Console Wars

And today, for once, we will be talking about something other than TV---which is amazing, because really, TV was my first true love and is still, to this day, the driving force behind much of my creative spark.

But today, however, we will move on from television and talk about another thing: video games. Or, more specifically, console wars---which is really more about something I hate, because I have kind of thought the whole thing was stupid from the beginning.

Now, first off, this whole discussion is going to mostly ignore the Wii U. This has nothing to do with whether I think the Wii is a current generation console (it is, dammit, because it came out this generation) or how much I like the thing (which is not much, both because I think that it's main innovation is a complete farce next to the awesomeness that was the Wiimote and because its failure as a console has kept the price of the Wii from falling and me from getting a Wii so I can play the 2 or 3 Wii games that I really enjoy). Instead, it has to do with the fact that the Wii U really isn't competing with its next generation console companions, the Playstation 4 and the Xbox One (or the Xbone, if you prefer---which, I believe, is supposed to be a derogatory nickname but is one I actually still find kind of fun and charming). The big question has been, ever since the new consoles were officially announced, Xbox or Playstation?

Secondly, I will openly admit that my husband and I pre-ordered an Xbox One. In fact, we did it even before Microsoft reversed course on the whole always online, kinect required thing. Why? Because while it was poorly advertised (Microsoft marketing FAIL) and could have been implemented better than it was, their whole digital-only games thing was actually pretty cool and would have worked better for me (and, yes, we cough up for very high speed internet and both our Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 are always online anyway) than the current disk swapping regime. I was sorry to see it go and I do hope they bring it (or at least the family sharing plan) back at some point in the future.

Anyway, moving to the real point here, the console war itself, the thing that really drives me crazy about the whole thing is how the dynamic of the whole thing is working---I've been on Kotaku a certain amount lately, and all the console war seems to be is people accusing one another of being fanboys (ug) and talk about gaming policy/who's trying to screw over the gaming community harder. It seems that very few people are talking about games, which has been driving me crazy from the beginning, in part because Playstation trolls (not people who happen to plan to get the Playstation 4, but those who have to openly declare to the world that anyone getting the Xbox One must be an idiot---which is to say no one that I've actually talked about this with on either Facebook or in real life) have been claiming from the beginning of this madness that real gamers will get the Playstation 4.

Let's get one thing straight here, "real" gamers care about playing the games they like. Real gamers will get the console that will have the games they really want the most---you know, so they can actually play them. It's really that simple. For me, that's the Xbox One because of Halo (I get to play Spartan dress-up! Yay! Powered armor is so cool and I can make it my favorite color and I can make my character a girl . . .) and Forza (I have owned every game in this series and love all of them---and yes, I love it more than Gran Turismo, which I have played). For you, that may be the Playstation 4. People's tastes are different and when you're spending your money (and let's face it, both consoles have a pretty hefty price tag, even if the Xbox is definitely the pricier of the two), what matters is that you get what you want out of it. Figure out what consoles have the exclusives you want (which, I will note, is actually a pretty anti-consumer move in and of itself and both Sony and Microsoft do it) and then buy that one. Or, if you're into new, innovative indie games, then buy the console you feel supports that best (which apparently, according to the internet at large, is the Playstation, although I'll admit to being a bit skeptical based on all the misinformation about how the original Xbox One game sharing policy was going to work still seems to be believed by so many people). For me, I'm not, because I can't really think of the last "indie" game I liked. Maybe my definition is odd, but it always seemed like they were just a bunch of cheap, crappy looking games available through Xbox Live, for the most part. Again, not for me, but if it's for you (and I will also admit to being somewhat skeptical of those who are so in love with the Playstation's indie game policy but never seem to talk about their love of indie games, but this may be colored by my own preference for more mainstream games), then buy for that!

The point here is, do what works best for you and remember what really doesn't matter here even if it does seem to be at the heart of the debate right now:

Which company has the true interests of gamers at heart. Newsflash here, folks, neither of them do. They're both big evil corporations and they both only care about making money for their shareholders (in fact, they're pretty much legally obliged to). Much like Microsoft's varying reversals about the Xbox One, Sony's moves are less about making us happy and more about getting us to spend money. Are the two connected? Yes, because we spend money on what makes us happy, but if the two ever diverge I can promise Sony will go for the money. So will Microsoft. Like I said, they both suck. Really, the difference between the two of them has more to do with Sony being better at figuring out what will get people to spend money (better marketing, which, again, Microsoft completely failed at) than anything.

Hardware. Yes, the Playstation 4 has better hardware. No, it won't matter. Why? Because most games will be cross-console anyway. Developers won't be making two different games just so they can take advantage of the slightly better graphics offered by the Playstation 4. It's too expensive. That's why no one did that for the current generation either and games pretty much look the same on both consoles. There's no reason that will change for this generation. Honestly, the only way in which hardware will really matter for the person actually playing the consoles is in terms of controllers. Which controller works better for you is important, because, again, most games will be cross-platform and your control scheme is your window into the game experience. Getting the controller that works better for you (or doesn't have features you hate, like my own dislike of the PS4's touchpad), is definitely important.

So, what's the takeaway here? No console, even ones as similar as the Xbox One and Playstation 4, is one size fits all. They are different and they do both have different things going for them---with many of the things that are bonuses to one customer being detriments to the other. We're all different and if you're going to bother to get a next gen console, you should get the one that will really work best for you, from day to day, rather than worrying about all this crap knocking around the internet about how either console is stupid. They'll both do well. They'll both be great. They will both play games well and they will both have good games. Pick the one that works best for you and then game on.

Once Upon a Time in Wonderland

So, as people may or may not know, I'm a huge fan of Once Upon a Time. Huge. It just hits all the right buttons for me: it's a fantasy TV show, it leans heavily on its characters to be what's good about the show and it evokes my Disney-laden childhood (not unintentionally, of course, and not unsurprisingly given that it's a fairy tale show aired on Disney-owned ABC). Also, the villains are awesome. Rumpelstiltskin is a delightfully magnificent bastard with a wonderful sense of dramatic flair. Regina Mills (the Evil Queen)---well, she's just so evil (and she revels in it!). And yet still sympathetic. And kind of great looking (I have serious girl-crush on the Evil Queen. And a normal one too).

In any event, the point of all this is that I was really looking forward to the premiere of Once Upon a Time in Wonderland. It was based on a series I love (but which, admittedly, did wander a bit in its second series while it looked for a major plot arc to fill the hole left by the amazing first season finale) and the ads for it looked epic and amazing and seemed to suggest a theme of awesome-girl-doggedly-tries-to-find-tragically-lost-love that I found very appealing (mind you, when you use Two Steps from Hell as the soundtrack for your commercials, it's hard for them not to look epic and awesome).

Did the premiere of the new show disappoint? Well, actually, yes, but that's not going to stop me from watching the new show. Basically, it just wasn't completely awesome. It was passable with some elements that suggest it could mature into a really enjoyable show, and I'm willing to give it that chance. I still think this show could be really good, it showed some spark, but it's just not the immediately engaging, suck-you-in-immediately series premiere that the original Once Upon a Time had.

The best parts of the show were Jafar and Alice. Jafar was a complete badass with an awesome wardrobe and I definitely think it will be fun watching whatever the hell his evil plan is come to fruition. He seems clever and calculating and expect good things from him. Basically, he definitely seems like the sort of villain I've come to expect from Once Upon a Time, which is a show I watch mostly for the villains.

Alice, on the other hand, was something of a nice surprise. I liked her and thought she was kind of a fun protagonist. This is in stark contrast to Emma from Once Upon a Time, who was never really a dislikable character (unlike another character portrayed by Jennifer Morrison, Allison Cameron) but was just never that interesting. She just sort of sat there being disbelieving. Alice, on the other hand, is the person who is disbelieved and she's pretty much just an action hero, coming off as quite the badass. Despite the fact that Emma does seem to have some decent fighting chops, she just never came off as a badass---which is really kind of too bad.

The worst part of the show, though, was the other villain, the Red Queen, who much like Alice evokes comparisons to her Once Upon a Time counterpart, Regina. Unfortunately, where Alice fared well via the comparison, the Red Queen suffered. Badly.

Part of the problem is just that the acting for the Red Queen kind of suck. Seriously, she just sort of struts around going "I have cheekbones!" and is incredibly, incredibly wooden. The real kicker, though, really is just that the obvious comparison for the Red Queen is against Regina and where Regina is a raging badass of badassness, the Red Queen is really just kind of weak tea. For instance, when Jafar is threatening her and she replies by giving a "But this is my town! We play by my rules!" speech, it just comes off as stupid, because she doesn't back it up or even seem at all affronted that Jafar just tried to strangle her to death. Really? Really? Regina would have responded to that by plucking his heart out of his chest and making him dance around like a marionette on a string. Regina gets played sometimes (pretty much every character on Once Upon a Time does, because it is something of a show of gamesmanship) but she sure as hell doesn't take threats lying down. Like I said, the Red Queen is just kind of weak tea. At this point, I'm kind of hoping that Jafar kills her like a bitch.

Other than that, though, the pilot suffered from a bit of mediocrity. The Knave of Hearts, for instance, was a bit predictable and doesn't really come off so much as a character at this point as much as a cardboard cutout. He'll probably get developed later into an interesting character---even in the pilot, there are plenty of hints of his potential to be a really interesting character--but in the pilot, he's really just not there yet.

Unfortunately, though, the romance also suffers from mediocrity at this point, probably because they presented us with the major highlights of the relationship without any of the build-up that would really make those moments meaningful to us and they also just filmed them too early in the production of the series. The actors haven't really had the time to get their chemistry totally worked out and the scenes suffer from a bit of weak scripting too---it seems like the writers hadn't really figured out the relationship in any way more than "it's tragic love" and they just started writing the scenes from that point without really having worked out who these characters were and how they related to each other on a deeper level than just "love." Again, this isn't something that can't be saved but I have to admit that having this romantic relationship come off as being so without depth really did hurt the show in its premiere. Much of the premise revolves around Alice trying to get Cyrus back, so they really need to sell us on that relationship in order to give the plot some umph. They probably should have waited to film those scenes until the show was less new and, if I may be so bold, they probably could have dealt with keeping the Two Steps from Hell soundtrack for some of those scenes too. Nothing says love like Heart of Courage.

So, yes, I was disappointed by Once Upon a Time in Wonderland. It didn't blow me away the way I had hoped it would. But, I'll keep watching and I have a great hope that it can get better. It definitely seems like a show that at least has a shot at being really good once it finds its groove.