The Viewing Experience Episode 2: Canada

It’s been over a year since I last wrote an entry in this series, but finally I’m getting back into it. Since coming to Toronto, Canada I’ve checked out a film or two down at the local Cineplex and I’d say it’s time I took a look at what makes the business of visiting them tick. The film was Spectre and the place was the Scotiabank Theatre down on Richmond Street.

Differences and a few other quirks

• ·      Keeping films on for longer, depending on success

In most common cinemas I’ve been to, every film has a set amount of time to be shown at a cinema; this is usually a maximum period of four weeks. But for Cineplex in Canada, a film will keep on going if it proves to be successful. Take the wildly popular Jurassic World for example, a summer blockbuster which has raked in millions this year. It premiered in June and yet was still being shown as late as September. This, I feel could a bit of a double-edged sword; on the one hand, it ensures that popular films get recognition and that both the theatres and the filmmakers can have a better opportunity to break even with profits. But on the other hand, it makes it easier for bad films such as Transformers: Age of Extinction to rake in much more than they deserve in specific regions.

• ·         The VIP experience

While I skipped over it due to its higher price, the VIP package is an interesting proposition indeed; rather than simply having premium seats, Cineplex goes a step further by offering fully-fledged meals and drinks both before the film and then delivered to your seats. Limited to adults only, VIP definitely seems to add a kind of upper class flair to the cinema experience, with a hangout lobby and an extensive bar, turning cinema-going into a fully-fledged night out. From a business standpoint it’s another means to boost profits beyond the common cinema-goer, but from my point of view, it’s an intriguing option which could definitely build on what you usually get from going to the movies.

• ·         Mini-games before the film

Cineplex’s SCENE points program works similar to that of an ODEON premier card; you collect points which can be used on discounts and other additional items. But in addition to adverts and trailers that play before the main feature, there are carefully selected games that make use of an app and playing them can earn audience members even more points. For example, when I saw Spectre, there was a poll that asked the audience to vote for the best performance of James Bond and those who chose the most popular answer (In this case Daniel Craig) earned more points. Other games include a tie-in with the local Blue Jays baseball team in Toronto and a brief quiz or two. It’s an interesting component of the SCENE strategy that you’ll have to try out for yourself to see if you appreciate it. Personally I felt it was another obstacle that came in between the audience and the film they came to see.

Things that could be better

• ·         Adverts

Adverts are a common fixture in any cinema; that’s been true for years, but the ads down at Cineplex went far beyond any I had seen before. What it all comes down to is that so many connections and collaborations exist in a city as big as Toronto. Taking your cinema ticket over to the massive CN Tower gets you a discount and in return, the tourist attraction places it’s marketing into the theatre for example. Audiences play a mini-game about the Blue Jays and as a result, more attention is directed towards the baseball team. The adverts also extend beyond the screen, with the foyer and reception littered with all kinds of ads catering to the newest big film; Jame’s Bond’s newest watch in Spectre flanked the entrance to the screen we saw the film in for example. Advertisements may be the most commonly used method to expose a product or service, but Cineplex really does go overboard on their use and placement.

• ·         Refreshment prices

Refreshments are outrageously overpriced at Cineplex and this is again down to numerous collaborations and partnerships. Everything sold in the foyer is an official brand which makes for good choice, but it also drives the prices up to a pretty ridiculous level. The bundle packages which include large popcorn bags, a packet of sweets and a large drink are grouped together to offer SCENE points for those who fork out the high prices for them, and rather suspiciously, very few prices for these refreshments are displayed on the Cineplex website. Thinking back to what I said about the viewing experience in Greece, it’s probably too much to ask for both a wide choice of refreshments, plus reasonable prices to support it. I recommend you stick to the common practice of bringing your own cheaper food and drink with you on this occasion.

• ·         Raising prices over weekends

This is a more frustrating bone I have to pick with Cineplex; why do they have to raise cinema ticket prices over the weekend? It’s a fairly easy money grab for the company, to up the prices over the period where most people generally tend to take in a movie. When prices vary depending on the day of the week (the cheapest being Tuesday), it comes off as quite inconvenient for the audience. It’s a small gripe, but one that also takes away from things a bit.

In closing

Heading to the cinema in Canada gives an audience plenty of choice in both refreshments and viewing, but there are several aspects which end up distracting and detracting from the overall experience. The adverts are long and extensive, and the games to earn points will be an unwanted annoyance to some, but if you can get past these issues, the Cineplex is still a worthwhile place to visit to get your movie fix.

Star Wars Battlefront: A carefully crafted and dangerously enticing consumer trap

“It’s a trap!” Good old Admiral Ackbar famously cried out these words in Return of the Jedi more than thirty years ago at the sight of a massive Imperial force bearing down on the rebel fleet. In November 2015, this statement carries an interesting analogy; scores of gamers and Star Wars fans alike are racing towards the next big game, a title we have been waiting ten years for. It looks and sounds amazing, with gameplay that just about anyone can pick up and fool around with. It also runs really well with hardly any bugs or other obstacles getting in the way. They approach the highly anticipated release, eager to tear into it in time for Christmas, but the excitement veers off target and the “fleet” of fans instead enter an approach vector with Electronic Arts. Their business cannons are armed and ready to annihilate any and all sense of value, to exploit the massive anticipation for a new trilogy of Star Wars movies and impose their full control over all the Star Wars games to come.

This is the position we find ourselves in with the new Star Wars Battlefront, a title with gorgeous production values, accessible gameplay and one of the most bare-bones content packages to ever be released on this gaming generation so far. It’s style over substance from the get-go and is being designed to maximise the profit intakes at the expense of giving consumers a great value product. Shocked? Let me elaborate for you…

What is the most profitable Star Wars game of all time? Star Wars Battlefront 2, it’s no contest; the game sold over a million units on both the PlayStation 2 and original Xbox which were impressive figures back then. The series took players into the most intense battles and conflicts in the Star Wars saga yet seen in video games. Not only that, but it was also based in the first and third person genres, two of the most popular avenues in the industry. Considering that EA owned DICE, creators of the Battlefield series (which served as the original inspiration for Battlefront), there was no way they would let such a massive money-making franchise pass them by. As the anticipation for the Star Wars sequel trilogy began to build from 2012 onwards, EA got their wish a year later when they finalised a deal with Disney to have exclusive rights to develop Star Wars games for the foreseeable future. The company then moved quickly to take advantage of this hype and announced a new Star Wars Battlefront at E3 2013. Gamers everywhere grew incredibly excited; our imaginations running wild at what ten years of hardware progression could do to a game many of us played almost religiously back in 2005.

But sadly it was not to be; minimising the development costs while maximising the sales was EA’s top prerogative and this meant that numerous features from Battlefront 2 were cut out from the reboot. This was also done to ensure that the new game would meet the hard deadline of being released in time for The Force Awakens without fail. This included the clone wars, galactic conquest, space battles, character classes including unique units, numerous planets from the original and prequel trilogies and perhaps the most egregious omission of all, a single player campaign which proved surprisingly engaging in the previous title in the series. One of the things I enjoyed most about Rise of the Empire in Battlefront 2 was the way the simple story filled in a gap or two in the timeline between Episodes III and IV, not to mention being able to tackle it with a friend in local coop. Once the core features were announced, long-term fans were quick to call out the game in April 2015 for just how many massive steps backwards it took from its near decade old predecessor; nothing could be done or changed, the feature list was set in stone whether long term fans liked it or not.

The beta for Star Wars battlefront, which ran from October 8^th to October 13^th 2015 was the largest beta ever done by EA; nine million players all clocked into the testing and many more also jumped into the EA Access program to get into the game a week early on Xbox One. It was at this point that EA revealed three main editions of the game; standard, deluxe, and ultimate. The problem of poor value returned, picking up from where the stripped feature list left off. The standard edition was overpriced enough for a multiplayer only game, but the so called “extras” you got in the other editions were incredibly basic; most of these from the Ion torpedo and Han Solo’s blaster were items that could be unlocked after just a few multiplayer matches on the game’s release. There was absolutely no point in paying an extra ten pounds or dollars to instantly access these items, but that wasn’t the worst part of EA’s editions. Battlefront was also flanked by a fifty dollar season pass containing 16 additional maps, a grossly unbalanced and overpriced component which should have been included in the base game to begin with. EA had seized control of all content for Star Wars Battlefront, splitting it up however they pleased in the time leading up to launch.

This notion of control has swept into the base game itself; popular YouTuber Angry Joe has discovered there is no option for customisable private matches. Not only that, but every last server in a multiplayer only game is owned and controlled by EA, meaning they could choose to shut down the game whenever they want and force the community to move on to the next instalment. Between the sequel trilogy of Star Wars films and the countless spin-offs Disney has planned, and the announcement of sequels already in the pipeline EA could potentially keep going the same way with every new entry, all the while continuing to overcharge consumers for both the base game and have a load of content restricted to DLC.

EA’s true motives behind Star Wars Battlefront have become clearer leading up to release, and now that the game is in the hands of consumers, the most damning thought of all comes into play. It’s still going to sell millions (9 to 10 million units before the end of the fiscal year according to projections) because of how devious EA has been in promoting and preparing the game for an unearned financial gain. The game’s success is all but guaranteed and no amount of criticism for a poor value product is going to change that. You can’t blame DICE for this; they’ve been at the mercy of EA ever since the corporation acquired them in 2006. Why did Battlefield 4 launch in such a poor state in 2013? Because it was rushed out the door by a publisher cracking the whip to turn a profit; the developer never would have let that happen if EA had given them more time. Now they’re probably going to be pressed into making more of these games year after year. As for the rest of us, a vast majority will be sucked into the game easily thanks to its convincing look and the authenticity of its license. The game may play well and look well, but I can’t stress enough that Star Wars Battlefront is not worth anywhere near full price no matter which way you look at it. It plays on your love of Star Wars and endlessly boasts about putting you in “The Star Wars battles of your dreams”. It’s a trap designed for the common consumer to fall into and it needs to be avoided, despite the persistently growing temptation to buy into it.

Spectre Movie Review

Released: 26th October 2015 (UK)

Starring: Daniel Craig, Lea Seydoux, Monica Belluci, Christoph Waltz, Ben Whishaw, Naomie Harris, and Ralph Fiennes

Length: 148 minutes

Genre: Action/Spy

Daniel Craig makes a whole-hearted bow out of the 007 franchise in Spectre, the fourth and presumably final film in the actor’s decade long run as James Bond; it’s a satisfying movie with plenty to love for fans of the series, even if it does stumble in some ways.

Spectre’s tightly focused plot picks up straight after Skyfall, with the original MI6 headquarters still in ruins and the new staff getting settled into their new roles. Much the same way as previous films, the audience is catapulted into the middle of the action, this time with the Day of the Dead festival in Mexico for another tense action sequence. Following this commonly used trope, the film’s opening act takes on a slow burn, as Bond searches for something from his past. What could it be? It’s this question that grabs the audience from the outset and adds a kind of detective style to the film. The film then delivers its carefully concocted mix of action and dialogue, switching back and forth between the two regularly as well as bouncing between Bond overseas and his fellow MI6 colleagues in London. Since Craig first made his debut in Casino Royale nine years ago, we’ve seen a continuously flowing narrative arc with characters coming and going over the course of each film; one of Spectre’s most noteworthy aspects is the way it brings all four films together, weaving in references and mentions of past characters to tie off the actor’s contributions in a neat little ribbon. Spectre also carries on with the idea of special agents becoming obsolete and the rise of automated surveillance utilised briefly in Skyfall. It’s a modest attempt of picking up the modern day trends left over from the previous film, but the film doesn’t really do anything interesting with this theme; it’s very predictable and becomes a distraction rather than a benefit as the film goes on. Despite this slight annoyance, the film’s plot pushes on at a good pace, allowing its mysteries to be gradually pushed to the forefront.

The character of 007 is maintained very well as always, but Daniel Craig’s cold, almost callous mannerisms in the role feel quite subdued here; that’s because of his interactions with Dr Madeline Swann, played by the well-known French actress Lea Seydoux. She’s a relatively strong willed character who may not be as fully-fleshed out and versatile as Eva Green’s Vesper Lynd, but Seydoux’s performance is still emotive and versatile enough to make an impression. The character's personal ties to the main plot and the Craig saga as a whole are also well-thought out and implemented. Ben Whishaw, Naomie Harris and Ralph Fiennes are all growing into their respective roles of Q, Moneypenny and M very well and it was a wise choice to further incorporate them in the film’s action as opposed to the briefer participation they had before.

Sadly, Spectre really falls short when it comes to the opposite side, the villains; for what he’s built up to be, Christoph Waltz’s character is far too basic and doesn’t make enough of an appearance to make his presence felt. Waltz has proven himself to be a terrific actor in other films, and his part in Spectre goes by as a wasted opportunity. There are other antagonists to be discovered in the film, but they’re extremely under-developed and almost completely devoid of any remotely interesting traits. Only half of Spectre’s characterisation, not all of it can be enjoyed and appreciated and that is the film’s most frustrating fault.

Daniel Craig’s final Bond film is lovely to look at; Sam Mendes’s cinematography is once again excellent, providing the audience with some breath-taking views and seamless action choreography. A welcome return to the snowy mountaintops of the Alps in Austria is one particularly stunning backdrop in Bond’s search; on the whole, the agent’s globetrotting has been toned down significantly this time around with many locations having been seen in past films as well as this one. The film’s look is very clean and washed out, relying on fairly plain colours as opposed to the gritty and dirty look of the previous Craig films. Often times the film will make use of a black and gold colour palette to portray the shadowy nature of the titular organisation Bond is pursuing; it creates a foreboding atmosphere which the primary antagonist fails to live up to, not to mention bestow us with a dazzling title sequence. Spectre’s main theme, “Writing’s on the wall” by the popular British singer Sam Smith is a constant fixture which hangs over the film, its sweeping and elegant orchestrations sliding into place at all the right moments. It’s clear that a large sum of money was poured into Spectre and this has paid off enormously for the film’s visuals and presentation.

Disappointing villains aside, Spectre stands as a fond farewell to a great series of Bond films; it refuses to falter or fizzle in the face of being a closing chapter, becoming another worthwhile entry in the long running series. The next actor to play Ian Fleming’s wildly popular super spy will no doubt have their work cut out for them.

Rating: 4/5 Stars

Death of the Kinect: A look back on one of Microsoft's biggest failures

Every large company in gaming has had a failure or two over the years; the one question to ask is how long will it take for a corporation to pull itself back from failure and realise the mistake they made? With the recent roll-out of the “New Xbox Experience” on Xbox One, there’s one main detail which has caught my attention; the removal of gesture controls from the Kinect. I’ve expressed my disdain towards the motion sensing peripheral briefly a couple of times on this blog. Now that the device is being killed off for good, I think it’s time I did a full-fledged analysis/retrospective of why the Kinect failed so horribly as both a gaming peripheral and a piece of consumer technology.

E3 2009: Project Natal Announcement

Since 2006, the motion gaming scene had the industry in a tight grip; the Nintendo Wii had millions upon millions of people playing games, even those who had been uninterested in them before. Wii Sports still stands as one of the best-selling games of all time and it served a pitch perfect base for Nintendo to engage with the casual market, putting them miles ahead of both the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 from the offset. Of course, when any product achieves such a massive success, business competitors will inevitably have to respond in order to keep up. Sony would retaliate with PlayStation Move controller, which ended up being ridiculed for its peculiar aesthetics and design, but Microsoft would go in a different direction. At E3 in 2009, audiences were treated to Microsoft’s newest innovation, referred to as Project Natal. Natal looked genuinely unique and innovative if you judged it by the debut trailer alone; not only that but it also seemed like a fine alternative to the Nintendo’s motion controls, touting the phrase “You are the controller” with full body tracking and facial recognition. Kinect looked to do for motion games what its competitors couldn’t; actually get players up off the couch rather than have them simply flick their wrists. As with many Microsoft tech demos, the functions of the Kinect appeared to extend outside of games as well; scanning and using external items to play as well as gesture controls for movies were all seen in the demo. The stage was set for games and entertainment as a whole to become more immersive, more interactive and more engaging; little did we know how hollow this promise would ring…

E3 2010: The embarrassment begins…

Microsoft’s first showcase for the final product, named “Kinect” took place at Microsoft’s E3 press conference. One of the first lines spoken by Microsoft execs was this: “Last year we made a promise that Kinect would revolutionize the way you had fun, today we deliver on that promise”. What came next was quite a sight to behold; the promising features shown off in the Project Natal announcement were gone and in their place were dreadfully forced demonstrations alongside some of the most cringe-worthy stage demos the gaming community had ever seen at the big show. The poor young girl overacting in Kinectimals, the embarrassing Kinect Adventures demo and the awkward Dance Central showcase were just some of the moments that swamped the proper games Microsoft showed off throughout the conference. This was our first sign that something was wrong; when Kinect Creative Director Kudo Tsunoda took to the stage and showed off “the underside of an Xbox Avatar’s shoe” the avatar on screen appeared to jerk about strangely, not registering the executive’s movements very well. Was the device inaccurate? Nobody could tell for sure, considering how the product wasn’t yet out for general consumption. Looking back on the conference now, it was hard not to feel sorry for all the performers who embarrassed both themselves and the company they were representing. It firmly planted Microsoft at the bottom of the barrel of E3 that year; but rather than taking on feedback and taking steps to improve their conference, the corporation instead chose to continue their downward trajectory, one which was spearheaded by the Kinect and the numerous failings that were yet to come.

November 2010: Kinect for Xbox 360 launches to a surprising success

Microsoft’s dreadful E3 presser did not slow down the original Kinect in the months leading up to the release later that year. The casual market that Microsoft was targeting did not constantly tune in to gaming events; soon the Microsoft marketing machine kicked into gear with a five hundred million dollar marketing campaign and the device arrived in the hands of consumers just in time for Christmas. The campaign even included a live performance by American R&B singer Ne-Yo in Times Square, New York. It was a very successful launch for the peripheral, with eight million units flying off the shelves in the first 60 days. The Kinect set a record for the “fastest selling consumer electronics device” in the Guinness book of records. From that point on, Microsoft knew that the device was something they could push hard with, even with all the persistent negative feedback that was thrown their way.

E3 2011: Microsoft’s image in the eyes of fans continues to plummet

Microsoft would continue to turn their backs on the fans that had made their console so successful in 2011. The dreadful E3 presentations continued for the second year in a row with obnoxious football players, more overzealous child actors and mediocre projects which ended up having no proper payoff. But Microsoft simply would not listen; their marketing campaign had worked, the Kinect was selling well and they would continue to invest in the device for several years. Even Rare, the once renowned British developer of titles such as Goldeneye and Banjo Kazooie in the nineties found themselves pressed into making Kinect games year after year for their owner, something which long term fans cried foul of.

E3 2012: Awful exclusive titles come, thick and fast

As bad as games like Fighters Uncaged and Kinect Joy Ride were, they were only the first of a multitude of poor titles to grace Microsoft’s Kinect. The quality of Kinect games grew progressively worse; for every Dance Central, there were three or four badly thought out games. It came to a head in 2012 when the motion games for Kinect really started to infuriate people. Star Wars: Kinect was touted as one of the biggest titles for the Kinect and it ended up being a basic and underwhelming collection of mini-games that served to highlight how the Kinect was taking games backwards rather than forwards. Many fans felt that Steel Battalion: Heavy Armour ruined their beloved franchise, taking what was once a unique gaming experience in gaming and turning it into an exercise of intense frustration; players were left furious when the Kinect refused to read their motions, suffering the same cheap reloads time and time again. Fable: The Journey was condemned as a terribly basic and ill-conceived on-rails affair that took away from the already under-delivering fantasy franchise. Finally Dragon Ball Z and Harry Potter for Kinect were two of the laziest and most bare-bones motion games ever seen; embarrassments to the franchises they were based on. 

Why were these titles all so bad? I’d say it all comes down to the inaccurate tech used by the Kinect; it was difficult to program for and the sensors themselves simply could not register precise and complex movements. Because the Kinect’s functionality was so basic, developers could do little other than simplistic designs and gameplay and the progression, not to mention the evolution of titles for the sensor grinded to a halt. The only other times where Kinect was used for games was voice commands in titles such as The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and Mass Effect 3, but these felt more tacked on than anything else.

May 2013: Xbox One Announcement

It’s been over two years, but the memory of the disastrous debut of the Xbox One still remains etched into the minds of scores of gamers. Between digital rights management and a badly conceived focus on television, Microsoft seemed to be doing everything possible to enrage their most loyal fans. The rotten cherry on top was the new Kinect, which Microsoft claimed was far more accurate and advanced than the original. A majority of Xbox fans and general gamers were not impressed in the slightest with the new Kinect and this was exacerbated by the then recent leaks of NSA surveillance by Edward Snowden; rumour after rumour began to circulate around the web that the Kinect would be used to spy on people, that it would become a kind of corporate HAL 9000 used by security agencies. Who could blame them? Microsoft’s original plans for the Xbox One demanded that the Kinect be plugged into the console at all times; a highly restrictive and questionable component of their strategy. It was incredibly frustrating to watch; after the failure of the original Kinect for Xbox 360, most had hoped Microsoft would have learned their lesson and give up on the peripheral, but it would be another year before that would happen. They continued to force the Kinect into every aspect of their marketing, adamant that the Xbox One would not function without it. Even when the corporation reversed their controversial policies soon after E3 of that year, the Kinect was still a sore spot for many.

November 2013: The bad exclusives continue, while the better ones fail to gain traction

The new Kinect proved to be a tremendous burden for Microsoft’s current platform; people didn’t want it and yet the corporation insisted on everyone having it anyway. The Xbox One did manage to come out of the gate fairly well, but the games for the device just didn’t get any better. Fighter Within was a broken mess of a motion controlled game and whilst other titles such as Dance Central Spotlight and Kinect Sports: Rivals were competent enough, they didn’t receive nearly as much attention or praise as their predecessors did. From that point on we had nothing to go on when it came to Kinect sales figures. The last time we were told how many Kinect sensors had been sold was 24 million for the Xbox 360, according to an article from Gamespot in February 2013. Try looking up Kinect sales figures for 2014 and 2015; there’s nothing there. It could be assumed that after the initial rush of early adopters, things slowed down massively for the device; there were no solid games to keep people around and people began to ask for an Xbox One without the Kinect. Why? Because it simply wasn’t useful enough to warrant the one hundred dollar price bump; people were beginning to catch on to the device’s numerous shortcomings and developers slowly began to withdraw from making games for it.

May 2014: Microsoft unbundles the Kinect

I think the ultimate reason why the new Kinect didn’t succeed is because consumers had gotten sick of it; they were tired of Microsoft’s insistence on shoving the device in everyone’s face. The extreme levels of controversy surrounding the Xbox One’s announcement, and the fact that early adopters had to get the new Kinect with the system whether they liked it or not didn’t help either. It took four long years for Microsoft to finally realise just how badly the device was holding them back; they saw how much the PlayStation 4 was selling because they didn’t force a camera into the package, nor did they constantly ramble on about how important it was to the system’s infrastructure. The decision was made to begin selling a cheaper Kinect-less Xbox One in May 2014 and when that happened, sales for the console doubled. The message could not have been any clearer; the Kinect was unwanted, undesirable and unnecessary. For many, this marked the beginning of the end for Microsoft’s failed peripheral.

April 2015: Kinect for Windows production ceases

Microsoft has always had a rather questionable strategy for dealing with external devices and accessories; rather than allowing other third party hard drives, headsets or adapters to work with their systems, they instead demand that everyone purchase officially branded Microsoft or Xbox add-ons instead. Soon after Kinect for Xbox One was launched, they made a separate model of the device which would only work on PC. It was not received very favourably and the PC model proved just as unpopular as the version on its console counterpart; this prompted the corporation to release an adapter which connects the Xbox One Kinect to a PC. Despite this more consumer friendly move, Microsoft announced that the Kinect for Windows V2 would no longer be produced earlier this year.

November 2015: The New Xbox Experience eliminates gesture controls

The only thing the Kinect has now is voice controls and that’s pretty basic considering the same sort of thing could be done with headsets or microphones. There’s practically no reason to use the Kinect anymore and Microsoft doesn’t appear to be showing any more interest in the device they once pumped so much money into. While there may be those who still enjoy the Kinect for its voice controls, they are in the growing minority, and now that the latest Xbox One update has removed gesture controls, the final nail has been hammered into the coffin for the disappointing device. It seems that from the get-go, a vast majority of the gaming community felt little other than apathy and distaste towards the peripheral, a device which was designed to leech off of the Nintendo Wii’s success with the casual market. Sony’s PlayStation Move was guilty of a similar thing as well, but Kinect became the most infamous for its butchering of popular franchises and licenses, not the mention the sheer arrogance of a company who for too long believed in selling an inaccurate and poor value product to unwilling consumers.

Thankfully, things have now changed; Microsoft has clawed its way back from the ire of consumers and fans with new leadership and most importantly, a new focus free from gimmicks. The motion gaming scene has also picked up and moved on for the most part, Rare has turned back to making platformers again and the laughable press conference demonstrations have been phased out completely. The Kinect is no more, but it still stands as one of the biggest missteps Microsoft have ever taken in their time in the gaming industry.

(All YouTube videos used are the property of their respective owners)

Fallout 4 Fan Fiction: Vault 96 and the S3 Program

Segregation, Subjugation and Servitude; these were the three prime objectives of the S3 Program devised by the Enclave for Vault 96. The Vault-Tec Corporation made a deal with the United States government before the Great War commenced which was classified above top secret; that Vault 96 would be handed over to the government to use for their own nefarious needs after the radioactive fallout had subsided. To ensure the plan would begin smoothly the government planted a member of their special forces to serve as Overseer, Captain Jenna Nillson, as well as fifty other soldiers to serve as vault security. When Vault 96 was sealed shut, things were kept as normal and homely as possible, leaving no suspicions of the Enclave’s true motives.

Vault 96 was one of the largest vaults ever built; it housed 1800 occupants as opposed to the usual 1000 and had a vast array of top-of-the-line facilities, some of which were hidden from the Vault dwellers. Fifteen years after the Great War, the radiation had mostly subsided and the Enclave dispatched a contingent of 100 soldiers, scientists and combat robots to Vault 96; they entered the vault, rounded up the entire population and began the S3 program. The vault dwellers were split up into sections; children were brutally trained and worked into the Enclave’s ranks, adults were used for either breeding or hard labour while the elderly were used for experimentation or executed. Anyone who disobeyed or even angered Nillson and her men was punished severely and over the decades that followed, the vault population knew nothing but pain, suffering and fear under their so-called “masters”. A never-ending message was seared into their minds; “Your servitude and obedience are the most important steps towards rebuilding our great nation and the only way we can avoid repeating the actions that destroyed the old world”.

The Enclave’s original plan was to build an army in Vault 96, an unstoppable force that would sweep across the wasteland, destroying anyone and anything that didn’t fit their definition of a true American while also imposing complete and utter control over those who were “uncontaminated” by nuclear fallout. Some of the key components of this plan involved constructing a massive fleet of Vertibirds and mind control devices similar to the ones in the Capital Wasteland were also developed for use on any uncooperative human subjects. However, the order to emerge from the Vault never came, so instead the Vault 96 contingent remained below ground and continued their work, assuming that their superiors would eventually commence the operation they had spent decades preparing for. To ensure her authority would endure, the aging Captain Nillson uploaded her consciousness to the Vault’s computer systems before passing on; to this day, her static face on all the computer screens is a constant reminder to the Vault dwellers that they are being constantly monitored and controlled.

Even as the Enclave crumbled thanks to the actions of both The Chosen One and The Lone Wanderer, the Vault 96 contingent continued their sadistic power fantasy, adamant that their rule would not be challenged or ended. Perhaps they may have sought to overtake their defeated superiors to become the de-facto leaders of the Enclave, keeping the organisation alive no matter the cost. The leaders of the contingent remained inside their vault, with their only interactions being the use of proxy factions and disguised individuals who were selected to obtain useful technologies and information from The Institute at the Vault’s neighbouring city, Boston. Knowing that any major operations on the surface would draw the attention of the Brotherhood of Steel, each of these individuals was fitted with an automatic counter-measure to ensure the secrets of Vault 96 would never be revealed. If any key words were uttered outside of the vault, then the Enclave operative and everything he or she was carrying would be reduced to ash instantaneously.

After nearly two centuries of secrecy, a critical flaw in the Enclave’s plan has occurred; at a chance meeting with the Sole Survivor at the Diamond City trading hub, an operative of Vault 96 triggered the failsafe; while their body was turned to ashes, their belongings were left mostly intact. The Sole Survivor discovers several notes on holotapes as well as a map showing the location of Vault 96’s location. Curiosity gets the better of the Sole Survivor as he or she discovers the Vault door, only to be knocked out, captured by the Enclave and placed in the living quarters with the other vault dwellers. Here, the Sole Survivor learns first-hand of the brutal regime the Enclave holds over the vault and resolves to escape while also assisting (or hindering) the fellow vault dwellers in the process.

The Enclave officer encounter occurs at level 25 and as the player character; you decide how to deal with Vault 96. You have several choices as to how to escape or deal with the last remaining Enclave stronghold on the East Coast. You can choose between…

A. The Great Escape: Rally and inspire the Vault dwellers together to form a rebellion and escape the Vault, potentially incorporating them into your settlements on the surface. The Vault will still be accessible for loot and other story snippets (Very good Karma): Tactics for the escape depend on skills alongside preparatory quests such as using speech to sway dwellers to work together. A strong skill in guns or energy weapons is very beneficial towards training the dwellers to fight with you.

B. A plea for assistance: Use the Vault’s communication systems whilst sabotaging defences to inform the Brotherhood of Steel of the Enclave’s presence, prompting them to launch an assault on the vault to rescue the dwellers. This however will cause the Brotherhood to take on the dwellers into their ranks and take all the technology, reducing the Vault to rubble after the rescue is completed. If you are allied with the Brotherhood, you can change their minds about going through with this. (Good Karma): Science or Lockpick alongside sabotage quests to make the Brotherhood assault more likely to succeed.

C. The only way out is my own… Deactivate or sneak past the security systems and sneak out of the Vault or steal one of the vertibirds, leaving the dwellers to their fate. Alternatively you can also trick the Enclave into sending you above ground and deactivate the countermeasure while above ground. This is the simplest way to complete the overall story but will also result in Enclave squads being dispatched to find you. (Neutral Karma): Sneak alongside deactivation quests to aid the Sole Survivor and make the escape go more smoothly.

D. A merciful end? Set Vault 96 to self-destruct with either the Vault central computer or by rigging key areas with explosives; this will rid the Commonwealth of the Enclave for good but will also kill the entire Vault population, effectively freeing them of their torment and making it seem as if neither of the two sides existed. The Vault will be inaccessible and its contents will also be destroyed in the cave-in. (Evil Karma) Explosives and rigging quests to target vulnerable points in the vault.

E. The Queen has fallen… Disable or destroy Jenna Nillson’s AI, assassinate or enslave the Enclave troopers with their own mind control devices, take command of the automated systems and seize control of the vault for yourself, using the vault dwellers for your own nefarious means. With this ending, you can come and go from Vault 96 as you please as it becomes your own twisted settlement, but having one ruler as opposed to an army means the dwellers are more volatile and you will also need to put down any rebellions that spring up. (Very evil karma) Science and repair alongside preparatory quests to both seize control and enforce the Sole Survivor’s rule afterwards.

Steve Jobs Movie Review

Released: October 9th 2015 (United States)

Starring: Michael Fassbender, Kate Winslet, Seth Rogan, and Jeff Daniels

Length: 122 Minutes

Genre: Biography

Steve Jobs; we knew him as the CEO of Apple, others referred to him as the “billion dollar hippy”. No matter which way you look at it, the man left an indelible mark on the computing industry. His exploits in this area are the subject of Danny Boyle’s latest film, a whole hearted and detailed recount of the major points of Job’s life and work.

Steve Jobs begins in 1984 with the rapidly approaching launch of the Apple Macintosh; we’re thrown straight into the thick of things as the young Steve Jobs (Michael Fassbender) grapples with family matters, rants over a piece in TIME magazine and also runs through the then complex task of getting the product to say “Hello”. The film’s three act structure is immediately apparent, flashing through the key areas of Job’s product presentations through the use of typography and backgrounds. As the times change, so too do the characters and this is shown through various changes of costuming, technology and make-up. The events of the film are layered so fluidly that we as an audience are also given a strong picture of just how cut-throat the computer business really is; the pressure to deliver and reach success has a telling effect on Jobs and we see the detrimental effect this has on his friends and colleagues. The film also makes an effective use of stock footage from news reports to weave in the events that occurred between each act, ensuring that the narrative remains coherent and on point. There’s rarely a moment where Jobs isn’t running back and forth, trying to fix three or four problems at once and this is what keeps the audience engaged throughout, despite the film being mainly dialogue focused. The only issue I had was the ending; there is a feeling of reconciliation, but I feel it could have been more impactful with more time dedicated to it.

With a film so heavily focused on characterisation and conversation, the actors all do a very convincing job in their roles. Michael Fassbender is fantastic as the titular Steve Jobs; the film makes a point of concentrating on his flawed points and this brings a range of emotions and tones into play. Jobs is practically obsessed with making his product work and sell, yet behind closed doors he is incredibly reluctant to deal with and admit to his girlfriend and supposed daughter. He never gives up on his vision, but he also enters a great deal of verbal conflict with his peers. At Job’s side is his marketing executive Joanna Hoffman (Kate Winslet); she behaves just like you would expect a marketer to, but Winslet creates a sense of growing frustration as she desperately attempts to convince Steve to make the right decisions. The same holds true for Steve Wozniak (Seth Rogen) who makes his irritations felt with Job’s refusal to acknowledge him and his team. The last piece of the main cast is Jeff Daniels as John Sculley, a father figure to Steve; his confrontations are particularly heated which conveys his status and position as the then CEO of Apple. If there’s one gripe to the characters it’s that some of them don’t really get much in the way of closure; we don’t learn what happens to Wozniak or Steve’s ex-girlfriend and that’s a bit disappointing considering the role they played in the plot.

While the ending feels quite rushed and some of the characters could have had better conclusions, Steve Jobs is another great effort from both Michael Fassbender and Danny Boyle; it puts us into the shoes of the innovator, seamlessly blending his life and work together to form a highly intriguing and worthwhile biography.

Rating: 4/5 Stars

The Exorcist Movie Review (Halloween)

Released: 26th December 1973

Starring: Ellen Burstyn, Linda Blair, Jason Miller, and Max von Sydow

Length: 122 Minutes

Genre: Horror

Supernatural horror is an often exploited sub-genre in horror cinema; we’ve seen films like The Devil Inside and The Possession all but tarnish the idea of a spirit or demon infesting the body and soul of an individual. One of very few films that came close to perfection stretches back to 1973; The Exorcist is a relentlessly frightening film, one which continues to haunt audience to this day. The reason why is down to many things.

Based on the book of the same name by William Peter Blatty (who also adapted the story for film), The Exorcist tells the story of a 12-year-old girl named Reagan (Linda Blair) and her mother Chris Macneil (Ellen Burstyn). The innocent Reagan begins to act strangely, which gradually grows more and more severe in the film’s first act. Medical and scientific methods prove ineffective in fixing Reagan as her body begins to change despite appearing normal from doctor reports. Before long a sinister force takes hold of Reagan completely, yelling obscenities in a foul voice, committing frightful acts of violence and making objects move by will alone. The doctors direct Chris to the Catholic Church and the possibility of an exorcism and from there, it’s nothing but sheer scares and a serious creep factor broken up by scenes that take place outside the Macneil household. Cutting between several different locations, we learn more about the three main characters whilst also journeying through the slow growth of Reagan’s possession. The horror tropes are ones which have been adopted (and in other cases ripped off) by countless other supernatural horror films in the decades since, but The Exorcist is perhaps the only one to make them feel real, not to mention translating them into true horror; the degeneration of Reagan combined with the escalating supernatural elements grabs the audience by the throat and never lets go. It seamlessly maintains the scares, as opposed to other modern horror films. Simply put, you will constantly dread what will come next every time the characters enter into the upstairs room.

Most horror films feature fairly basic characters which lack depth, but those portrayed in The Exorcist are highly realised and detailed in the emotions they convey. The bond between Reagan and her mother is very believable; it’s built up over the film’s first act to great effect and we see the love they share for each other before the possession begins. It’s a great build-up which makes Ellen Burstyn’s performance of an intensely stressed and helpless mother that much more realised and sincere. Father Damian Karras (Jason Miller) has a very deep and underlying theme to his character; he’s having trouble with his faith whilst dealing with his dying mother and the way he deals with the possession makes him question his beliefs even further. It’s a great display of internal conflict and the many times he is on screen before attending to Reagan allows him to develop greatly. Reagan is played by Linda Blair and Mercedes McCambridge with the film juxtaposing the voices to show a clear and often shocking difference between the innocent young girl and the sadistic demon. It’s a curious creation indeed; you will believe that the voice coming out of Reagan is not from this world and that only adds to the fear the film instils into its audience. The one weak link in an otherwise stellar cast is Lee J. Cobb as the police lieutenant. When every other cast member puts so much into the film, he comes off as fairly underdeveloped and he could have had a larger role to play in the proceedings.

Perhaps the most critical aspect of the Exorcist that has terrified thousands of viewers lies with its special effects. Some of the most disturbing sights ever put to film were achieved with the work the filmmakers put into both atmosphere and puppet work. At the centre of the film is the Reagan puppet in the film’s third act, a truly hideous and frightful sight; scars and moles sprout on Reagan’s distinctively grey face, her head twists around in a full circle and a vile mucus erupts from her mouth. Just as Reagan’s mother is horrified at her daughter’s transformation, so too is the audience. Reagan’s room itself is laced with an air of constant anxiety and a grim atmosphere that is only enhanced with the cold air and eerie rumbling of the bed and other surrounding objects. You really do feel that a demonic presence has enveloped the room completely. The main piano theme that sweeps in at key moments is iconic for a reason; it has such a sense of foreboding to it, informing the audience that something terrible is about to happen. The demonic presence is enhanced even further with the shadowy lighting and silhouettes that sweep the proceedings. Every single aspect of the special effects in The Exorcist pulls every ounce of their weight to pull the audience in, something which modern horror films have almost completely forgotten about.

The Exorcist more than holds up today; the impact it had on the horror genre is something I can’t put into words in this review. The thematic ideas, superb acting and disturbing special effects hold its place at the top of supernatural terror. Is it the scariest movie of all time as some people say? That’s debatable, but nevertheless it’s still a thoroughly creepy piece of cinema that continues to mark its mark on everyone who puts themselves through it.

Rating: 4.5/5 Stars