This Saturday the unthinkable occurred, Fedor Emelianenko - unbeatable heavyweight Mixed Martial Artist, was toppled by +500 underdog Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu master Fabricio Werdum. The MMA world has been shocked to say the least.

Honestly, I am not surprised as much as I am mad at myself for not putting the bet down on Werdum. It was such a solid underdog play, this should serve as a reminder the next fight I wanna place a bet on. Anyways, so what makes this news interesting as well, is that this guy was billed as the unbeatable, or the most dangerous man on the planet,etc. And now he has lost to a guy that got booted from the UFC after being flat-lined by Junior Dos Santos (on his debut no less).

The reason this is a big deal is that the promotion Strikeforce has now had a few of its biggest stars beaten almost back-to-back. Earlier this year Jake Shields beat recent Strikeforce acquisition (and 4-1 favorite) Dan Henderson. Strikeforce paid Dan allegedly a handsome sum in jumping from UFC. They built an advertising campaign centered around both the former Pride Champions and their arrival to Showtime, and now those guys have lost.

What does this mean when Fedor has 1 more fight left on his contract and the superfight with Strikeforce Champ Allister Overeem out of the picture - who does he fight and will people be interested? If Jake leaves, even if Hendo goes through the gauntlet on his way to becoming the champ - would Sheilds leaving give the title any less credibility? 

Hey, its a tough sport! What can you do.. 

OK.. by now I'm sure you'll have read the news surronding Gizmodo editor Jason Chen and his property seized by California's Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team. All I can say about it is that's pretty rediculous if you ask me. I don't understand why, with all the attention surronding the leak of the recent iphone v4, that they would want to associate themselves with something like this. Only thing I can understand about it is regarding the sales of current iphones (which by the way seem to have no problems selling as reported in Apple's most recent earnings statement), however it seems a tad - how do you say - dick-headish? Maybe thats just me.. but for all the positive things going for Apple's finances and all the negative things coming from troubled developers from working within their closed systems or having applications approved - it seems like maybe not the smartest time to bring any more news that makes you guys seem like the most evil fucking corporation that you seem to be.

I don't know about you but I am actually kind of excited for Heavy Rain's release. At first it seemed like it wasn't all it's cracked up to be, but it now at looks as if things have swayed in favor for the PS3 exclusive.

I think its safe to say that this is one I'm adding to my collection. Quantic Dream is known for coming up with pretty ambitious games, this one is definitely shaping up to be another classic. Question is... With so many games competing for my attention right now, when will I ever get a moment to enjoy it :/

&

Ok, I think it's fair to say that DRM is becoming a bit of a annoyance and unnecessary if not trivial practice. Above is an example I recently came across while browsing the webernet, and it serves to illustrate a point. Why as a paying customer, am I subject to a worse experience than that of someone who illegal obtained the materials?

Recently I became a bit of an unwilling participant in this game, and I say that because I fully accept responsibility for my own pool of piss to sit in. A long time ago, I used to be a hobbyist game console programmer and in order to run unsigned code, that resulted in me needing to modify the console. When the Wii first came out, I bought one and later modded it. Nintendo has been one of the largest ass-ambassadors of no mercy (along with the MPAA, RIAA, and many more..), in that they will go after the jugular to anyone threatening their earning potential. I think Nintendo's focus should be more centered around publishing quality titles not just large quantities of garbage, and should revisit their pricing model for games (They aren't pushing many games on best seller lists and probably benefit from setting multiple price tiers/levels) but the focus of this writing is on another topic. So recently I decided to dust my Wii off and play the damn thing (The last time I remember using it I think was almost two years ago.) and I go to pop in the New Super Mario Bros. and it wants me to system update, and flat out telling me it has the potential to shit on my face and brick on me if I installed a mod-chip. Now you have to appreciate that they want to protect themselves against people playing pirated games, but here we are with a legitimate copy I purchased, that I am terrified to play because theres a possibility it will kill my system when it goes to update :( T hanks jerks.

But Nintendo's not alone in this war on consumers, Ubisoft recently got its fair share of bad press for its stupid move but they are just one of many, many countless public relation nightmares caused by the effort to enforce digital rights management the complete opposite way that should be gone about it. If your DRM actually effects the quality of you actually produce and present to your consumer, that speaks volumes in itself. I am convinced there are other smart people out there who can come up with less intrusive or ridiculous ways to implement this strategy as it applies to your content, and if not, then come hire me and I will teach you. Fuck it, I will even give you the information for free just so we all can benefit as a whole. 

Pay attention Sega. This is something the whole industry could benefit from actually. Put your game out on 3 platforms, and the multi-player base will likely be smaller unfortunately. What you should really start striving towards is allowing your Playstation, Xbox and PC customers all play against each other online. In order for the multiplayer and overall longevity of the title to sustain (DLC, etc), cross-platform play would open up the greater likelihood that the people who enjoy the multiplayer, will always have some people to compete against as well as the success of their alternate revenue streams (DLC). Games like this in particular I see doing alright overall across all three platforms, but ultimately the number of players online will dwindle. I have faith the industry will eventually adopt a the videogame as a medium similar to that of a movie, where the consoles will eventually just play one format of game and we can buy the hardware off of different companies, and all play happily together online... (Note: PC's are pretty sweet, and at least you can have total control of the components, but we all benefit from a generation of hardware like the current PS3, 360 [in terms of similarity] Right?.. maybe I'm just baked.)

Video game publishers are seriously starting to piss me off.

I read recently that Electronic Arts (one of my most hated companies) have "begun" prepping DLC for their latest title Dante's Inferno. This struck me as odd. At the time the game hadn't actually released yet, so where was the indication that it would A) be a hit/mega seller, or B) generate enough popularity and interest to be deserving of additional content? Hmmm... Maybe thats because of the paradigm shift in the industry that now has companies seeing nothing but big green dollar signs. I'm talking about the latest and greatest initiatives to present Downloadable Content to consumers. Now don't get me wrong, I love the idea of being able to purchase small patches or additions, expansions if you will, to a title I have purchased and enjoyed thoroughly. What I do not like, is how I am seeing trailers or reading all sorts of information regarding it before I can even buy the retail version of the game.

The way I see it, I'm almost certain that when designing the games these games, companies are sleazily looking to nickel and dime their loyal customers by stripping out content intended to be in the retail version, exclusively so they can repackage and redistribute it for an additional fee. It seems like a great economical strategy for these guys. I would not be one bit surprised if Dante's Inferno was to include all of said DLC, but some smart executive decided that "Hey, by leaving this stuff out - we can actually just charge them extra for these features". 

Back in the good ol' days, we used to have expansion packs. Typically these would release sometime after the game had been a proven success, and would give you more reasons to keep playing and enjoying a title you were particularily fond of. These days, DLC and other paid 'features' are being pumped into games wherever they see an available opportunity to charge for content. Case and point - I am a fan of the NHL series from Electronic Arts. This year we had the pleasure of purchasing stat and equiptment upgrades. Now, this wasn't actually too sleazy a move. You could actually unlock all of these rewards through playing the game. The problem was, in order to do so, you really had to go through some rediculously stupid challenges. Some of which, still did not unlock your reward - in some cases, not following a particular order of completion, would render that reward locked indefinately with the only ability to unlock coming through a purchase. Similariy EA has done so with the Skate series, enabling all of the games locations unlocked if you would pony up rather than struggle through some of their (yet again) rediculous challenges designed to unlock as you progress. Now the major problem I had with the NHL case, was that in order to be competitive in the online mode for the game, you needed to obtain some of these unlockables. Anyone who had been playing since the release can attest to the unbelievable unbalancing of characters who had and who hadn't. Essentially, this resulted in 90% of the people I know who played the game purchasing upgrades, and the other 10% stopped playing all together.

That was just one example of what I consider to be a pretty scummy move. In some cases we have even found that pay DLC may have been included on the disc only to be unlocked after a code had been purchased from PSN or XBL (whichever your poison). Now that is downright evil.

I'm not against DLC, I just believe the subject should be approached with some morality. A studio should set out a very clear intention for their game, while also some potential DLC ideas, but should not even begin to work on the extra stuff until the game has shipped and been well received enough to warrant such a thing. I'm all for standing behind your game, supporting it over time, but I wont stand for taking advantage of your fan base or for scheming up ways to turn a $60 game into an over $100 investment for a gamer - only to receive what he/she should have in the first place. If this is going to be the case, we need to start avoiding these games and studios like the plauge until they reduce the prices on those games and it starts making a stronger case for releasing only bits of it at a time. You know, we do have a such thing as episodic content as well, and it's actually a pretty wonderful idea. And it may even benefit developers and gamers to take note of how Sony approached Siren: Blood Curse, which not only is offered as a full game (download or retail), but also as a game split into episodic chunks. (Granted that has NOTHING to do with DLC, its just something I thought was a pretty sweet idea for a game that also released as a full version on a disc. Sam & Max would be another example, but they release like one episode a year, so nobody follows what the f*&% they're doin')

But this could just be my opinion.  

Yes, thats right. I want you to sell Palm. I want you to sell them so that I can afford more. I can't believe that this stock has taken this kind of hit. This is ridiculously under valued right now as we head into CES.

Think about it!

Palm CEO Jon Rubenstein has been talking about CES.

Palm has been teasing CES 2010.

Although they are playing coy with us, those of us who have been using and getting to know the Pre for the past little while really understand the untapped potential inside the device and are patiently waiting for the WebOS updates that will unlock the real power.

Ares just went open beta last night and developers everywhere cannot stop gushing. It's an excellent step in the right direction and the direct result of this is a development environment available to anybody with a computer, and the internet. This could very well change the game. Providing Palm doesn't implement any license fees for amateur development, this could mean that every single person with a computer and an internet connection is a potential WebOS developer. Not only that, but its actually quite impressive.

We already know Palm has joined Adobe's Open Screen Project and can expect WebOS to be one of the first platforms to adopt Flash, and can't even begin to lecture you on why that is a big deal. You should know this by now.

Anybody's guess is as good as mine for what's planned, but I wouldn't be surprised to see some applications that have access to the GPU finally, in order to show they are legit they'll need some games. Why carry a GPU thats capable only to not give any developer access? That's silliness. It's coming, we know it. Hopefully if not at CES they do talk about it sometime soon.

My point is manly this.. I'm sorry to see all the investor confidence flee this company when its doing so many great things, has a great piece of technology on its hands, and has a future that actually gets brighter as the products lifespan increases!

I for one can't wait to hear the exciting new things that are coming.

Big news this week for everyone who was waiting for Apple's latest press event regarding iPod products, namely new additions to the popular touch line-up. 

This was a pretty crappy event from what I read.

A couple of stand-out points in my mind were:

• Lack of an addition of a camera to the touch. Of course we will just have to wait until next year I suppose for that. They increased the storage size at least... Though the prices are a bit high.
• The addition of ring-tones for the iPhone to iTunes. $1.29?? For the ring-tone? Maybe I mis-interpreted this one. Because the price of a song is $1.29 as well correct? So I suppose you when you buy a song, you automatically get to activate it as a ring-tone as well right? Because if not that would be pretty stupid. It would be pretty stupid for someone to purchase the same song twice because they wanted to hear it for 30 seconds whenever they might have somebody dumber than themselves who maybe fancies a retarded conversation.
• Finally an addition of a FM radio. Only iPod I've known to date to have a built in transmitter.. only the oldest fucking technology finally available albeit on its deathbed. It's one of the reasons I hadn't owned an iPod prior to the original 2G iPhone. I just couldn't find a reason why an iPod was superior to any other DAP.

Addition of special album features are key, that shit should have been around for ages. I'm pretty sure I was pitching that idea around when I was seven years old. It's just a shame this is probably going to drive the cost of the album up which I hope I'm wrong about, as the cost got higher because sales did better and they are only helping allot more people find a reason to pirate rather than obtain legally.

I think they confidently showed a few signs boasting about the amount of songs they sell on iTunes and how many iPods they've sold. This is the part where I start to disconnect with whats going on and start wondering if this is for the fans of the products, consumers that are looking for the next big thing, or shareholders interest. They always seem to lack in how far they go with the tiniest incremental advances in their newest technology but yet have a highest percentage of all competing brands in the portable audio market.

When is this tablet thing coming?

Oh well, I don't know what else might have been important to cover that happened there. I'm sure a couple crappy bands may have dropped by and theres probably a new hip commercial.