and make sure that it is manageable and that the team is sticking to it as well as overseeing and guiding less experienced artists on the team.

I think that being an Art director of a game in contrast to that of a film requires a lot more responsibility and management skills. My reason for thinking this is that with a film, there are slightly fewer factors that need to be taken into account during the development process such as technology perimeters. I would say the difference is probably fractional though.

I think if I were to aspire to be an Art director, I would without a doubt have to drastically improve my artistic skills.I think my understanding of what a game should look like is fairly adequate andI think with a bit of experience, I could communicate and manage those ideas with a small team butI would probably find it difficult to manage larger teams that are used in most games developed today.

To me, the word gameplay means several things. First of all, the game has to be interesting with lots of things to do with your character, this then leads onto the second topic: length, its no good having a game that is brilliant to play for 10 minutes but is repetitive after that (assassins creed anyone?) other aspects might include story line but i wount go into that just yet. Then there is the third topic, Visuals; This aspect has become increasingly more important over the past few years especially with the development of new technology. The best example I can think of is the Wii (Wii sports in particular). I think its odd how a game can be both visually simple and short in length yet is surprisingly addictive. most of the people on my course will kill me if they read this but I actually like the idea of the Wii. My girlfriend's dad got a Wii and every time I went round, I would always check my fitness level to see if I got any better (until she got a bit annoyed). yet to more hardcore gamers, the idea is almost completely against what they stand for.

I would have to say that Game design takes place at the very beginning of the development stages all the way back with initial ideas, concepts and planning. designing a game is like creating a piece of art. without composition, the whole piece will be less successful then it potentially can be. I would definitely say that the design style and principles of the game strongly depend on the genre. put it this way; would the resident evil series have been nearly as successful if it was...say...Santa's elves trying to eat your brains? or a slightly less extreme example:- would it have been nearly as scary if it took place on a warm summers day rather than a foggy night?

I suppose in some ways, reviewers and other gaming journalists rely on the gaming market to keep their interest in gaming high. so by promoting games, they are in effect increasing the potential for a larger audience thus increasing their potential profit. On the other hand, journalists must keep the material published as accurate as possible in order to establish reliability. however, despite this reliability, the objective ranking system seem a bit flawed to me. The majority of the time, they don't take into account different peoples tastes in games. A good example of this is fable 2. I played the first game and it was fantastic in my view and when I heard that there was a sequel I was stoked. The previews and reviews all sounded promising but as soon as I laid my hands on it I was really quite disappointed. It seemed like they took all the good parts of the previous game and replaced them with mediocre parts. The problem was that the developers were trying to branch out to more casual gamers so they simplified the game which didn't impress me at all. It would be nice if they got a mixture of gamers and let them have a few minuets with the game or something along those lines and got feed back from them.

I think in reviewing and other forms of gaming journalism, it is important to have a certain amount of both objective and subjective research. it is important to give the facts but in such a commercial industry, it is also very important to give a point of view generated from actual experience. | found the NGJ manifesto really quite intriguing as I found I had a lot of similar opinions. I especially liked the quote "The worth of gaming lies in the gamer not the game". I wouldn't say that is the exact truth but I will say that it is important that research and the journalism is done by someone who fits into the target audience for that specific (it would be a cool contrast to have a small insight from a person at the opposite end of the spectrum as well).