Opinion | KitGuru https://www.kitguru.net KitGuru.net - Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards Sat, 19 Jun 2021 12:58:12 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3 https://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/cropped-KITGURU-Light-Background-SQUARE2-32x32.png Opinion | KitGuru https://www.kitguru.net 32 32 E3 2021: The winners, losers and inbetweeners https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/matthew-wilson/e3-2021-the-winners-losers-and-inbetweeners/ https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/matthew-wilson/e3-2021-the-winners-losers-and-inbetweeners/#respond Sat, 19 Jun 2021 12:58:12 +0000 https://www.kitguru.net/?p=520579 E3 2021 has officially wrapped up after several days of virtual conferences from major publishers. Microsoft and Nintendo had particularly good showings, but the event as a whole felt somewhat disjointed and dare I say, lacked the magic of previous E3 events. Let’s take a look back at the winners and losers of this year’s E3.

The post E3 2021: The winners, losers and inbetweeners first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
E3 2021 has officially wrapped up after several days of virtual conferences from major publishers. Microsoft and Nintendo had particularly good showings, but the event as a whole felt somewhat disjointed and dare I say, lacked the magic of previous E3 events. Let’s take a look back at the winners and losers of this year’s E3.

Winner: Xbox

Microsoft’s Xbox and Bethesda E3 showcase was the closest thing we had to a normal E3 presentation. It started off with a banger too, with Todd Howard immediately taking to the stage to introduce Starfield with its first proper trailer. The trailer was all captured in-game and the overhauled Creation Engine is looking great, but a lack of gameplay, story details and a late 2022 release date really held this back from being an all-time great E3 moment like Fallout 4's reveal.

Microsoft’s other marquee exclusive, Halo Infinite, also had an underwhelming outing. We did not get a new campaign gameplay demo to showcase the improvements made since last year’s showing. Instead, 343 Industries chose to focus on multiplayer, emphasising the fact that Halo Infinite multiplayer will be free to play and that we can expect playable alpha and beta tests over the summer. Unfortunately, no specific dates were given for these playtests, in-fact, Halo Infinite does not have a final release date, instead we are left with a vague ‘Holiday 2021’ release window.

Fortunately for Microsoft, it did not need Starfield or Halo Infinite to be great in order to ‘win’ E3 2021. With so many first-party studios now under the Xbox Game Studios umbrella, Microsoft was able to win with variety. One of the best reveals of E3 came from none other than Playground Games with Forza Horizon 5, showcasing stunning next-gen graphics and better yet, a November 9th release date. Microsoft also countered an upcoming PS5 exclusive, Deathloop, with another Arkane Studios game of its own – Redfall, due out in 2022.

Microsoft dipped into its bag of third-party partnerships too, revealing exclusives like “Stalker 2: Heart of Chernobyl” for April 2022 and Avalanche Studios’ “Contraband “.  Sea of Thieves is getting a crossover with Disney’s Pirates of the Caribbean, Battlefield 2042 debuted its multiplayer trailer during the Xbox showcase, Blizzard made a brief appearance to announce the release date for Diablo II: Resurrected and finally, we got a lot of Xbox Game Pass titles.

Xbox Game Pass was really the standout of the show. Out of the 30 games Microsoft showed, 27 of them are coming to Xbox Game Pass, including six months’ worth of headliners all coming in the very near future. Before the end of this year, one marquee game will be launching onto Xbox Game Pass every month, including Microsoft Flight Simulator, Psychonauts 2, Back 4 Blood, Forza Horizon 5, Age of Empires IV and Halo Infinite.

With all of this, Microsoft has sent a strong message – Xbox Game Pass is going to be the best deal in gaming for years to come.

Winner: Nintendo

Nintendo stopped doing live on-stage shows for E3 many years ago, replacing them with more regular Nintendo Direct streams. Still, Nintendo always saves its biggest hitters for the summer game announcement season and this year was no exception. Out of all the games Nintendo announced at E3 this year, the majority of them are releasing in 2021, bringing plenty of excitement to Nintendo Switch owners for the second half of the year.

Over the next six months, Nintendo will have Mario Golf: Super Rush, Monster Hunter Stories 2: Wings of Ruin, The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword HD, No More Heroes III, Metroid: Dread, Shin Megami Tensei V, Pokémon Brilliant Diamond/Shining Pearl, and another classic remake in Advance Wars 1+2: Reboot Camp.

Nintendo fans have a lot to look forward to next year as well. Square Enix has another HD-2D Switch exclusive in the works under the name “Project Triangle Strategy”, Game Freak will be releasing its most ambitious Pokémon game to date in the form of Pokémon Legends: Arceus and Ubisoft has Mario + Rabbids: Sparks of Hope lined up.

The Nintendo Direct ended as we all hoped it would, with a brand-new trailer for The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild 2. Somehow though, this ended up being double-edged sword. The trailer delivered new in-game footage, but it looked quite rough as the Nintendo Switch is beginning to show its age, raising one major question – where is the Nintendo Switch Pro?

The Nintendo Switch Pro has been spinning through the rumour mill for years now and just ahead of E3 2021, insiders with proven sources began claiming that we would see the upgraded console, and games that take advantage of it, prior to and during E3. This really raised the bar for Nintendo this year and led to the unfair expectation that we would finally see upcoming exclusives like Metroid Prime 4 and Bayonetta 3.

Nintendo tried its best to temper expectations by announcing that its E3 Direct would only focus on games and more importantly, games coming out this year. However, once the hype train starts moving in one direction, it is difficult to put a stop to it, leading to what should have been a highly exciting set of announcements falling a bit flat.

Still, as you will see in our upcoming segments, compared to other publishers, Nintendo ultimately came out ahead.

The Inbetweeners: Square Enix and Ubisoft

Square Enix and Ubisoft were in the same boat this year, with neither having a particularly good or bad showing at E3. If we take the highest and lowest points of E3 2021, these conferences sit firmly in the middle.

Square Enix is the most recent publisher to switch to an all-year round announcement model, with its own Square Enix Presents streams. Thanks to this, the reveal for Life is Strange: True Colours already took place back in March, so its re-appearance at E3 lacked the weight it normally would've had.

To make up for this, Square Enix had two major game reveals – Guardians of the Galaxy from Eidos Montreal and Stanger of Paradise: Final Fantasy Origin from Team Ninja.

After Marvel's Avengers fell flat in 2020 due to live service elements, bugs and microtransactions, Guardians of the Galaxy had an uphill battle. Fortunately, a lot of concerns were immediately alleviated by announcing that this game will be single-player and story-focused, free of any DLC or microtransactions. However, the snippets of gameplay that we did see made combat moments look slow and monotonous. Without a demo or any hands-on press previews to accompany the trailer, we are left to wonder what the hook of this game really is, outside of the Marvel branding.

Stanger of Paradise: Final Fantasy Origin is an action-focused Final Fantasy spin-off. Initially, leaks pointed towards this being a Souls-inspired take on Final Fantasy, but the trailer is much more akin to something like Devil May Cry in my opinion, with fast paced melee combat and a focus on spectacle when taking on bigger enemies.

This reveal should have been huge for Square Enix, as the publisher also shadow-dropped a playable demo right after the stream. The demo arrived in a broken and unplayable state, taking the sheen off of the announcement.

Ubisoft had decidedly more to show off compared to Square Enix, but rather than having a tight show with trailer after trailer, Ubisoft's hour and 40 minute long stream focused on developer-led deep dives into previously announced games, new content and DLC for previously released and upcoming games, as well as early looks at a handful of newly announced titles.

For Ubisoft, the E3 showcase seemed to be going through the motions. Previously announced games like Rainbow Six Extraction and Far Cry 6 have release dates and new gameplay footage, while already released titles like Watch Dogs: Legion, For Honor, The Crew 2, Assassin's Creed Valhalla, Trackmania and Brawlhalla bulked out the runtime with new DLCs, in-game events and expansion announcements.

There was a whole lot of ‘old' throughout Ubisoft's E3 conference, but it was saved by two major ‘first-look' trailers – Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora, and Mario + Rabbids: Sparks of Hope.

Ubisoft Massive has been working on Avatar for years and the first look at the game did not disappoint. Powered by the Snowdrop Engine, the world of Pandora is already looking incredible, full of alien creatures and human invaders. There is no true gameplay footage yet, but with a 2022 release date, it is much easier to get excited for.

Ubisoft's Mario + Rabbids: Sparks of Hope announcement was the saving grace of the show. Not only did we get a great cinematic trailer, but members of the development team followed up the reveal with new gameplay snippets showing the game in action, as Mario and friends venture through space to put a stop to the Rabbids. So far, all indications are that this will be an excellent follow-up to one of the Nintendo Switch's best exclusives.

Looking back on the conferences from Ubisoft and Square Enix, both publishers had legitimate reasons to be at E3 and had big announcements to make, saving them from the losers bracket, but there wasn't really enough to label them as winners either.

Losers: Capcom and the ESA

Capcom is one of the few publishers that really did not need to have a standalone presence at E3 this year. Resident Evil Village is already released and has already garnered critical and commercial acclaim, as has Monster Hunter Rise for the Nintendo Switch.

This left Capcom with extraordinarily little to announce during its E3 stream. We did get a new trailer for Monster Hunter Stories 2: Wings of Ruin, which admittedly looks like a fun spin-off, but it is also a previously announced game that is coming out in just a matter of weeks (July 9th on Switch and PC). The other ‘new game’ Capcom had to show was The Great Ace Attorney Chronicles, a re-release of two previously Japan-exclusive Ace Attorney games.

Outside of that, we got a new look at Re:Verse, the delayed multiplayer deathmatch mode for Resident Evil Village, as well as the vague promise that “additional DLC” is now in development for the game. Exactly what form this DLC will take is unknown.

With so little to show, why did Capcom bother having its own E3 stream at all? Well, that is a symptom of a much larger problem that E3 is facing. Previously, the ESA (Entertainment Software Association) would unify publishers from around the world and deliver a concentrated mega-week of announcements, interviews, panels, and demos.

Nowadays, most major publishers are organising announcements on their own terms and hosting their own streams on a more regular basis throughout the year. This puts smaller publishers in an awkward position, as it is still important to be aligned with the E3 brand to be seen as a strong industry presence, but big game announcements also need to be spread out more evenly to maintain mindshare and social engagement.

Ultimately, this year-long spread of reveals and announcements has led to E3 feeling less important than ever and at this point, it seems highly unlikely that the ESA can bring the magic back.

KitGuru Says: E3 2021 had its highs and lows but the overall prestige the event used to hold has withered away in recent years. Did many of you tune into E3 2021 this year? What were your overall thoughts on this year’s event?

The post E3 2021: The winners, losers and inbetweeners first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/matthew-wilson/e3-2021-the-winners-losers-and-inbetweeners/feed/ 0
Opinion: The Best Games of the Generation! https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/mustafa-mahmoud/opinion-the-best-games-of-the-generation/ https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/mustafa-mahmoud/opinion-the-best-games-of-the-generation/#respond Sat, 07 Nov 2020 09:00:33 +0000 https://www.kitguru.net/?p=491391 As we approach the final weeks of the Eighth generation of consoles, it's high time that we took a deep breath, looked back, and showed appreciation for all of the fun, exciting and emotional experiences that we’ve gone through over the past 7 years. Here we look back at some of the best PlayStation 4 and Xbox One video games.

The post Opinion: The Best Games of the Generation! first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
As we approach the final weeks of the Eighth generation of consoles, it's high time that we took a deep breath, looked back, and showed appreciation for all of the fun, exciting and emotional experiences that we’ve gone through over the past 7 years. This generation of video game systems may have had its ups and downs, its highs and lows, but there is no denying that these machines offered some of the greatest video games of all time. With that said, let's look back at some of the best PlayStation 4 and Xbox One video games.

Best Games of the Generation

Before we begin the list however, I should clarify the parameters of this discussion. Firstly, this list will not include any Nintendo Switch, Nintendo Wii U, or PC exclusive titles. While there have been many games released for these platforms during the life cycle of the Xbox One and PlayStation 4, both Nintendo’s systems, and the PC market operate on independent generational cycles. As such, any games which released exclusively for either of these platforms could not be included in this list – sorry Breath of the Wild.

Secondly, while I will try to keep spoilers to a minimum, many of these games’ most affecting moments are why I enjoy them so much. I will attempt to be vague with my descriptors, but do be warned that moments from these games may be spoiled for you.

Finally, and most crucially, these opinions are my own. Video games are wide, varied and cater to many different audiences. Some games are beloved by some and may be hated by others. This is okay. In fact, that is part of what makes video games so great as a whole: to be united by a single medium, while acknowledging that not everything will be to your liking makes for a healthy and creative industry, serving to push video games forward.

With all of the semantics out of the way, let's get into my top 6 video games of the generation.

The post Opinion: The Best Games of the Generation! first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/mustafa-mahmoud/opinion-the-best-games-of-the-generation/feed/ 0
Why the Future of Video Games Will Ditch the Traditional Screen https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/larry-alton/why-the-future-of-video-games-will-ditch-the-traditional-screen/ https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/larry-alton/why-the-future-of-video-games-will-ditch-the-traditional-screen/#respond Wed, 25 Apr 2018 07:10:14 +0000 https://www.kitguru.net/?p=371445 In 1983, the Nintendo Entertainment System was released, introducing a technological marvel that hooked an entire generation of gamers. Imagine what it would be like to show one of today’s 4K-resolution, VR-capable powerhouses to someone from that era, who believed Super Mario Bros. was about as high-tech as video games could get. It’s taken 35 …

The post Why the Future of Video Games Will Ditch the Traditional Screen first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
In 1983, the Nintendo Entertainment System was released, introducing a technological marvel that hooked an entire generation of gamers. Imagine what it would be like to show one of today’s 4K-resolution, VR-capable powerhouses to someone from that era, who believed Super Mario Bros. was about as high-tech as video games could get.

It’s taken 35 years to make that leap, and we keep inching forward in terms of graphical capabilities, but the next 35 years of video game development are going to challenge our assumptions about what video games are, and potentially revolutionize the way we play them.

In the distant future, we might not even use a screen.

The Benefits of Immersion

There are many ingredients that make a perfect game. A compelling story, a decent challenge curve, high-quality technical execution, and uniqueness are all important, but none of those are dependent on advancing technology.

Everything we think of as advancing along with technical capabilities (such as better graphics, higher-quality sound, and realistic landscapes) are part of the same goal: immersion. Immersion is important because it helps a player block out the rest of the world, and offers them a more engaging, and therefore more emotional and stimulating experience. It’s why the majority of businesses, from clothing stores to museums, are starting to offer more in-depth, first-person experiences.

Today’s consoles and PC games are capable of providing better graphics than ever before, but there’s a fundamental limit to how immersed you can be in an experience that’s projected on a screen. As the demand for higher immersion grows, the screen will eventually disappear, replaced by more immersive mediums.

What a Screenless Future Might Look Like

So what could these immersive mediums be, and what might a future without screens look like for gamers? The process will likely be a gradual one, branching out into several directions before ultimately landing on one path.

These are just some of the possibilities:

  • Headsets. Virtual reality (VR) headsets haven’t taken off as quickly as experts anticipated, but strong sales and support from practically every major gaming juggernaut means they’ll probably be sticking around—and improving—for the foreseeable future. VR has its own kind of screen, but because it responds to player’s head movements, it doesn’t offer the same barriers to immersion that conventional screens do. This technology is still in its early stages of development, but it’s already making waves—and could represent the near future of video game advancement.
  • Glasses. Google attempted to create a pair of augmented reality (AR) goggles a few years ago, but the market wasn’t ready for such an advancement; they’ve since reemerged, but aren’t a revolutionary new technology so much as they are a logical step forward in AR progress. AR games would rely on a player’s natural surroundings (at least to some degree) to give them more interactive, physical-digital hybrid experiences. Currently, casual AR games like Pokemon Go are a hit with smartphone owners, but these rely on the screen of a mobile device for interaction, and therefore limit a player’s immersion. Future games would give AR glasses wearers a much more in-depth gaming experience.
  • Projections. Modern holographic projection technology isn’t very far along, but if sufficiently developed, could represent a new kind of gaming. It could be like AR, but without the need for glasses or any kind of wearable device. In heavily equipped settings, it may even be possible to holographically simulate entire environments, rather than individual objects or characters.
  • Haptic feedback. If you’ve played a game with vibration support for your controller, you’ve experienced some degree of haptic feedback. The feature has been so immersive and so well-supported that you’d be hard-pressed to find a modern game that doesn’t offer at least some level of functionality here. But the future could be a much more immersive kind of haptic feedback, with a full-body suit giving you sensory information based on what’s happening around you in a digital environment. In the early stages, a haptic suit like this could serve as an accompaniment to an otherwise standard AR or VR experience, giving players sensory data to complement what they’re seeing and hearing. But many years, or even decades after this initial development, these suits could provide even more detailed sensory inputs, helping players feel specific textures, temperatures, and other sensations.

It’s hard to say how long it will take to see tech advancements on a scale that makes screenless video games a reality, but it’s a future we’re reliably marching toward. We’ve already seen the emergence and acceptance of VR as a powerful gaming enhancement tool, so it’s only a matter of time before innovators and engineers take the next steps toward more immersive digital experiences.

The post Why the Future of Video Games Will Ditch the Traditional Screen first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/larry-alton/why-the-future-of-video-games-will-ditch-the-traditional-screen/feed/ 0
I switched from 4K/60 to 1440p/165 – here are my thoughts https://www.kitguru.net/peripherals/monitors/dominic-moass/i-switched-from-4k60-to-1440p165-here-are-my-thoughts/ https://www.kitguru.net/peripherals/monitors/dominic-moass/i-switched-from-4k60-to-1440p165-here-are-my-thoughts/#comments Wed, 14 Jun 2017 15:18:49 +0000 https://www.kitguru.net/?p=337796 4k to 1440p? surely I got that the wrong way round? No, let me explain!

The post I switched from 4K/60 to 1440p/165 – here are my thoughts first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
Up until recently, I did all my gaming, photo editing and content consumption on a single 4K monitor – the ASUS PQ321QE. Now, don't get me wrong – it's a brilliant 32-in 4K 60Hz IGZO panel – but I'd been after something with a few more gaming features for a while now. After all, when I'm not reviewing products I'm often playing games, so I thought I could definitely do better than the PQ321QE.

So, I went out and bought an AOC AGON AG271QG – 1440p, 165Hz, IPS and G-Sync – making it just what I was looking for in-terms of gaming features. So, how have I found the switch, and what would my advice be to anyone thinking about a new monitor purchase?

To answer those questions, I first need to break-down my usage of a desktop monitor. Essentially, I use my monitor for two main purposes: productivity and gaming. I'll talk about my experience in both of those areas below.

Productivity

Given I write a lot of reviews here at KitGuru, as part of that I spend a lot of time in Photoshop editing the photos I take myself. Because of that, having an IPS monitor has always been a ‘must' for me, as I simply need the enhanced colour accuracy and viewing angles. In that regard, both monitors I've been using have been excellent, but it is definitely here that I miss the 4K monitor most. Not because of the colours – but because of the detail.

After all, 4K is 3840×2160 (a total of over 8 million pixels), while 1440p is 2560×1440 (3.6 million pixels). With my DSLR taking photos at 6000×4000 (24MP), dropping down to the 1440p monitor has meant I do lose out on quite a lot of detail from my photos. Part of that is negated by the fact that our review photos are not uploaded at native resolution (we downsize them to a more workable 2048px width) but even so, general photo viewing is noticeably better on a 4K monitor.

The same can be said for 4K video. When I watch some of my favourite YouTubers, for instance, a lot of them now upload videos in 4K – detail I can't fully take advantage of with my 1440p monitor.

Therefore, I present my first mini-conclusion: for those purely interested in content-creation, photography or photo editing, I would definitely recommend the increased pixel count of a 4K monitor. The extra sharpness is just vital for those tasks, and it is definitely something that I miss.

Gaming

However, productivity is only half the story, and when it comes to gaming there is a different outcome. My AGON AG271QG sports an overclockable refresh-rate of up to 165Hz which crushes the standard 60Hz of the older 4K ASUS panel.

When gaming, the difference really is night and day. Everything is just so much smoother at the higher refresh-rate, and G-Sync also keeps things nice and tear-free. I did notice tearing previously in the few instances where I managed over 60FPS at 4K, as I would never use V-sync due to the stuttering that occurs when the frame-rate drops below 60.

There are two points to mention about gaming, though, and the first does come back to loss of detail. I do notice the lessened detail at 1440p, compared against the 4K monitor, though I notice it far less while gaming than when photo editing. The picture is still nice and sharp, though, and I definitely prefer having slightly less detail but a much higher refresh-rate as the overall experience is simply more satisfying.

For those who are keen FPS gamers, the higher refresh-rate is far more important than the higher resolution, too, as it makes fast-paced aiming and firing much more manageable. The loss of detail won't hurt your gaming performance, whereas 165Hz vs 60Hz does bring tangible performance improvements.

Matthew Wilson, our Senior News Editor, concurs. He tells me that he previously gamed at 4K/60, but eventually dropped the cash on a 1440p/144Hz ASUS ROG Swift. In his words, ‘it was a step forward for me. The picture isn't quite as finely detailed but the difference in how smooth everything is, is a game-changer'.

Now, the second thing to mention when gaming is what system you have. Personally, I am lucky enough to have an i7-5820K, 16GB DDR4 and a GTX 1080 Ti so I have been able to hit both 4K/60 and 1440p/144+ frame-rates. However, for those with older rigs, there is a good chance that both 4K/60 and 1440p/144+ will be out-of-reach, so bear that in-mind. Even then, though, the G-Sync feature of my new AGON helps keep things smooth even when the frame-rate does dip, so that is something to consider.

Conclusion

So, in a nutshell, the battle between the monitors looks like a draw – 4K is best for productivity, but high refresh-rate 1440p gaming is definitely superior to 4K/60FPS. It does come down to personal preference when deciding which to go for – but personally, I don't regret making the switch one bit. My AG271QG still has great colour accuracy for my work, while gaming at 1440p/144hz (144fps with G-Sync, too) is simply a fantastic experience. I do miss the extra detail that a 4K monitor provides, particularly when watching videos, but for me the improved gaming experience outweighs that by far.

That being said, the days of 4K being limited to just 60Hz are now over. Launching later this year, we will see two new monitors from ASUS and Acer which will be 4K/144Hz, and that would be a truly phenomenal gaming experience – I can only imagine how immersive it would be to game with the detail of 4K coupled with the smoothness of a high refresh-rate monitor.

However, that brings us back to hardware limitations – not only will users have to shell out around $2000 for those monitors, but you would need a monster of a gaming rig to push 4K games at 144 frames per second. For the latest AAA titles, users would probably want to be looking at 2X GTX 1080s – at least – and ideally 2x GTX 1080 Tis. Two of those graphics cards alone will set you back another £1400+, so if you want to have 4K/144Hz, you will need very deep pockets indeed.

But, to conclude this article, I have opted for a high refresh-rate 1440p display over the extra detail that 4K provides. The good news is that 4K/144Hz monitors, for the ultimate gaming and productivity experience, are very nearly here. It will take time for the prices to come down to reasonable levels, but eventually we will get there. Until then, I'll be very happy with my shiny new AGON AG271QG.

KitGuru says: Have any of you guys moved from 4K/60 to 1440p/144+ – or have you done the opposite? Let us know what you think in the comments, we would love to hear your thoughts.

The post I switched from 4K/60 to 1440p/165 – here are my thoughts first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/peripherals/monitors/dominic-moass/i-switched-from-4k60-to-1440p165-here-are-my-thoughts/feed/ 30
Opinion: Why I bought a MacBook Pro (and not a Windows Notebook) https://www.kitguru.net/lifestyle/mobile/mac/dominic-moass/opinion-why-i-bought-a-macbook-pro-instead-of-a-windows-notebook/ https://www.kitguru.net/lifestyle/mobile/mac/dominic-moass/opinion-why-i-bought-a-macbook-pro-instead-of-a-windows-notebook/#comments Tue, 27 Dec 2016 10:17:40 +0000 http://www.kitguru.net/?p=314046 Here at KitGuru, the vast majority of our content – be it news or reviews – is focused on PCs. We love the ability to pick and choose parts tailored to your own specific needs – be it raw performance, aesthetics or low noise levels. You may be surprised to hear, then, that at the …

The post Opinion: Why I bought a MacBook Pro (and not a Windows Notebook) first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
Here at KitGuru, the vast majority of our content – be it news or reviews – is focused on PCs. We love the ability to pick and choose parts tailored to your own specific needs – be it raw performance, aesthetics or low noise levels. You may be surprised to hear, then, that at the beginning of the month I splashed the cash and bought a MacBook Pro.

Before you ask – I did not spend £1449 on the latest 2016 model which may or may not have dodgy battery life. In actual fact, I got a great deal on the 13-inch Early 2015 MacBook Pro, picking one up in mint condition from CeX for £665. Until very recently, this model was the latest in the MacBook Pro family, selling for £999 on Apple's website – and for the sake of the argument, I am going to use that price as the basis for this article.

macbook

By now, there is a good chance being a PC centric gamer you are probably frothing at the mouth, exclaiming how I was stupid to spend money on an over-priced laptop which only uses low-power parts (my MacBook Pro uses the i5-5275U chip, for example). You may also add that £999 would buy you a significantly higher-spec Windows laptop – the MSI GS40 Phantom nets you an i7-6700HQ and a discrete GTX 970M for the same money as this MacBook Pro.

You would be 100% correct to say that. However, I think such sentiment – which is often echoed online – misses the point. The MacBook Pro has never been about raw performance. Not to my mind, at least. What I mean by this, is that you don't buy a MacBook Pro because of its on-paper specs. At least not when it comes to the CPU , graphics or memory.

gb4

I fully agree that if you want a beefy, HyperThreaded mobile CPU, get an i7-6700HQ or i7-6820HK based Windows machine. A MacBook Pro's CPU is never going to keep up – and to demonstrate this, I ran Geekbench 4 on my MacBook Pro, which you can see above. Heading over to Geekbench's website shows that an i7-6700HQ scores roughly 5000 more points for the multi-core performance aspect of the test.

It is very clear to me that the MacBook Pro is not about just having the fastest CPU, or about having a discrete graphics card that can blitz through the latest AAA games at ultra settings.

For me, Apple are much more concerned about delivering a beautiful and refined user experience to consumers, rather than just trying to cram the chassis full of the the fastest hardware on the market.

One important factor in ensuring this experience is as good as it can be is the MacBook Pro's chassis. A great slab of aluminium, it is by far the best looking laptop on the market. It is also exceptionally sturdy and just generally feels great. It is clear that the Razer CEO is quite the Apple fan too (don't believe us? read THIS), as their Blade machines look very similar – albeit it in black.

Every time I rest my palms below the keyboard to type, for example, I am reminded of  just how well-built this laptop really is. Combine this with the thickness (1.8cm) and weight (1.58KG) of the device, and the end result is an ultra-portable but ultra-durable laptop.

Another huge factor behind the appeal of the MacBook Pro is the display. While high-resolution (by this, I mean greater than 1920×1080) displays are increasingly common to high-end laptops, the MacBook Pro's display is still a cut above. The 2560×1600 panel is still stunningly sharp across the 13-inch display, but the colours are the true star of the show. Apple use an IPS panel-type which explains the excellent colours – while the deep and rich blacks, not quite at the same level as an OLED display, for example, make photos and movies a real joy to watch.

desktop

Then there's macOS. It is a bright and colourful OS, but is wonderfully simple to use. Critics say it is too ‘locked-down', but I disagree. So far, the only thing I haven't been able to change that I wish I could is the start-up sound. Even then, I can just hit the mute button before I shut down the machine and the problem is solved. New Mac Pro laptops no longer have this start up sound (more HERE).

Despite that, the fact of the matter is macOS is not meant to be the most customisable or technical operating system on the market – it is designed to just work, and boy does Apple nail that. Granted they have only one set of hardware to content with, so you have to hand it to Microsoft for getting Windows working generally quite well on millions of hardware configurations.

All-in-all, the MacBook Pro is an exceptional laptop. I would say it is the best I have used – but it does of course depend on what you want to do. I bought mine to be a portable photo-editing and work machine, but you would obviously not specifically buy a MacBook Pro to play games. So far, though, it has proved to be a lovely piece of kit and I would buy one tomorrow if had to make the choice again.

I have no doubt that many people reading this would disagree with me on all the points I have mentioned. If you do, leave us a comment on Facebook and I will do my best to get back to you. I am just trying to start a debate with my views here, so if you think I have made a bad choice, let me know!

KitGuru says: This article has just been a short piece about why I bought my MacBook Pro. We want to hear from you, though, so tell us in the comments why you would or wouldn't buy an Apple laptop – or even Apple products in general.

The post Opinion: Why I bought a MacBook Pro (and not a Windows Notebook) first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/lifestyle/mobile/mac/dominic-moass/opinion-why-i-bought-a-macbook-pro-instead-of-a-windows-notebook/feed/ 38
Opinion: How to pick the perfect CPU cooler for your needs https://www.kitguru.net/components/cooling/dominic-moass/opinion-how-to-pick-the-perfect-cpu-cooler-for-your-needs/ https://www.kitguru.net/components/cooling/dominic-moass/opinion-how-to-pick-the-perfect-cpu-cooler-for-your-needs/#comments Mon, 26 Dec 2016 10:11:38 +0000 http://www.kitguru.net/?p=314902 Here at KitGuru we get through a lot of CPU cooler reviews. Accordingly, I have tested my fair share of top-end liquid coolers – such as the £195 EKWB Predator 280 (HERE) – as well as budget-oriented air coolers costing less than £20. With that being said, picking the right cooler for your needs can be …

The post Opinion: How to pick the perfect CPU cooler for your needs first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
Here at KitGuru we get through a lot of CPU cooler reviews. Accordingly, I have tested my fair share of top-end liquid coolers – such as the £195 EKWB Predator 280 (HERE) – as well as budget-oriented air coolers costing less than £20. With that being said, picking the right cooler for your needs can be a complicated process. In this article, I explain how to make the decision depending on a few specific factors.

CPU cooling is critical – but it can be an area where I think people sometimes try and spend a bit less cash as they don't think it matters that much. However, picking an absolute bargain-basement cooler could affect your overall gaming experience by being excessively loud or just being inadequate at actually cooling your processor – which can result in throttling, and by extension, lower performance.

main1

The first thing to consider is what you are actually cooling. More specifically – what CPU are you using? What is its rated Thermal Design Power (TDP)? Can it be overclocked? – something which would cause more cooling power to be required? Answering all these questions will help you get a better understanding of the cooling needs.

This is because, first and foremost, buying a cooler should be a case of getting something that is actually going to keep your CPU cool. For example, if you have a locked-multiplier Core i3 processor you would be just fine by going with a small low-profile air cooler. However, that same cooler – let's say the Raijintek Pallas, for instance – would do a terrible job of cooling AMD's monster 220W TDP FX-9590. Generally, the more heat your processor is producing, the beefier the cooler required. I would say picking something that will actually be able to keep your temperatures as low as possible is the starting point.

That is just the starting point, however, and would not necessarily help you to decide between air or liquid cooling. This is because there are now air coolers on the market which have just as much cooling potential as all-in-one (AIO) liquid coolers. For example, the Cryorig R1 Ultimate has a rated TDP of 250W, the same as the Arctic Liquid Freezer 120 AIO.

Part of it, then, comes down to budget. This perhaps is the limiting factor – anyone can dream of a £1500 custom waterloop, but if you can't afford it, then you need to rethink your strategy. At the end of the day, you can only buy what you can afford, and air coolers are typically a bit cheaper. That being said, AIO's are increasingly competitive. The Arctic Liquid Freezer 120, for example, costs around £50 and ships with a thick radiator and two fans – all included in the box.

Once you have a budget in mind, how much space do you have for a cooler? If you have a Fractal Design Node 202 you are not going to fit a 240mm AIO. At the same time, a monster air cooler like the Noctua NH-D15 isn't going to fit either. Be smart with your space and see what you can go for. Most mid-tower cases have height limits of about 150-170mm for air coolers – although be sure to check your case's specifications. Most modern cases should fit a 240mm radiator as well, but radiators start to introduce issues such as RAM clearance, too – so it is always best to check what you can fit. There is nothing worse than ordering a shiny new liquid cooler only to find you can't actually get it into the case.

So at this point, you have a budget and you know what can or can't fit into your case. The next thing to consider is reliability – an area of contention for many. I was speaking to Luke Hill, KitGuru Deputy Editor-in-Chief about this topic and he told me he would only consider an air cooler for his work PC because they are reliable and require no maintenance – typically, you install one and it just works.

1

This is true to an extent – nothing can really go wrong with an air cooler other than the fan may eventually stop working. Even then, it is a much easier fix than if your liquid cooler develops a leak or its pump fails, for example. That being said, I would say liquid cooling has got to the point where, for AIOs at least, a leak is very rare. For example, my Kraken X61 from NZXT carries an extended 6-year warranty and I have had zero issues with it so far. Still, it is true liquid cooling simply has more components in the loop which can fail – and if it does go wrong, it could be quite spectacular.

I remember an early AIO liquid cooler from Coolit developed a leak, and it dripped a few times on my graphics card, destroying both the graphics card and the motherboard at the same time.

Leading on from that, there is also debate over which is quieter – an air cooler or a liquid cooler. Personally, I have a large 280mm AIO to cool my CPU. The big radiator means I can run my fans at just 25% – which means the PC is essentially silent. Generally, the harder your cooler has to work, the louder it will be. If this could be an issue for you, leave some extra headroom to make sure the cooler is beefy enough to do the job quietly.

Finally, the aesthetics of the cooler is another factor worth considering. If you are on a tight budget, this may not be a luxury you can afford, but it is always nice to get a cooler which matches your colour scheme, or can be configured to do so. NZXT's Kraken coolers have RGB waterblocks, for example, which look really good.

Another thing to consider with the aesthetic side of things is space around the CPU. Air coolers can take up a fair bit of room around that area which, for some, can look messy or not as clean as an AIO, for instance. It usually easier to access RAM with an AIO, too.

So, those would be my key areas – first and foremost – getting something that performs is the main thing. However your budget, reliability concerns, noise levels and aesthetics should also play significant roles in deciding what cooler is right for you. If you want to get an indication of performance and ease-of-use, be sure to check out the KitGuru cooler reviews HERE. If you have any questions about picking a CPU cooler as well, let us know in the comments and we will try our best to get back to you.

Overclockers UK sell a wide range of air and liquid coolers over HERE.

Discuss on our Facebook page, over HERE

KitGuru says: There is no ‘one-size-fits-all' approach when it comes to picking the right CPU cooler, but hopefully these points will help you make a good decision. We want to hear from you as well, so let us know in the comments what cooler you are currently rocking and if you are planning an upgrade. I quite fancy the Kraken X62 myself.

The post Opinion: How to pick the perfect CPU cooler for your needs first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/components/cooling/dominic-moass/opinion-how-to-pick-the-perfect-cpu-cooler-for-your-needs/feed/ 4
First they came for the cheaters. Why Ashley Madison hack is bad news https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/first-they-came-for-the-cheaters-why-ashley-madison-hack-is-bad-news/ https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/first-they-came-for-the-cheaters-why-ashley-madison-hack-is-bad-news/#comments Thu, 20 Aug 2015 14:57:05 +0000 http://www.kitguru.net/?p=264307 “First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out, because I was not a socialist,” begins the poetic version of Pastor Martin Niemöller's famous statement about the cowardice of German intellectuals during the rise of the Nazi party. It's a speech that has many applications when the topic of free speech arises and funnily enough, …

The post First they came for the cheaters. Why Ashley Madison hack is bad news first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out, because I was not a socialist,” begins the poetic version of Pastor Martin Niemöller's famous statement about the cowardice of German intellectuals during the rise of the Nazi party. It's a speech that has many applications when the topic of free speech arises and funnily enough, works very well when juxtaposed with the recent Ashley Madison hacking.

In the aftermath of a hacking group gaining access to the servers of Ashley Madison's parent company, Avid Life Media, the details of some 37 million account holders have been revealed. That includes names, email addresses, phone numbers, physical characteristics and sexual preferences. Despite the reveal of this deeply personal information, many people have seem happy at the news, or at least willing to suggest that those members of the site deserved having their information made public.

Their reasoning? That the people who signed up for the site were (probably) looking to cheat on their spouse.

hacking
There was a reason so many people marched to protect privacy on the internet. 

Not only is this a huge generalisation that removes any context of their sign up, but it suggests that the privacy of these people is any different from our own. None of us would like our personal details aired for all to see. I'm a happily married man, but there's some kinks in my life I'd rather keep to myself. Very few people can't say the same.

Last year it was the celebrity nude pictures. Now it's the personal account details of millions of people that were partaking in the services of a legal business. If we start supporting the moral granstanding hackers of the world, then we open the door to worse invasions. What about when it's your Gmail account that they're exposing because you flirted with a colleague? Or your financial details, because you happen to have a great accountant that can save you from paying high taxes?

You don't need to cry for the cheaters, but don't revel in their misery either.

Over the past few years, we've seen the internet attacked by governments, corporations and intelligence agencies, all wishing to make internet privacy a thing of the past. We stood up against it and pushed back the tide in a monumental global effort that saw people really fight for freedoms of expression, speech and privacy online. Let's not look to give that up just because we disagree with how some people make use of it.

KitGuru Says: Doxxing is not an ok practice, whether that information comes from Ashley Madison, Government records or a Netflix account. Let's not start pretending it is. 

Image source: Wikimedia

The post First they came for the cheaters. Why Ashley Madison hack is bad news first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/first-they-came-for-the-cheaters-why-ashley-madison-hack-is-bad-news/feed/ 135
Researchers say social networks not good gauge of public opinion https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/researchers-say-social-networks-not-good-guage-of-public-opinion/ https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/researchers-say-social-networks-not-good-guage-of-public-opinion/#comments Fri, 28 Nov 2014 09:04:14 +0000 http://www.kitguru.net/?p=223987 It seems now that almost every news show, every radio show and indeed, every news site – ourselves included – solicits opinion from their readers, viewers and listeners via social networks like Facebook and Twitter. It's a great way to find out what your audience thinks, or so we thought. According to new research on …

The post Researchers say social networks not good gauge of public opinion first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
It seems now that almost every news show, every radio show and indeed, every news site – ourselves included – solicits opinion from their readers, viewers and listeners via social networks like Facebook and Twitter. It's a great way to find out what your audience thinks, or so we thought. According to new research on the types of people that use social networking sites, their communities are in-fact incredibly biased, meaning that any consensus is unlikely to represent your audience as a whole.

This research was conducted by scientists over at McGill University in Montreal and Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, which found that on a community like Twitter, less than five per cent of the site's population is over 65. In comparison, 18-29 year olds make up over a third, giving them a vast majority and therefore a much louder voice.

thesame
And on the (social networking) outside too, apparently.

Comparatively, Pinterest, while still populated by mostly young people, is more biased towards women. LinkedIn is full of rich, post graduates. Facebook has one of the most diverse populations, but due to much more of its communications being private, it's harder to judge bias.

In any case though, researchers are using this data to warn those using social networks as measurements of public opinion on certain issues, or interest in certain subjects. Unless you ask questions that are specific to the dominant groups, you aren't going to get a fair and mixed response.

Checking in on the opinions of millions of people might seem like a great way to gauge what people think of a particular issue, but not if they're all practically the same person.

KitGuru Says: Perhaps that's why more left leaning ideals are common online: because it's dominated by younger people, who as a group tend to be more liberal. It does however exacerbate confirmation bias, which is something we should all try to avoid.

[Thanks Telegraph]The post Researchers say social networks not good gauge of public opinion first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/researchers-say-social-networks-not-good-guage-of-public-opinion/feed/ 2
Name calling makes #gamergate divide impossible to fix https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/jon-martindale/name-calling-makes-gamergate-divide-impossible-to-fix/ https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/jon-martindale/name-calling-makes-gamergate-divide-impossible-to-fix/#comments Tue, 02 Sep 2014 16:05:29 +0000 http://www.kitguru.net/?p=209935 Update: I didn't want to provide too much context as it's such a big, lengthy story with lots of sides to it, so I'll just link to this. It doesn't necessarily represent mine or KitGuru's take on the whole thing, but it is at least fairly comprehensive.  Original Story: I must admit, I came a little …

The post Name calling makes #gamergate divide impossible to fix first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
Update: I didn't want to provide too much context as it's such a big, lengthy story with lots of sides to it, so I'll just link to this. It doesn't necessarily represent mine or KitGuru's take on the whole thing, but it is at least fairly comprehensive. 

Original Story: I must admit, I came a little late to the whole #GamerGate controversy. Since I caught the tail end of the furore though, I've been reading a lot about it, because a lot of people have a lot to say. Some of what I've read has been opinion pieces by other journalists, some of it has been blog posts from developers and I've also read a lot of comments from gamers, lengthy and short. Ultimately, after all that's been said, all that's been done and supposedly done, you know what's been the most shocking, the most shameful? All the name calling.

I'm not even talking about anything specific, as nearly everyone that's dipped their fingertips into this argument is guilty of it. Whether they're railing against the “cis males” that are prejudice against their particular group, or the “social justice warriors” (SJW) for tearing up someone's favourite hobby, or just people being generally mean and occasionally threatening, it seems like the one constant has been that they're right, and that everyone else is wrong and can be easily pigeon holed into a negative category, which they've got a great, insulting name for.

I'm going to do my best to not discuss any of the controversy surrounding this overblown argument, as it's been covered extensively elsewhere. I'm also going to try not to interject myself into this piece, as really none of this is about me. It's not about my opinions, or my sexuality, or my gaming history or interests or anything. It's about all of us, because this; this name calling; this mud slinging, it's only making it so that we can't figure it out.

gamergate

You see this sort of thing from politicians and their supporters all the time. People take what was traditionally a way of describing one's political leanings and throw it out as if it's an insult. Those “damn liberals,” “‘ruddy conservatives,” they'll say. This is something that helps those people maintain their individual power base because in an us vs them scenario, it makes it much less likely for people to go over to the other side of thinking. If they can just drown out what the other party says by branding them with a disparaging nickname, no one is ever going to consider the other person's opinion.

Just think war propaganda and you've got the extreme version of what we're talking about here.

Whether it's a journalist who's branded all “gamers,” as misogynists, or a commenter that's called anyone who's voiced an opinion on women in games as a “feminazi,” by labeling all people that think differently than them, they make it nigh on impossible for their view point to change, because all this does is exacerbate confirmation bias.

It should tell us something that there are two conflicting petitions doing the rounds at the moment, one from the press and developers suggesting that gamers need to change their behaviour and are at fault for the recent furore and one from the gamers that suggests the press is actually the antagonist in this tale. Everyone is coming from a position of superiority and moral righteousness, where everyone else is it at fault. Wouldn't it be much healthier to encourage discourse between both sides, instead of just calling on the other to change?

Think about it. Even the person who you think has been the biggest dick, is doing it because they think they're right and you're wrong. You may indeed be in the right, but just as you want them to give you the time of day, you need to be enough of an adult to do the same for them.

In an ideal world, everyone would be ready and willing to do a 180 degree turn on any idea they have, if presented with enough evidence to sway the argument. That's very hard to do in reality as nobody is 100 per cent without bias, but it's something we should aspire too, because evidence based debating is so much more fruitful than finger pointing and name calling. It allows for change and growth instead of perpetuating a status quo where people just think they're the greatest and everyone else is a bunch of assholes.

uturn
Don't go so far as to thinking this was actually a good movie though

Unfortunately it's a trap even those that are fighting for recognition for a marginalised group have fallen into. The people that may have had honourable intentions by championing minority groups in gaming often seem to end up taking part in the very activities they decry. Terms like “cis male,” while perhaps technically correct in that of course, if one group of people has a label, surely others should have one too, are completely counter productive. The point of it all is to tar everyone with the same brush and remove the need for groups entirely. The end game here is that sexuality becomes so androgynous in our collective mindset that it doesn't matter where on the spectrum you lie. Being entirely masculine is ok, likewise with female or anywhere in between. Insisting that everyone needs to be characterised makes this impossible.

There comes a time when you have to stop championing the rights of one group and just push for general inclusvity, without standing up and telling everyone that's what you're doing. That does mean calling out deliberate, malicious and intentional prejudice when you see it, but it also means listening to people you don't agree with. Because like it not, those people deserve as much time to be right as you.

SJW, misogynist, white knight, as apt as these names may be in some situations, all they do is perpetuate the divide rather than helping us bridge it. Yes there are differences in people and it isn't an ‘ism' to point those out, but if you define a person by one characteristic, you alienate them from those that don't identify with that and therefore make it very easy to just write off their argument instead of countering it with logic and intellect. That's not how debates are solved.

This is why you see Tweets and Facebook statuses from people that have been trying to make things better – in their eyes alone perhaps – saying horrific things to people. It's also why some of those branded as idiots, SJWs, assholes or any number of other names, have said some of the most poignant stuff during this whole debate. They get lost in the crowd, because if you don't drink the coolaid de jour then you're not worth listening too.

Also though, discounting what someone says by tying them to an agenda, makes it harder to discredit their ideas properly and allows them to be marginalised and martyred. A lot of the arguments put out by some of the most despicable of people in the past couple of weeks are getting buried by people calling them names. That's not the way to deal with it. Give them enough rope and they'll hang themselves, if you shout them down before they've even started, then it allows them to become victims and makes their position ever stronger.

Just look at the Westboro Baptist Church. Chances are you, like a lot of people, find them despicable. Their actions are truly repugnant, but thanks to freedom of speech they have the ability to say what they want. Over the years there's been some wonderfully inventive ways to shout them down, like counter protests, aggravated love and simply making loud noises in their faces. But do you know what's really highlighted how shoddy the church is overall? Themselves. Their awful parody songs, endlessly defecting members and showboating have made them a laughing stock.

westboro
Tell me this isn't a much better way to counter bigotry?

That's how people with horrible ideas should be treated. Not in kind with more hatred, but with openness and frank discussion, because it's in those environments that bigotry and prejudice cannot thrive. What can, are real ideas from real people. When you talk openly and honestly without fear of being shouted down for your ideas, it gives you the chance to be humanised which are least gives your thoughts some basis and helps people to empathise with your position, even if they don't agree with it.

The women feeling marginalised by the industry are people, with genuine complaints from their perspective. Whether those thoughts are something that just needs to be vented or can allow for industry tweaks is up for those that work in it to decide, but that can't happen in either sense if they're written off as feminazis or SJWs. Developers are people too, who just want to make games that make people happy and earn a bit of money while they do it. That's why sometimes they opt to go back and change things in a game because they hurt someone's feelings. It's debateable whether they should do that, but for some people, the idea of hurting someone is abhorrent.

For others, that's not the case, and those game developers that choose to ignore the minority in favour of their artistic vision shouldn't be decried any more than the one that appeases a select group. It's their art. Their choice. Again, don't write them off just because you disagree with them.

Similarly, there might be some journalists that have questionable morals and are willing to let that filter into their work. There may also be some that like to grandstand a bit too much, but to brand the entire profession as such does the majority a disservice.

And the fans are allowed to be pissed too. They're allowed to complain about games and games journalism if they feel like they're being talked down to. They don't deserve to be called racists just because they enjoy games with white protagonists. They aren't automatically sexist if they don't like Gone Home, and suggesting as such drowns any interesting points they might have had on the topic of gameplay.

jesus
I'm not saying turn the other cheek, but maybe lend your other ear

Do you see? Bundling people into some schoolyard clique is what's causing this divide. Branding all gamers as misogynists is where half of this problem stems from. There's always going to be a minority of assholes in every group, especially online, but letting that jade you to the point where you only listen to the opinions of people that agree with you is helping the gaps between people grow ever wider.

I don't pretend to know the answer to this situation, but I do know that it's never going to be sorted out if we spend our time mud slinging instead of actually discussing it like adults.

We're all fans of games, whether we play them, make them or write about them, it's time we remembered that and stopped trying to break into separate camps so that we can validate our own position.

We're all gamers. We're all humans. Let's start acting like it.

Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.

[Thanks to Matthew Wilson for his help editing and sourcing.]

Image sources: Burstein, James Shepherd, Blizzard, Tristar

The post Name calling makes #gamergate divide impossible to fix first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/jon-martindale/name-calling-makes-gamergate-divide-impossible-to-fix/feed/ 19
Don’t forget the UK rushed through the DRIP snooping law https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/dont-forget-the-uk-rushed-through-the-drip-snooping-law/ https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/dont-forget-the-uk-rushed-through-the-drip-snooping-law/#comments Mon, 21 Jul 2014 12:03:17 +0000 http://www.kitguru.net/?p=203982 Do you know what the government hopes the most about its recently rushed through DRIP legislation? That you'll forget about it. For those that don't know, DRIP, or the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers law, is a bill that was pushed through last week that forces ISPs and in-fact any company dealing with data on …

The post Don’t forget the UK rushed through the DRIP snooping law first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
Do you know what the government hopes the most about its recently rushed through DRIP legislation? That you'll forget about it. For those that don't know, DRIP, or the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers law, is a bill that was pushed through last week that forces ISPs and in-fact any company dealing with data on UK citizens, to store your activities and information for up to a year. This was pushed through in just over a week, with almost zero debate or scrutiny, despite the fact that back in April, the European Court of Justice ruled the practice as a breach of human rights.

The reasoning behind the UK's response to this law (over three months late mind you) is that without hoovering up the conversations, internet histories and content of text messages of every single British citizen, they wouldn't be able to track terrorists and paedophiles. While those two buzzwords should throw up a red flag whenever a politician pitches them around like a moral smokescreen, the fact that the entire world is up in arms over the data retention practices of the US and yet the government here wants to increase its powers and rope in private companies to do it, should be even more cause for concern.

Not only does that mean that the public's views on snooping are completely unheeded, but it shows that politicians themselves don't understand what's being pushed through. In many cases like this, where a law seems to affect the public far more than the politicians themselves, if they truly thought about its implications, they would obviously have voiced more concern. In recent years, the expenditure scandals through second homes and other expenses, has ended the career of more than a couple of MPs and tarnished many others. Do they not realise that it's this sort of snooping that can bring these scandals to light?

cameron2
According to Mr Cameron, we're all suspects

While I doubt you'll find many people opposed to the idea of catching out a politician gaming the system, the fact that those same politicians who no doubt have a few skeletons in their closets didn't attempt to halt the DRIP laws going through should tell us just how little they understand it.

The only ray of hope in the whole DRIP law situation is that it has a clause that brings it to an end in 2016, with the idea to re-evaluate its usefulness and (presumably) legality. And that's why we mustn't forget it. David Cameron has pledged to increase surveillance should be voted in again after the next general election, so it seems unlikely he'd rescind more snooping powers in 2016. He and his supporters like Theresa May, who trumpeted the loudest when this legislation was being rushed through, are no doubt imagining that the world will have moved on by 2016 and we'll have forgotten that this law is in place. We'll be used to having all of our information seized and stored, despite it breaching fundamental rights laid down by the EU.

That's why we mustn't forget, so that when the times comes we can do something about it. Don't forget it in the mean time either, as you can get in touch with your local representative (here) to complain that they didn't throw up a stop sign when they had the chance. If you want to go all out, you can join the Open Rights Group (here) which is planning to sue the government over this law's implementation.

Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.

KitGuru Says: Elsewhere in the world, snooping laws are used for more than tracking down terrorists. They're used for stopping protests before they begin and preventing government descent. That's the slippery slope we're on. As badass as a V for Vendetta finale would be, nobody wants the build up police state. It'll happen if we let it.

And to those that say “I have nothing to hide,” the problem, with that argument, is that you don't choose what you need to hide. Today it might be terrorist affiliations, but tomorrow it might be voting for the opposition party, or being friends with a muslim. Remember that just because it doesn't affect you yet, it may do in the long run. Stand by others now and they'll stand by you when it's needed. 

The post Don’t forget the UK rushed through the DRIP snooping law first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/dont-forget-the-uk-rushed-through-the-drip-snooping-law/feed/ 6
Steve Wozniak criticizes smart-watches, praises Google Glass https://www.kitguru.net/lifestyle/mobile/apple/anton-shilov/steve-wozniak-criticizes-smart-watches-praises-google-glass/ https://www.kitguru.net/lifestyle/mobile/apple/anton-shilov/steve-wozniak-criticizes-smart-watches-praises-google-glass/#comments Thu, 03 Jul 2014 22:56:07 +0000 http://www.kitguru.net/?p=201359 Steve Wozniak, a co-founder of Apple who foresaw the emergence of the upcoming iWatch several years ago, claims that smart-watches have too limited functionality and too small displays. At the same time, he praises Google Glass. While the former partner of Steve Jobs does not really admire wearable computing devices now, he hopes that when …

The post Steve Wozniak criticizes smart-watches, praises Google Glass first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
Steve Wozniak, a co-founder of Apple who foresaw the emergence of the upcoming iWatch several years ago, claims that smart-watches have too limited functionality and too small displays. At the same time, he praises Google Glass. While the former partner of Steve Jobs does not really admire wearable computing devices now, he hopes that when the iWatch hits the market, it will show the right direction for their evolution.

“I want my smartphone here, but I really want the whole thing,” said Mr. Wozniak in an interview with Xconomy. “I don’t want just a little Bluetooth connection to the smartphone in my pocket because then it’s just an intermediary, an extra thing I buy to get what I already have and have to carry anyway.”

samsung_gear2_gear_fit_galaxy_s5

While smart-watches primarily designed as health and fitness tracking devices make a lot of sense, they cannot really replace smartphones in the vast majority of cases.

In fact, even classic mechanical wrist-watches were not common about a hundred of years ago. The majority of gentlemen at the time carried pocket watches. The wrist-watches became mainstream after the First World War when soldiers needed to know time, but could not use pocket watches since their hands were busy, so they wore wrist-watches instead. The same thing could happen to smart-watches these days. If people are unable to comfortably use smartphones , certain common functions will migrate to smartwatches.

Although Mr. Wozniak does not really like smartwatches, he is confident that Apple’s iWatch will show everyone how they should be made.

“If 30 companies are doing the same thing, you know it’s wrong,” said Mr. Wozniak. “When one company does one thing very strikingly different, and everybody says this company got it right, this is the way of the future. In the past, it’s been Apple a number of times, not always. So I’m really hoping that Apple’s the big breakthrough.”

google_glass_4

It is noteworthy that the legendary co-founder of Apple seems to be more satisfied with Google Glass smart eyewear. For Mr. Wozniak the Glass seems to be more useful than any smartwatch.

“It may not be that useful, just like smartwatches may not be useful enough to get the critical mass they need to really go ahead,” said the Woz. “But everything I’ve done with Google Glass, I actually kind of liked playing with it.”

Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.

KitGuru Says: While Steve Wozniak has no influence of Apple’s product roadmap, from time to time he expresses rather interesting opinions regarding new technologies. In some cases his views turn out to be predictions, but in many cases they remain his own views only. In this particular case it is interesting to note that the Woz likes Google Glass more than smartwatches.

The post Steve Wozniak criticizes smart-watches, praises Google Glass first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/lifestyle/mobile/apple/anton-shilov/steve-wozniak-criticizes-smart-watches-praises-google-glass/feed/ 2
Valve’s Steam Summer Sale tactics are bad for all gamers https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/jon-martindale/valves-steam-summer-sale-tactics-are-bad-for-all-gamers/ https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/jon-martindale/valves-steam-summer-sale-tactics-are-bad-for-all-gamers/#comments Fri, 27 Jun 2014 08:59:15 +0000 http://www.kitguru.net/?p=200259 If there's one thing PC gamers hate, it's those horrible, by-the-numbers, mobile gaming mechanics championed by the likes of King and Zynga. The micro-transactions, pay to win scenarios, games that become more about some meta-management, rather than actually playing the game itself. Scores of companies have been smashed for this, on forums and reviews, in …

The post Valve’s Steam Summer Sale tactics are bad for all gamers first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
If there's one thing PC gamers hate, it's those horrible, by-the-numbers, mobile gaming mechanics championed by the likes of King and Zynga. The micro-transactions, pay to win scenarios, games that become more about some meta-management, rather than actually playing the game itself.

Scores of companies have been smashed for this, on forums and reviews, in every marketplace and on every digital distribution platform. One company though that always, always skates, is Valve. Whether it's because it holds the key to the almighty Steam, or because of nostalgia for the days of yore isn't clear, but it shouldn't.

Just look at the Steam Summer Sale. It's gone from being a way to pick up some AAA titles on the cheap, to some obfuscated, meta game: there's team based, competitive buying, trading cards, collectibles, unlockable game content and a daily lottery to win prizes.

None of this has anything to do with the games we're buying to actually play.

adventure
There's nothing adventurous about coercing people into buying more games than they need

We all railed against Ubisoft just a few days ago with its Assassin's Creed Unity “Guillotine Spin to Win” and yet Valve is doing the exact same thing. It might be selling released games rather than a pre-orders, but the premise is the same: pay money for a game now, and maybe you'll win something extra.

Of course its all optional. I've bought some games in the Steam Summer Sale and haven't picked a team or crafted a collectible, despite my inventory notifications flashing to let me know something else unrelated to the game I just bought is going on.

But all of this contributes to the landscape of digital game buying that nobody foresaw: we all have more games than we'll ever play. Personally, I have just over 100, but I know people with far more than that, some closer to 1,000. It's wasted money. These are products that can't be resold, can't be traded or given away and likely won't ever be played; they just languish there in your account.

Valve refuses to let people do anything with these dusty collections and yet continues to convince you that you need to buy more and even goes so far as to distract you by making the actual process of buying games a meta-game in itself.

It's the same kind of faux-progression, dopamine-rewarding, addictive mechanics that are built into games like Candy Crush to make you part with your money. Sure you can collect all of the Sale cards just through voting or other community actions, but every time you buy a game it lets you know just how close you are to reaching the next monetary threshold. Tell me you wouldn't be screaming bloody murder at the screen if a King logo appeared alongside that rather than Valve's?

valvepromo
Valve doesn't even have to promote it, we do it ourselves

The nudge to buy might be more gentle and subtle than many mobile developers, but what Valve is doing isn't too far removed, and as successful as these Steam Sales are for developers, it's contributing to games being underplayed and undervalued. It's dangerous and alarming but for some reason Valve gets a pass.

Well no longer.

Valve doesn't do all of this meta-game nonsense for no reason. It and supporting developers make a little bit of money every time you trade a card or collectible and the sheer volume of transactions these team based Summer Sale mechanics encourage, makes them all a pretty penny.

While we can all get behind developers being paid for the work they do, it's a worrisome trend that sees them focusing more and more on making money outside of the game itself. Their main focus should be crafting a game that sells because it's engaging, fun and a unique experience, not bundling extra time-wasting, addiction pandering elements just to get you to spend a bit more to craft that Summer Sale '14 badge.

We love to smash giant publishers like EA and Ubisoft for adding pre-order bonuses, or paid for DLC, citing them as the trend setters in a business that has picked up some of the worst aspects of the console and mobile market, but in reality, are the publishers really to blame? Are platforms like Steam, with its regular sales, collectibles, voting, awards, prizes and now competitive buying, the real problem?

Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.

KitGuru Says: As usual, we'd like to hear your thoughts on this. Get in touch with us below, or on the KitGuru Facebook page.

The post Valve’s Steam Summer Sale tactics are bad for all gamers first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/jon-martindale/valves-steam-summer-sale-tactics-are-bad-for-all-gamers/feed/ 5
The Facebook, Oculus deal makes sense for everyone https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/the-facebook-oculus-deal-makes-sense-for-everyone/ https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/the-facebook-oculus-deal-makes-sense-for-everyone/#comments Wed, 26 Mar 2014 16:33:10 +0000 http://www.kitguru.net/?p=184369 I know guys. I know. I'm mad too. I'm sad, disappointed, even betrayed, but these are all things I'm feeling and I bet you are too. We're having an emotional reaction to two companies worth multiple billions of dollars doing a business deal and though I can't help but wish it hadn't happened, I know …

The post The Facebook, Oculus deal makes sense for everyone first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
I know guys. I know. I'm mad too. I'm sad, disappointed, even betrayed, but these are all things I'm feeling and I bet you are too. We're having an emotional reaction to two companies worth multiple billions of dollars doing a business deal and though I can't help but wish it hadn't happened, I know that if I look at it logically, it makes sense for everyone.

Firstly let's look at Facebook itself. While still dominating the social networking scene Facebook has peaked and is slowly on the decline. It may be still seeing increased user numbers around the world as it enters new territories, but in specific age groups, teens and 20-30s, it's definitely on the downward slope. It's not the cool, hot property it once was, so the kids are moving on to new methods of communicating. Facebook has to diversify and move with the times, hence Whatsapp, hence Oculus.

devil
It's time to play…

With the Rift, Facebook will be able to champion digital, virtual face to face meetings, hang outs, multiplayer movie watching, virtual music gig experiences – the potential to expand into all these areas is huge, all through a centralised Facebook or Oculus hub, which it can sell adverts on.

All of this was coming any way, but now it's going to have the Facebook name associated with it. I know that seems distasteful, especially considering Zuckerberg's stances on privacy and personal ownership in the past, but this isn't Zynga with OMGPop, this is Facebook, a company that while overvalued in any number of ways, is making WhatsApp work and it's grown Instagram exponentially.

It also can't afford to screw up with Oculus, as there's competition out there now. Sony isn't too far behind and Microsoft is dipping its toes in the water. Oculus has a head start, but not enough that it can drop the ball on the consumer launch and still maintain that lead.

Let's talk about Oculus' position though, as really, it didn't have to take the deal did it? Well, no, but then again, how many of you would have turned it down? Seriously, think about it for a second. If you started up a business and two years later someone offered you two billion dollars for it, are you going to turn that deal down? Even if it comes from Facebook? While I'm sure there's a few who legitimately would, the majority of you saying no, are liars.

oculusbus
Look at those guys. Running a successful, fun, innovative business. And they're happy. What assholes. 

Even taking the personal money out of the equation though, Oculus is still a very niche product (for now) and even with the impressive number of devkit sales, we're still years off this becoming a mainstream product. Not only can Facebook finances help make that a reality, but it can also promote it like nothing else. Hell, a massive portion of KitGuru's traffic comes from Facebook, can you imagine the amount it could funnel Oculus' way if it so chooses?

It can help champion the more social aspect of the Rift too. It's great for some games, but if you've used it extensively, you'll know that “experiences,” in it tend to be more memorable. That's partially because very few real Rift games have been made yet and we don't have the full capabilities of a consumer version, but it should also tell you that as much as we love the Rift as a gaming device, it's so much more than that.

readyplayer
All we need now are trailer park skyscraper “stacks” and we're good to go. Source: Sepiawolf

We've seen the potential for vision correcting programs, help with phantom limb pain, communal movie watching experiences, the ability to visit virtual art galleries – there's a myriad of weird and wonderful things you can and could be able to do with the Rift and it's these are the sorts of things Facebook is going to push. AND, it's these sorts of things that will take the Rift mainstream, which is where it needs to be if you ever want to see it get the install base it needs for big developers and publishers to give it the time of day.

But what about Kickstarter backers? You helped fund the very company that has just been bought out. As Notch said, he didn't drop 10 grand on the Kickstarter to see if sold off to a giant corporation two years later. Neither did any of the original backers. If we cut to the quick though, you know what you and he did pay for? Your rewards. Notch paid that extra money to go to the Oculus developers studio (which he only just decided to do), an early Devkit, Doom 3 BFG and a few little extras. If you pledged enough for the original Rift, you got one. That's what Kickstarter is, a potentially volatile pre-order system, that is designed to help companies and ideas that you like succeed.

In Oculus' case, it worked exactly as intended.

oculus
You backed this, and got this. What's the problem?

While it would be a classy move for Oculus to offer its original backers a kickback now that it's hardly cash poor, Kickstarter is not an investment scheme. Campaigns cannot offer financial incentives (though on other crowd funding sites, that is a possibility) and beyond fulfilling the rewards, the campaign creators are not beholden to “backers” in any way. Is it nice when a company continues to listen to and support early fans afterwards? Sure, and Oculus has done that over the past year and a half, but considering so many Kickstarter campaigns face endless delays and some don't even send rewards before running out of money – just look at CLANG – Oculus did right by everyone.

Everyone still loves Tim Schafer and Double Fine remember, me included, but his company took eight times the original budget for Broken Age and still ran out of money, leading to delays, half a product and calls for more funding through early access to actually finish the project. That's far worse than what Oculus is doing and Double Fine hasn't received close to the amount of vitriol that Oculus has.

Even after everything I've said though, you're still pissed right? I can tell. I am too if I'm honest and I think I know why – Oculus Rift just stopped being cool. Dare I say it, but we're in danger of becoming technological hipsters.

I know it's difficult to accept, but by being all uppity because the cool, startup, tech firm was bought by the giant corporation, is the same as that guy that stops liking a band because it's in the charts. The Rift doesn't stop becoming awesome just because Facebook bought the company that makes it.

Ultimately though, whether this sale is really a money grab by the owners, or a big middle finger to the earliest backers, or in-fact a real investment opportunity for a company that wants to make the best virtual reality hardware imaginable, while giant corporations like Sony are nipping at its heels, we're just going to have to wait and see. It really is way too early to tell what's going to happen here, but just remember this: just because you were invested emotionally in Oculus and its future, doesn't mean pandering to you is what's best for the company.

You aren't its only customers, in-fact, you can't be if it ever wants to something more than a curiosity you show your mates that had no idea VR existed. It's been a cool run, but Oculus and its Rift is going to step out into the sunlight sooner or later and at that point we can either go with it and enjoy the minor props from knowing it would do well all along, or we can sit and grumble about how the owners sold out.

Discuss on our Facebook page, over HERE.

Either way, VR technology doesn't care, it's coming and it's going to be awesome.

The post The Facebook, Oculus deal makes sense for everyone first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/the-facebook-oculus-deal-makes-sense-for-everyone/feed/ 5
Four reasons Esports are better than real sports https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/jon-martindale/four-reasons-esports-are-better-than-real-sports/ https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/jon-martindale/four-reasons-esports-are-better-than-real-sports/#respond Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:34:06 +0000 http://www.kitguru.net/?p=123499 I'll admit from the get go I'm not a big sports fan. I don't go to the pub with the “lads” and drink generic beer and shout at a TV while a band tries to play in the corner. I went through the phase many people do of being interested in football, until I realised …

The post Four reasons Esports are better than real sports first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
I'll admit from the get go I'm not a big sports fan. I don't go to the pub with the “lads” and drink generic beer and shout at a TV while a band tries to play in the corner. I went through the phase many people do of being interested in football, until I realised that the viewing experience is akin to a very slow game of tennis. Your head pans from the left, all the way to the right, then back to the left again and once in a blue moon someone takes a shot. Seriously when the average points scored per game is less than three, it's not that exciting.

Now there are some sports I do enjoy. I like a bit of MMA, I'll check out the odd Olympic event when it's on. As long as there isn't endless hugging, boxing can be quite exciting sometimes too. All in all though, I don't really like to watch other people play a game. If I enjoy it, I'd rather go and do it myself.

However one thing I have found myself watching quite a bit of recently are Esports. Being a life long gamer, perhaps this is more because I understand the nuances a bit better, but when I was a kid I loved football and I quickly grew out of that. So it got me pondering: I think there's real reasons that Esports could potentially become as dominant as traditional ones, because they offer something far different and in some cases better.

1: Ever evolving gameplay

Now for some people this might be the opposite of the reason they like traditional sports. They can watch a few games, not check it out for a year, come back and everything is the same. The teams will have different lineups and there will be the odd new kit, but the rules are the same, formations aren't too different, it's all the same sort of deal. However with Esports, patches and balancing tweaks are released, new characters are created and new strategies are discovered all the time.

If you were a League of Legends player from the start of Season one and you quit merely six months ago, coming back to it now would be a big surprise for you. The item shop is different, there's 10+ new champions and a reskin and redesign of one of the major maps.

LoL Shop
I still panic whenever this screen pops up.

While this might relate to a player as much as an Esports viewer, when it comes to the pros, what this means is an ever evolving gameplay. You don't have the same teams fielding winning combinations, or tweaking their setup just because of who they're playing. They have to change how they play because the ground beneath their feet may literally be different from how it was last time. And from a viewer's perspective, this makes for a more exciting matchup.

It means that teams will need to be constantly evolving their gameplay, changing it up, trying new things and it means as a viewer you'll see new emergent strategies on a more regular basis.

Admittedly you can chalk up a win for traditional sports in terms of their pick-up-and-play nature, but I'd far rather have a slightly harder time understanding the nuances, than I would a static game that plays out almost the same, year on year.

2: Viewing is free, high definition,wherever you want, on whatever you want

Of course you can pick up some sports on your standard digital TV connection and you can watch some sports online for free, but good luck with the vast majority of it. Don't have Sky sports? Aren't willing to pay the £10 for the next UFC Pay Per View? You're out of luck, because the companies behind those broadcasts strip the pirated videos offline in hours of their posting and they keep it up for months after the event, making it so you'll never find a recording – until maybe they replay it on a recap show further down the road.

Compare this with the latest and greatest competitions being held by the worlds biggest Esports organisations. Seriously, go to the Major League Gaming homepage right now, what's there right in the centre? Free, live streams of the most popular competitive games at the moment. They load automatically. Sure there's a quick advert, but compare that to having to pay for a cable or satellite service and dealing with adverts.

On top of that, look just underneath the main live stream videos. Skipping over the news headlines, there's the “top videos,” where the most popular games have been highlighted. In the VOD section, we have tonnes of videos of almost every recent game. Qualifiers, championship matches and even training videos that offer tips for amateurs. These are all freely available, streaming in HD, compatible through the site's mobile app with iOS and Android. You can watch these videos for free, live or on demand, wherever you want and on whatever device you want. This is light-years ahead of traditional sportscasting.

On top of this, with the continued proliferation of services like Twitch, you can watch the pros play from their own perspective. Imagine if this was done with traditional sports? It would be the equivalent of some of the world's highest paid sports professionals talking you through what they're doing as they play a practice game, with video. That just doesn't happen.

Streaming
Some people are building entire careers out of streaming their gampeplay.

3: Becoming a pro is far, far easier

Maybe you could contest that this is because the calibre of player isn't at the same level as you would find earning multiple millions a year in other sports, and that's somewhat true, but there's a couple of truer reasons that make becoming a professional gamer much easier: 1: It's a relatively young industry, so the top players haven't been weaned on the game they're playing, 2: It's so much more accessible than traditional sports.

Taking these points individually, professional gaming is very, very young. In its current iteration, it's a couple of years old at best. I'm talking the domination of MOBAs, the worldwide streaming, the professionalism. Go back a little further to the FPS dominance with titles like Quake III or Unreal Tournament and you're going back just over a decade. Go back even further to the much more niche like arcade games, where it was more competing for high scores than head to head and you're looking at thirty years or so. Compare that with the legacy of football, basketball, cricket and you're talking hundreds of years since their inception and for most, over a hundred years of competitive, high level, professional play.

Every pro gamer out there now, unless we're talking Starcraft, or some of the few titles that have been around for a long time, has less than five years of experience with the game they're playing. DotA players, less than ten. League of Legends gamers, maybe three. Compare that with the football stars of the world that have been kicking a ball around since they were in the low single digit age range and it's obvious why – if these games survive – we're going to see huge advances in gamer skill over the next decade or so.

However it's not just that, that makes it “easy” to become a pro in comparison to some sports, its also the accessibility. I can login to LoL now, boot up the client and play with people that have a couple thousand games under their belt. I myself have maybe 500. I'm not particularly good, but say I was. Say I was damn good. I could join a team and start hitting up the ranked matches. Say I win a lot of them, before long, I'm playing against some of the best in the world. It might not be the absolute top, but chances are I'll run into one or two of them doing a solo queue.

How often does that happen with other sports? How often can you be the best player down the local park and that leads to you playing head to head with one of the game's superstars?

4: No geographical, political or cultural boundaries

Gaming is often given a bit of a bad rap when it comes to acceptance of other races, sexualities and genders. Some of that is deserved, a lot of it is just kids playing games they're parents shouldn't have given them in the first place. But ultimately, professional gaming has a far better track record with this than traditional sports. Not a week goes by without football fans or the players themselves getting accused of racist actions or chants and as I pointed out above, they've been around for decades.

Racism
Of course video games are where the real evil lies.

Of course this happens in gaming and pro gaming too  – if the “toxic” League of Legends pros we've seen banned were anything to go by – but what Esports do do, that real world sports don't, is break down all sorts of boundaries. Mostly this is because we're not limited to playing these sorts of games in person. How often can you play basketball against a person or team of players from all over the world, with a similarly mixed roster on your own side?

But at the professional level, it's also designed with a world wide focus. There's none of the Baseball style “World Series,” with only national teams. There are of course national competitions from smaller organisations and there are regional qualifiers,and the like, but every year with the biggest Esports games, we see who the best in the world is.

Got a great team from a small country? Maybe you're a great Starcraft player from Chile? You don't need to worry about having a local league to support your gameplay on a regular basis, you have plenty of professionals to play with around the world. On top of that, you have regular worldwide tournaments and competitions to attend.

Esports don't require local infrastructure. They're uniquely global.

Conclusion

Of course it would be remiss of me to point out that traditional sports are far easier to get into as a viewer and player. They're easier to understand, require very little in the way of technology and for the non-computer literate, they're far more intuitive. There's also a bigger audience for them, so you're among fellow fans far more often than with gaming. However with Esports, once you get past that initial understanding and begin to really get into the beautiful complexity that they offer, they're incredibly exciting.

On top of that, the audience, the money, the advertising, the spectacle, it's really, really growing. Esports are going to be huge and if you're the kind of person that can enjoy watching a sport where people kick around a ball for 90 minutes, I guarantee with a bit of effort you would find the fast paced action of a MOBA or RTS matchup even more exciting to watch.

Give it a try. See what you think.

The post Four reasons Esports are better than real sports first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/jon-martindale/four-reasons-esports-are-better-than-real-sports/feed/ 0
Do social networks make free speech, too free? https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/do-social-networks-make-free-speech-too-free/ https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/do-social-networks-make-free-speech-too-free/#comments Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:04:37 +0000 http://www.kitguru.net/?p=115722 Social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter, have brought the world together. They've allowed us to communicate with the stars of our generation and previous ones, they've let us see into the lives of those protesting in war torn countries and made it possible for us to tell public figures that we think they suck, …

The post Do social networks make free speech, too free? first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
Social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter, have brought the world together. They've allowed us to communicate with the stars of our generation and previous ones, they've let us see into the lives of those protesting in war torn countries and made it possible for us to tell public figures that we think they suck, directly, but it's caused some problems too. We've seen people arrested for things they've said, serious allegations thrown around without thought and personal abuse that some would claim is too targeted.

It brings about an interesting argument. On one side you have the rights of individuals to speak out and say what they feel, what they think and what they want, and on the other you have people being offended, people feeling hurt and perhaps more seriously, claims of libel. This leads us to a question that is often asked these days, does social networking allow too great a degree of free speech?

Twitter lets us do something that was not  possible before: it lets you send a message directly to a public figure. Imagine trying to send a message to some of the great actors and musicians of old. It would have taken the form of a letter, which would have either been immediately tossed or read by an assistant and if it was noteworthy maybe it would have ended up infront of the person it was intended for. Now though, all you need to do is time your @ mention correctly and you can practically guarantee that the person you wanted to contact will have seen it. That's not necessarily the case for those with millions and millions of followers, but those with a couple hundred thousand who receive a few mentions a minute – they're pretty easily reachable.

This is a great thing for artists as it lets them ask questions of their fans and get immediate responses. They can communicate promotional material like the dates of gigs, or live appearances or simply make jokes and appear more down to earth. It's a great tool, but it can occasionally lead to people not being very nice. Take the case of Olympic diver Tom Daley. After coming fourth in his event at the 2012 games, one man tweeted him to say that he had let down his deceased father.

Now this is a very nasty thing to say, no one is going to disagree with that. However, what was said there was not illegal. Nobody has the right to repeatedly harass someone, but neither does anyone have the right not to have their feelings hurt. You're reading my work write now. There is nothing stopping you – apart from KitGuru moderators – from telling me in the comment section below how much of an idiot I am. Maybe you'll call me short – considering I'm 5'4, you'd not be wrong – or any manner of horrible things. But it wouldn't be illegal.

This is why it's a problem that after Tom Daley received these messages and there was a moderate public outcry, a 17 year old and 28 year old man were both arrested. The former was eventually issued a warning and no charges were brought against the latter, but they were arrested and investigated – simply for telling someone in a graphic manner that they didn't like them.

An instance like this was brought up again recently, when a man posted a picture on Facebook of him burning a poppy on Remembrance Sunday. Again, this is a pretty disrespectful thing to do. Naturally people were outraged, offended, wanted to string him up, have him beaten – all sorts of horrible things – things some would suggest are a lot worse than essentially burning a plastic flower. However of course it's the message of what he was doing that was what people found offensive. Along with his curse filled caption, it was his way of putting a middle finger up to the dead who have fought to maintain the nation he now enjoys the privileges of.

However, one of those privileges is the freedom of speech.

People often like to say that people should wear a poppy whether they want to or not. I would imagine those same people are some of the most angry about the poppy burner's actions. Ironically, by not wearing a poppy and even by burning one, the lad who lit that fake flower on fire, was exercising his free speech. He was going against the grain and telling you he doesn't support it. The poppy wearer's are absolutely exercising their free speech too, but just as they would be outraged if someone arrested them for wearing them, shouldn't we be outraged that someone has been arrested for doing the exact opposite?

Burning Poppy
Can I post this safely? Or are we suggesting that burning poppy's are like pictures of a certain prophet?

The final case I want to look at is the recent issue with retired politician Alistair McAlpine, who was vaguely implicated by a Guardian journalist through Twitter of sexually abusing one or more children during his career. In the wake of this, Lord McAlpine has said he plans to take legal action against those that made libellous claims about him on the social network, ending what his lawyer described as “Trial by Twitter.”

While I'm far from a legal expert,  it seems – if you look at British defamation law – that as long as you are basing an opinion on facts, that you are perfectly allowed to have it. You can likely argue that any claims of child sexual abuse is libellous if the person is innocent, simply because of the stigma attached to the crime, but I think in the case of the Guardian writer – who merely pointed out that McAlpine worked in the cabinet while the abuse was going on – he should be ok, legally. Morally it's another thing altogether. Hinting at someone being a paedophile is akin to breaking out the torches and lynching rope, so while I would still argue he has a right to say it, perhaps with something so emotionally charged, the journalist, or any other Twitter user should clarify their position first.

“In my opinion…” is how any tweet should begin if you plan to make outrageous statements that may land you in legal waters. It's far from perfect, but make it clear you're stating an opinion not a fact.

However this is an issue that's been around for decades, the only difference now is it's online, it's often permmanent and it's much easier for people to read. Twitter is the equivalent of writing on the wall of the world's public toilets. You can use your marker pen to scrawl a person's name at the top to try and make sure they read it and they may do, but the point is: they don't have to read it. It may not be nice people saying things about you, but you don't have to read it. Tom Daley didn't need to read those tweets. Nobody needed to give attention to the poppy burner and Lord McAlpine doesn't need to listen to twitter commentary about his alleged actions.

Sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me. We all know it's not true, we all know that words hurt, but we should act like they don't. Words can hurt, but words unheard cannot. If a person says something horrible about you, but you're not around to hear it, have they really said anything?

It's a weird stance to take, but if we want to avoid threatening what those we wear poppies to remember fought for, it's a necessary one.

Ultimately, I believe in free speech. I believe in the right to say what I want, but more importantly, I believe in the right for you to say what you want. I may not always agree with you, but I will always defend your right to say it. I hope you feel the same way about me.

The post Do social networks make free speech, too free? first appeared on KitGuru.]]>
https://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/do-social-networks-make-free-speech-too-free/feed/ 3