iPhone dev accused of harvesting player phone
numbers

As if, in this world of economic hardship and international strife, you need another thing to worry about. iPhone developer Storm8 has been accused of stealing the phone numbers of players that downloaded its apps like Vampires Live and Zombies Live in a suit filed in San Francisco on behalf of Lynnwood, WA resident Michael Turner.

The company acknowledged the number harvesting in August, calling it a "bug," though the suit claims only specific code could have recorded and transmitted the numbers. So ... apparently that's a thing that happens. Have a great Saturday!

iPhone dev accused of harvesting player phone numbers originally appeared on Joystiq on Sat, 07 Nov 2009 14:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Find the Objects in Stadium

Find the Objects in Stadium is another point and click type hidden object game from 123peppyy. In this game, you have to use your point and click skills to find hidden objects in the stadium. Look...

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

The Meta-Narrative That Pulls Back the Curtain
for All Games [Weekend Reader]

Was GLaDOS, the artificial intelligence in 2007's critically acclaimed Portal, in fact a game designer? And if so, what does our relationship to the computer, and its abuse of our trust, say about the other games we play?

Guido Pellegrini at Playtime Magazine raises that point, among many others, in examining not just the meta-narrative of Portal, but also that of Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. Portal gets a deeper treatment, but both games deliberate puncture the illusion of control game players feel they have. In the end, Pellegrini writes, we are still following commands, taking cues and completing tasks in order to ultimately complete the game. Sons of Liberty in its way, and Portal to a much larger degree, are completely open about such manipulation.

If you haven't played or finished Portal and feel like you might want to some day, this essay should be treated as one long spoiler (the same for Sons of Liberty). Ultimately, Pellegrini raises this question: Within games is any restriction antithetical to one's freedom to act, or can there still be freedom within those boundaries? It is a question that extends well beyond the immaculate walls of Portal's test laboratory.

Portal and The Meta-Narrative Maker [Playtime Magazine, Oct 23.]

GLaDOS, then, is part adversary, part game-designer, guiding us across levels in an effort to finish the game of portal gun assessment. This antagonistic artificial intelligence is a diegetic representation of the creator or director, shaping up a fiction for the players to complete, providing context, giving orders, outlining our path, introducing complications, playing around with our expectations, intentionally misleading us, and so on. GLaDOS is our ruler and general, our boss. Meta-narrative elements are not terribly common in video-games, although they are not alien to the medium. We need only look at Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty to find an especially blunt and grandiloquent example of meta-narrative. In that game, a video-game player - a covert operative who has been trained solely through virtual reality simulations, or so he believes - ultimately realizes that his first official field-mission has been yet another simulation: every battle, death, and confrontation has been meticulously planned by an advanced artificial intelligence hiding behind the human façade of an iconic military general whom the protagonist has only communicated with through Codec, a sort of radio coupled with images of talking faces. The end of the game is infamously weird, culminating as it does with the advanced artificial intelligence commanding us to finish the game by killing the final enemy in a sword-fight atop the Federal Hall. Being coerced into finishing the game by the evil, back-stabbing computer that constructed the narrative we have been playing for the past twelve hours is surprisingly repulsive. We do not have a choice to do otherwise, unless we prefer to shut off our game system. But is this lack-of-choice a departure from other video-games?

Every video-game compels us to complete certain actions in order to reach the finish line. Every video-game controls us and directs our behavior through strict parameters. Even an open-ended video-game is not completely open-ended, only open-ended in the manner and to the extent decided upon by the game-makers. Our immersion into the fiction veils our status as prisoners. Yet we are no more than prisoners, forced to do what the dictator-storyteller demands of us. Now, this admittedly makes the whole business sound much more sinister than it necessarily is - we willingly pay money to be manipulated and led by the game-makers, after all - but it is interesting to note how foreboding and uncomfortable it can be when a video-game opts to make our dependency upon the game-makers a literal part of the plot. In most any game, we would not mind having to accomplish certain feats, and more importantly, we would certainly not complain about having to kill the final enemy, since that would bring upon the much-desired denouement. Alas, in the vast majority of games, these commands are gentle, imperceptible, implied through environmental and contextual cues. Thus, we receive the commands without protest. What Sons of Liberty and Portal do is to actually tell us these commands out-loud, through an in-game director, and suddenly the conceit of freedom that video-games tend to propagate is destroyed. Most games force us to do this and that. The above two games are honest about it.

If there is one divergence between Sons of Liberty and Portal, it is that the former provides no true escape from the fiction of the in-game director. To the very end, we are following the commands of an artificial intelligence. The closing cinematic (a movie-like animation that furthers the story using film language) suggests future freedom only for the fictional protagonist. As far as our interactivity is concerned, we never oppose the computer's authority. Our last action is to kill the final enemy, just as the computer has ordained. Portal, on the other hand, gives players the opportunity to walk backstage - to view the machinery behind the fiction - in order to confront the neurotic puppeteer.

[...]

We must constantly observe the architecture that traps, annoys, hinders, and informs us. Only by doing this can we find the opposite end of the labyrinth. Just as the architecture might facilitate our flight, it is also a participant in our entrapment. This double-edged quality makes our interaction with the environment a passionate endeavor. Equal parts savior and jailer, the environment is the middle-man in the tug-of-war between computer and human guinea pig, as each uses the same landscape to claim victory over the other. It is this battle that is the soul of Portal. The game-designer and the player are constantly at odds with each other. One tries to control, while the other hopes to achieve independence. One tries to dominate through a precise architecture that delimits movement, while the other explores his or her possibilities within this supposedly constraining architecture. The player's performance can flower inside a confined milieu. This happens in every video-game, but this one makes it literal and readily visible thanks to GLaDOS. We wake up inside a game and subsequently form a hostile relationship with its designer. Walking beyond the walls of this game, we find a parent game with more objectives and more puzzles. We wonder if the hostile relationship does not continue, despite our perceived escape. We turn off Portal. We play something else. We keep wondering about the hostile relationship, now in a new context. Video-games allow freedom of movement while restricting its degree. In a sense, Portal is about whether this restriction is enough to stifle any sense of freedom or whether there can still be freedom within restrictions. It is a dilemma that expands to the medium at large, if not beyond even that.

- Guido Pellegrini

Weekend Reader is Kotaku's look at the critical thinking in, and of video games. It appears Saturdays at noon. Please take the time to read the full article cited before getting involved in the debate here.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

3D Dot Game Heroes possible for Xbox 360

So far, one of the main things we've known about From Software's 3D Dot Game Heroes is that it's a PS3 exclusive. From even confirmed as such a few weeks ago, explicitly stating that it was only for the Big Black Box o' Blu-ray. However, it seems the actual development studio, Silicon Studios, is open to the idea of a 360 version.

"We can do it. Our libraries are multiplatform, so it would be possible to make it for 360," states Hiroyuki Misawa. "It's up to From. We're a developer, so if there's a call to make it, I believe we can do it."

Misawa was also asked about the whole Zelda thing, although he seemed to be ducking the question. He did confirm that the studio has in no way tried to get Nintendo's blessing, and that 3D Dot Game Heroes is "something like" an homage. He also denied that the created character data being shared with customers is Link, stating that "It probably looks like it, but it's not."

Oh, you rascal!

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Weekend Download

Who needs bajillions of colors, seriously? The games below illustrate that all you need for a visual presentation are a few well-placed shades of gray (or orange and black, for the last one) and you've got yourself a visual style!

Read The Full Article:
http://jayisgames.com/archives/2009/11/weekend_download_108.php

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Weekend Destructainment: Helicopters raining from
the sky

video details and more

_{[Weekend Destructainment is a collection of funny videos brought together from all across the Internet to bring you entertainment on these slow and boring weekends.]}

ScrewAttack gives us an analysis of the launch trailer for Modern Warfare 2. Sadly or awesomely, we're going to be hearing a lot of what ScrewAttack said during multiplayer matches.

Weekend D is smaller this week, but it's still full of entertainment! After the break, check out the Left 4 Dead 2 Easter Egg. Then remember how awful the Mega Man cartoon was. Next up, the Totally Rad Show guys play Ju-On. Followed by some rejected Mortal Kombat Fatalities. The Destructainment ends with an old Dig Dug sketch by Mega 64.

"Still Alive" Easter Egg in Left 4 Dead 2. Thanks, DarkTravesty!


video details and more



The best parts of the "Curse of the Lion Men" episode from the Mega Man cartoon. Poor Roll.
video details and more



The Totally Rad Show guys play Ju-On: The Grudge on the Wii.


video details and more



Rejected Mortal Kombat Fatalities by Machinima.


video details and more



Mega64's Dig Dug sketch from 2004.


video details and more

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

PS3 [L4D2]'>Valve's Multiplayer Calculus: (360 = PC) > PS3
[L4D2]

More provocative tidbits continue to trickle out of Valve, with the Left 4 Dead 2 project lead saying that game won't be coming to PS3 because the console's multiplayer community isn't on par with PC and the Xbox 360.

"Right now don't not buy it on the 360 because you think it's coming out on the PS3 - it's not going to," Chet Faliszek said. "Right? It's coming out on the PC and 360. It's going to be exclusive for that."

Faliszek also said that Left 4 Dead 2 is "all about playing with your friends," and that "in hooking up with your friends and the community aspects, I think the Xbox 360 is head and shoulders above the PS3. The 360 and PC are on par, right?"

Let's see, dissed PS3, and equated a console with PC, thus starting a good-old three-way let's-you-and-him-fight. Check, check and check. All in a day's work, Chet!

Valve: 360 Community "Head and Shoulders Above PS3" [CVG]

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Dhani Harrison: Rock Band 3 will make you better
at actual rocking

In a recent interview with the Chicago Tribune, Dhani Harrison, The Beatles: Rock Band contributor (and son of the late, great George Harrison), spoke about his involvement in future iterations of the popular rhythm franchise. "I'm working on Rock Band 3 and making the controllers more real so people can actually learn how to play music while playing the game," Harrison explained toward the end of the interview. "Give me a couple years, it's going to happen."

We wish Harrison and the entire Harmonix crew the best of luck in this endeavor, if only so they can finally stymie the infinitely deplorable "why don't you learn how to play a real instrument" contingency. Man, we hate those guys.

Dhani Harrison: Rock Band 3 will make you better at actual rocking originally appeared on Joystiq on Sat, 07 Nov 2009 13:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Reminder: We're giving away six copies of
Magnacarta 2!

We've teamed up with Namco Bandai to giveaway some great Magnacarta 2 prizes. Over on the official page for Magnacarta 2, you can win an art book, battle atlas and a Magnacarta 2 Xbox 360 themed faceplate. Over here on Destructoid, we're giving away six copies of the game away for the Xbox 360.

All you need to do to win the game is create a funny image with a photo editing program using one or all of the pictures from the gallery below. Whatever you create, try to keep it safe for work and post it in the comments below. The funniest and/or most creative image creation will win Magnacarta 2.

You have until November 8 to submit a photo and this contest is open to US residents only. Good luck!

[Update! The Magnacarta 2 contest on the official site is now live! Just register on the site and you'll get entered in the contest where you can win one of ten prize sets made up of an art book, battle atlas and Xbox 360 themed faceplate.]

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

NCAA Football, and the Science of Subjectivity
[Stick Jockey]

With true-to-life fidelity, my most recent season simulation in NCAA Football 10 found Boise State losing a trap game late in the season and, as the token BCS Buster from a minor conference, paying for it dearly in the polls.

Having gone undefeated through 10 games, the Broncos (not a user-controlled team in this dynasty) reached the BCS Top 4, striking distance of Florida, Oklahoma (with an uninjured Sam Bradford) and Alabama. The week 12 standings were strongly analogous to present day standings, absent TCU and Cincinnati, both undefeated in the real world.

And then Boise fell at home to Nevada, tumbling far out of both voting polls' top 10, and to 12th in the BCS. The machine held the lesser-conference team to the same double-standard as the human voters, who have matched one-loss teams from the major conferences in the previous two title games. Further, Boise State quarterback Kellen Moore (sorry, "QB #11") who had led the Heisman voting to that point, bottomed out to third in the final tally. Finally, a two-loss Oregon (to Boise and to Utah) leapfrogged the Broncos, as many expect the real-life one-loss Ducks will do once pollsters realize their votes will affect on a national title and major bowl bids.

The plausibility of all this is not just dumb luck. Games in November always bring into sharp focus just how American college football's poll-driven, playoff-less season and postseason is the most meritless selection of a team champion in the entire world. And yet NCAA Football 10, unlike any other sports simulation, has the responsibility to simulate the same purely subjective conditions, which aren't just the subplots of a season, they are the season itself.

"With sports there is always going to be controversy," said Kendall Boyd, a senior product manager for NCAA Football 10. "We do our best to make sure we have a little drama, but also ensure the integrity of the current system."

As college football, with seven unbeaten teams, lurches toward another inevitable matchmaking controversy, this week I tugged on EA Sports' shirttail, asking how they build a game that, if it mirrors reality, should also screw some deserving team out of a title shot every year. Boyd didn't answer that question head on, and I really can't blame him - the hypercriticized Bowl Championship Series is one of the game's biggest licensors, after all, and it's not doing so to be held up to ridicule or split polls in virtual reality, too. But he did shed light on how NCAA Football incorporates reputation into its team and individual performances.

"The biggest factor of our ?human element' is leveraged against your conference's prestige," Boyd said. "If you play in a BCS conference, you're going to move up the rankings a lot easier than a smaller conference school would."

Conference prestige - this is different from the six-star rating each program has in NCAA 10 - comes most into play in the game's simulated coaches' poll, the human factor most driving the game's BCS rating. The coaches' poll routinely favors programs from the major conferences, as 33 of 59 voters in this year's poll represent, and still others have previous experience with them.

Boyd said that once the season gets moving, "our media and coaches' poll are very similar." NCAA 10's media poll is, of course, analagous to the AP Top 25, which asked out of the BCS formula five years ago but remains an influential measure for judging the biggest matchups week to week.

"The previous week's rating is evaluated," Boyd said, "and then the following factors are brought in: score versus opponent that week; was it a game on the road? What was the ranking on our ?Toughest Places to Play' poll versus the opponent you played, if it was road game? And then finally, the separation between the two is simple percentages, so we have a disparity between them."

The game's BCS computation comes into play in Week 8, the same as it does in real life, but it is not a strict replication of the actual matrix. For one thing, the Harris Interactive Poll, which serves as the second human poll in the BCS formula, isn't a factor all that distinct from the game's media poll. And the six indices - with names like Colley, Sagarin, Wolfe and Massey - that form the ranking's computer average are not used in NCAA 10, Boyd said, even though their formulae are public. "We do make it equally interesting," Boyd said. "Without giving too much away, we combine the media and coaches' poll and then add in other variables, such as strength of schedule."

Such as? "Quality wins and losses are a big factor. Losing to a bad team will definitely have a severe impact on the rankings in our game." Also, timing is a key factor, just like real life. "In our game, it's better to lose early than lose late," Boyd said. "If you were to lose in the first few weeks of the season to a strong opponent, you will naturally move up the rankings as long as you continue to win."

The biggest question I had is whether NCAA 10 internally gooses the polling to help out a user-controlled team, in the name of a more fun video game for the person who bought it. Because in more than six years of playing console sports sims, few experiences have been more gratifying than taking over a two-star doormat, storming the Top 10, and getting that "Where'd They Come From?!" headline in the next week's NCAA news.

Answer: No. "We want it to be an even playing field," Boyd said. If you manage to take Temple to the Orange Bowl, you came by it honest. "I believe most of the ways we evaluate the teams would be affected if we skewed it toward the human-controlled teams," he added.

Nor is the voting skewed toward user-controlled players in the game's Heisman Trophy simulation. However, "We do have a special circumstance for potential upsets in the voting to keep it dynamic, for a twist," Boyd said, "but we don't want to disclose the formula, to help keep the intrigue. But this is equal among human controlled and CPU teams."

NCAA 10's Heisman voting likewise reflects the values of its real-world counterpart. It typically goes to quarterbacks, running backs and wide receivers, although I have seen offensive tackles and defensive backs get mentioned week-to-week, as they sometimes are in real life.

Significantly, Boyd said that the stats or results of a simulated game in a dynasty carry no additional weight, positive or negative, in the game's Heisman voting. And while it's easier to load up arcade numbers against creampuffs, he said a surer path is to take on tough teams on the road and log credible performances that contribute to a win there.

And no, Boyd said, there is no East Coast Media Bias helping players or teams from that region, in either the polls or the Heisman sims.

After our conversation, I went back into NCAA 10 to try to test out what Boyd had to say. I ran another simulation pitting Boise State versus a much tougher nonconference schedule this year. The Broncos went 8-3, losing to Oregon at home and Alabama and Texas in Tuscaloosa and Austin. Boise still ended the season at No. 11 - remarkably, the highest-rated three loss team in the nation, although all of the defeats came early. In fact, 11 is an uncommonly high rating for any three-loss team, let alone one from the WAC. Strength of schedule, with two Top-5 games on the road early in the season, clearly was in play here.

But it was impossible not to notice that a lesser team, North Carolina - whose football ranking I've long said is propped up by the school's basketball reputation and the votes of people who wish they went there - had hit No. 2 by the end of the regular season on a schedule as weak as the last swallow in a 2-liter of Cheerwine. And that literally raised up the old State alum anger in me, seeing the despised Tar Heels exalted by a system that would never ever give the Wolfpack the same benefit of the doubt, which is pretty much how we think about things in real life, too.

But then in the conference title game, Carolina suffered the kind of crushing loss that is so common to arriviste college football programs - 28-13 to Clemson, the ACC's original football power, booting UNC back to a lesser bowl, the Gator. And I threw a fist and roared with delight at, again, the true-to-life fidelity of NCAA 10.

Stick Jockey is Kotaku's column on sports video games. It appears Saturdays at 10 a.m. U.S. Mountain time.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!