Wrestling Wramblings - SummerSlam 2013

Everyone has a guilty pleasure. I have many, but one of them is the hurricane of stupidity that is professional wrestling. In my ongoing attempt to broaden my pool of writing topics and styles, I present a bulletpoint, match-by-match recap of last night's WWE pay-per-view, the year's 'second show', SummerSlam.

This is written assuming you know a bit about wrestling - I don't explain who people are, the stories or the lingo. It's really just a chance for me to get some thoughts out. Also yes I know it's all fake and no I don't care.

Preshow - Singles match for the United States Championship: Dean Ambrose (c) vs Rob Van Dam

• Relegation to the preshow is not a particularly encouraging sign for either The Shield or the United States Championship.
• Van Dam is still exciting to watch, but he's basically a spot monkey at this point, and his increasingly stiff movements have trouble covering how ridiculously convoluted the setups for his moves are.
• Ambrose can still sell with the best of them. 
• This mostly seemed to be setting up for a future six-man tag team match. The run-ins seemed sort of half hearted.
• Pretty standard DQ finish.

Ring of Fire match: Kane vs. Bray Wyatt

• Bad match to kick off the show with. Slow, lumbering and the fire prevented any major spots or acrobatics. 
• Weird booking here. Bray is clearly meant to be the one going over, but Kane dominates the match and the Wyatt leader only being saved by the intervention of his 'family' makes him look weak.
• The flames shooting up whenever someone took a big bump was a fantastic visual.
• The steps finisher is still completely stupid to anyone who has eyes in their head and half a brain cell.

Singles match: Cody Rhodes vs Damian Sandow

• The feud between these two has been lots of fun but with nothing on the line this match was sort of underwhelming
• Very well worked technically mind you. Solid in-ring stuff.
• Still love Cross Rhodes as a finisher, it just looks great.
• This feud is almost certainly set to continue, the question is in what direction? The persistent rumour is that Sandow's Money in the Bank briefcase may be on the line in their next match, which would certainly add the stakes that this was missing.

Singles match: Natalya vs Brie Bella

• ZzzzzZzzzzzzZzzzz;...
• OK, not actually that bad, but forgive me if I have trouble getting hyped up for aa match based on some dumb reality show.
• Not cool - the crowd doing the 'chant the announcers names' thing. It wasn't the greatest match in the world, but they were trying. Show some respect.
• Natalya is still way more skilled than her position on the card suggests. Persistent rumours have her buried because of her Hart connection (she's the daughter of Jim 'The Anvil' Neidhart and niece of Bret Hart)

Singles match for the World Heavyweight Championship: Alberto Del Rio (c) vs Christian

• I could not have cared less about this going in, so it's a testament to the quality of the match that I actually was really into it by the end.
• Alberto Del Rio remains one of the very best pure wrestlers on the roster, and his in-ring work is a total joy to watch. Now if only he could find a persona that could get over with the crowd.
• Christian isn't as good, but he did his part in making this match go, and deserves credit for some great work also.
• Destined to be remembered as the 'match which was really good that everyone forgot about'.
• The buildup really was awful though. They need to find a much stronger program for the WHC next time round.

No Disqualification match - CM Punk vs Brock Lesnar (with Paul Heyman)

• Brilliant, brutal and beautiful. Match of the night by far.
• Has Lesnar fought in anything other than no DQ matches since he returned?
• Also the rare no DQ match that went a considerable length of time before anybody produced a weapon.
• Excellent, in-character booking here. Both men played their parts to perfection - Brock as the unstoppable juggernaut, Punk as the agile, wronged hero. Ultimately Punk's animosity towards Paul Heyman cost him the match, as it should have been.
• Lesnar deserves a lot of credit for his work here. Despite his part timer status and reputation as a bulldozer, his skill and selling ability made this match what it was. Consistently underrated.
• Punk was as excellent as always. Both men made the other look great, which is the key to a successful match.
• With Lesnar now reportedly off until Wrestlemania next year, how does this angle advance? Perhaps Punk feuds with Curtis Axel instead, which is like going from a Ferrari to a pushbike.

Mixed Tag-team match: Dolph Ziggler & Kaitlyn vs Big E Langston and AJ Lee

• This match was atrociously booked and nearly everyone involved was made to look like an asshole. Sandwiching it as the cooldown between the double main event seemed to be a tacit acknowledgement of its unimportance.
• Three of the participants here are capable of so much better. Dolph is the modern Mr Perfect. Big E is fantastically athletic and great on the mic, and needs a face turn badly. AJ is an excellent wrestler and an even better actor who is sandbagged by the fact WWE creative seems unable to write stories for women that don't involve them being crazy or sluts.
• As for Kaitlyn...eh.
• Short match, inoffensive finish. I sort of hope this whole angle dies now.

Singles match for the WWE Chapionship: John Cena (c) vs Daniel Bryan (with special guest referee Triple H)

• Incredible crowd reaction for both parties, though in very different ways
• I didn't enjoy this quite as much as Lesnar/Punk - it's less physically brutal, but the stakes and the characters made up for that.
• Once again Cena proved he rises to the big occasion. The 'You can't wrestle' chants should be put to bed for good now.
• On the other hand, Bryan applying the STF looked miles better than Cena doing it.
• Bryan is coming dangerously close to having his own 'Five Moves of Doom'. I wouldn't say his sequences are predictable just yet, but there are certainly little patterns you can spot.

• I hope Bryan adopts that running knee as his full time finisher. It looks terrific and Cena sold it fantastically here.
• Daniel Bryan pinned John Cena 100% clean in the middle of the ring. Think about that for a second.
• Good job from Triple H for staying out of the way and just letting the match flow.
• Nice rub from Cena at the end there. Good that they gave Bryan time to properly celebrate too. The lengthy break and the pyrotechnics made me almost think they were done...

Money in the Bank cash-in match for the WWE Championship: Daniel Bryan (c) vs Randy Orton (with special guest referee Triple H)

• As heartbreaking as this was for Bryan fans, it was absolutely the right move. Bryan gets to chase Orton and play up his perpetual underdog role. Orton turns heel and gets more heat than the surface of the sun to kick off what will hopefully be a run where he finally becomes interesting. Triple H gets to needlessly involve himself in another angle. OK, maybe that's not so good, but it does further the McMahon feud storyline that's been bubbling under.
• I liked the tease before the actual swerve. Suddenly all those times Orton has appeared on Raw to just wave the briefcase at people make much more sense.
• It'll be interesting to hear Triple H's justification for his turn. At least his inevitable interference was simple and didn't occur in the match itself.
• Officially timed at 8 seconds, this has to be the shortest championship match in history right?
• I wonder if Orton and Triple H will at all acknowledge their shared history together - a decade ago they were part of the power-stable Evolution, until Triple H memorably betrayed Orton.
• The big question of course is, in storyline terms, who was 'in' on this betrayal. Is Randy Orton now a new Corporate Champion? Has Triple H joined forces with Mr McMahon or is he pursuing his own agenda? 
• Exciting times!

Man of Steel, feet of clay

Superman is a notoriously difficult character to write for, because he's basically unstoppable. How do you threaten, cow or defeat a man who can't be hurt and who has the power to change countries and worlds at a whim? It's for this reason that in the modern age Superman is often defined by his humanity, his everyday life and his relationships to other, 'normal' people. That's what Zack Snyder's Man of Steel attempts to do, but the result is the opposite. So determined, so ardent is the film to write itself as an epic new chapter in the Superman mythology, it instead leeches away the warmth, the human drama so vital to the character.

Instad, Man of Steel attempts to answer the big issues. It's a very conscious reboot in the vein of Batman Begins, an attempt to study what would happen if Superman were to appear in the 'real world' so to speak. The film concentrates on the alien nature of Superman, his inherent incompatibility with the planet and the worries both side experience at the prospect of Clark Kent revealing himself to the world.

Which quite frankly, is rubbish. The film is pervaded by a sense of cloying paranoia and distrust, quite unlike the sunniness and optimism I expect from a production which bears the big red 'S'. The point of Superman is he's meant to represent the best of humanity - the only part of him that's alien is his unnatural powers. Here there's a misguided attempt to cast Clark Kent as an outsider, a haunted figure who flits from job to job in a search for purpose and meaning to his existence. He's crushed by the knowledge of his alien past, desperately seeking validation by attempting to connect with it, without ever truly embracing the human aspects of his nature. In other words, he's (sigh) Batman. Now hands up who saw that coming? The essential 'grittiness' that characterised Batman Begins just doesn't work here - Superman is the very antithesis of that approach, an optimist who firmly believes in truth, justice and the American way. You'll find precious little of that here.

The film is also hampered by poor writing, poor plotting and an unusual lurching structure which never really gels. Far too much time is spent on the opening on Krypton, in a tornado of sets and costumes that look straight out of the Chronicles of Riddick, and from there the film adopts a weird flashback heavy style that constantly cuts between the past and present. I'm all for some non-linear storytelling but here it's poorly used, not allowing us to see the growth of the character and consistently interrupting dramatic scenes. The film moves at incredible pace and yet still somehow manages to be boring, and the constant jumping between scenes means there are precious few opportunities for genuine character development. There are also huge, gaping plot holes everywhere, and I don't just mean for nit-pickers or comics nerds, but big ones that cause obvious narrative issues - the film can't keep the source of Superman's powers straight for example.

It also suffers from an obvious lack of chemistry between its characters, and at many times poor performances from its actors. Henry Cavill does a decent job as Superman/Clark Kent, even though he's not really given much to work with. He's better as Superman, bringing gentleness and a soft-spoken charm to the role, but as Clark Kent he can border on wooden, and lacks the instant bright charisma that Christopher Reeve used to make the role his own. Amy Adams is a disaster as Lois Lane, a blank, exposition spouting shell of the tough reporter she's meant to be. Her relationship with Cavill is utterly unconvincing and the two have very little meaningful interaction. The big kiss, when it comes, is more bizarre than heartwarming or triumphant. On the antagonists side, Michael Shannon struggles gainfully with the remarkably two-dimensional General Zod, achieving 'tortured' but never quite ratcheting all the way up to 'menacing'.

If there's redemption to be found, it's in the film's elder statesman. Russell Crowe as Jor-El is on screen far, far too much, but he invests his performance with gravity and dignity that helps sell the incredibly obtuse dialogue he's working with. Kevin Costner and Diane Lane excel as more down-to-earth, less idealised versions of Jonathan and Martha Kent, conveying doubt and fear about their son's potential while never losing the homespun warmth and affection that so defines the characters. The scenes with Clark and his father are some of the best in the film and the closest it comes to fulfilling the idea of a more emotionally tortured man of tomorrow. Their final scene (shown in flashback) was one of the few moments I felt the hairs on the back of my neck rise.

Man of Steel is in the end laid low by a disheartening lack of purpose. The uncomfortable mish-mash of imagery, allegory and style is confusing and almost universally unfitting. The blatant Christ allegories are so unsubtle as to be distracting. For some reason there's a big US Military presence throughout the story , occasionally bordering on Michael Bay level gun porn. Superman is one of the few universes pro-US jingoism is absolutely acceptable and even encouraged, but the hard military sheen sits uncomfortably next to Superman's idealistic fantasy, and watching Zod's men murder helpless troops is uncomfortable to say the least. Speaking of Zod & co., Snyder cannot seem to get enough of the thoroughly uninspired Kryptonian hardware, throwing spaceships, machinery and armour onto the screen constantly to show off his designers' work. Superman himself rarely seems, well, super. Oh sure, there's an astonishing blizzard of CG in the fights, but there's very little actual heroism to go round. Many reviews have commented on the appalling amount of collateral damage that the superpowered smackdowns inflict and the film ends on a moment so out of character it feels like a definitive statement of the new direction the franchise is going in.

It's only after the movie ended that I realised this isn't really a Superman movie. Sure, Superman is in it, but he's close to unrecognisable, and so many of the trappings of the character have been stripped away with nothing to replace them that there's very little of the icon present here. Instead, this is a modern blockbuster sci-fi movie, down to the overabundance of CGI, bad magic mcguffin and lack of attention paid to much in the way of character development and interpersonal relationship. That doesn't make it an awful movie - it still functions on a basic level - but it's empty noise, lacking heart, soul or emotion. This is not a Superman to aspire to, not one who represents the best that humanity has to offer, but instead another stone-faced, grim engine of destruction who nobody would want to be. That's just about the worst thing possible when you're trying to articulate what makes Superman special.

Flip floppin' away

I'm not really sure how much needs to be said about Microsoft's unprecedented decision to scrap basically all of their much ballyhooed online connectivity policies suurrounding Xbox One. The decision sort of speaks for itself in many ways. But let's talk a little about it anyway.

Firstly, there's no doubt that is an absolute triumph for consumer bargaining power. Let's be very clear here - it's direct feedback from the end user which has led to this change. Microsoft was seemingly set on imposing these restrictions on Xbone users whether they liked it or not, but the sheer mass of negativity surrounding them has caused the tide to turn. It's a win-win situation - Users don't have to put up with the ridiculous always online bullshit, and Microsoft gets a much needed big PR push by appearing magnanimous and open to change.

The thing is, it's difficult not to be a little cynical about the whole situation when Microsoft turns so fast. More obviously than ever now this was not something where 'customer feedback' mattered from the beginning, and the policies were always in flux. No, this is a very specific knee-jerk reaction to a disastrous PR campaign topped by an E3 where Sony ruthlessly twisted the knife and Nintendo offered a few kicks while they were down.

That's not necessarily a bad thing - sometimes pressing the panic button is the right thing to do. But what does this say about Microsoft's dedication to their cause? We were told repeatedly how the always-online and all-digital aspects of Xbox One were key components of the experience and how Microsoft would utilise them to deliver a 'truly next-gen' experience. That they lied should come as no surprise, but it's still a little bitter to the taste. And the scrapping of these policies does mean the loss of some of the more unique aspects of the planned One experience, like the Family Sharing plan.

Ultimately though, as I said before this is a win for both parties. Yes, we as (potential) purchasers are giving up some cool features, but the rights we're regaining are far more important. We shouldn't overlook the fact that the console will now work in perpituity, not merely until one day the servers are turned off. Microsoft still has questions to answer - Kinect, price - and this fiasco has badly damaged their reputation among the gaming community. But the next-gen battle suddenly seems a less clear-cut race, and that's a good thing. Game on.

WWE Payback 2013 Thoughts

Everyone has a guilty pleasure. I have many, but one of them is the hurricane of stupidity that is professional wrestling. In my ongoing attempt to broaden my pool of writing topics and styles, I present a bulletpoint, match-by-match recap of last night's WWE pay-per-view Payback.

This is written assuming you know a bit about wrestling - I don't explain who people are, the stories or the lingo. It's really just a chance for me to get some thoughts out. Also yes I know it's all fake and no I don't care.

Triple Threat Match for the Intercontinental Championship: The Miz vs. Wade Barrett vs. Curtis Axel

• I still really, really hate Face Miz. He's such a dick and a crappy wrestler too. He also can't make the figure four look good in any way.
• Hopefully Wade Barrett can be buried somewhere for a while now. The horrifying booking wasn't his fault but he's rubbish on the mic and not brilliant in the ring.
• I sort of hope Axel's entire character gimmick becomes 'guy who manages to win matches in incredibly lame ways'. Having said that, this was actually a pretty smart finish and certainly way better than his terrible count out wins.
• Axel winning was kind of unexpected because he was a last minute sub for the injured Fandango. Was this push originally meant to go Fandango? Regardless, it works and  Axel winning his fathers trademark title on Father's Day was a nice touch.
• Overall, a solid match to open. Nothing spectacular but well worked with the right finish.

Divas Championship Match: Kaitlyn vs AJ Lee

• Wait, what? A Divas match actually worth watching?
• Not sure why Ziggler didn't come out with them. Maybe so he didn't overshadow the match?
• As ever, my enjoyment of any Divas match is severely reduced by Jerry Lawler being a fucking creep on commentary.
• Decent work on display here. High point was probably Kaitlyn throwing AJ over the announce table.
• I really like this result, especially the fact Kaitlyn had to tap out, thus furthering her anguish. Hopefully this leads to either a goes-crazy heel turn or a decent road to redemption story.

United States Championship Match: Dean Ambrose vs. Kane

• Eeeeeeeeh.
• Oh alright. Totally bog-standard match that really belongs on a filler episode of Smackdown. Ambrose is a great seller and Kane is much better than he has any right to be at this age, but nothing too showy here.
• Perhaps the most predictable match of the night.

World Heavyweight Championship Match: Dolph Ziggler vs Alberto Del Rio

• Ziggler has been both extremely unlucky with his concussion and badly booked. He's never looked dominant.
• I HATED this match at first, but as it became clear they were trying for a double turn it made much more sense.
• Ziggler was as good as ever and sold 'plucky underdog' very well. Del Rio was solid as always.
• Del Rio's promo after the match was not fantastic but it got the crowd booing again and that's all that was needed really.
• With all that said, and acknowledging the cleverness of the story, I'm really uneasy about this blurring between work concussions and shoot concussions. The uncertain line between kayfabe and real life is part of my interest in wrestling but this runs the risk of devaluing the actual seriousness of head injuries. Watching Del Rio kick in Ziggler's skull in was uncomfortable even though I knew it was faked.

CM Punk vs. Chris Jericho

• I honestly thought Punk would no show this given how rushed and unfulfilling the buildup has been.
• I do like that they delayed his entrance and had him keep the hood up a little too long to cast doubt into our minds.
• Nice chops Wolverine.
• Otherwise, good, strong match. Not a masterpiece, but great work from both guys.
• I was sort of hoping for Jericho to win and send Punk into a spiral of 'I've lost it' despair after his losses to The Rock and The Undertaker. But given how incredibly partisan the crowd was this was the right result.

Tag Team Championship Match: Seth Rollins & Roman Reigns vs. Daniel Bryan & Randy Orton

• Haven't we already seen this match like a billion times? OK not really but this feud is aging fast. 
• Daniel Bryan was amazing as always. He's one of the few wrestlers who looks like he's totally into it and actually out to maim people. Incredibly over with the crowd too.
• Randy Orton was boring as always. Have never understood the appeal. Further intriguing hints of a heel turn here though.
• The Shield were as efficient as always. Rollins and Reigns are a good partnership.

Three Stages of Hell Match for the WWE Championship: John Cena vs. Ryback (Lumberjack/Table/Ambulance)

• Surprisingly not terrible!
• I think the key here was each stage was kept relatively short and didn't outstay its welcome. The entire match was over in about half an hour. 
• Despite the thunderous 'GOLDBERG' chants, Ryback was not bad here. He'll never be Daniel Bryan but he worked efficiently.
• Cena was also not bad, and he has a history of rising to the occasion for big gimmick matches. He got the best spot when he jumped off of the turnbuckle and flattened the lumberjacks.
• The stages got progressively worse, as is the fashion. Ripping bits off of the ambulance was a fun way to keep it going but it couldn't save that last segment.
• The finish was totally stupid but in a sort of cool way. Decent bump to end with.
• While I don't think anyone really expected Ryback to win, the question is what now? His push is essentially over and nobody is going to buy him as an indestructible monster anymore. He'll completely disappear unless creative can find a decent new groove for him.

As you might be able to tell from all the comments, this was a solid, unspectacular PPV that nevertheless did the job and maybe slightly exceeded expectations. It was great to see Punk back, a decent Divas match was a rare treat and for better or worse this should be the definitive end of the Cena/Ryback feud. Still, this wasn't exactly an action masterpiece. We'll have to hope for better from next month's Money in the Bank, traditionally one of the year's best constests.

(All photos courtesy of WWE.com)

E3 2013 - The battle for gaming's soul

At an event that was ostensibly about gaming's future, there was an awful lot of wrangling about the present. The year 2013 finds the gaming industry in a state of uncomfortable flux, scrabbling around for new ideas, business models and paradigms to push this no longer young artform to the next level. Within this four day extravanganza there were reasons for both hope and scepticism on display, sometimes alarmingly close to each other.

The part of this E3 that will make headlines for years to come was of course Microsoft and Sony's head-to-head clash over the thorny issue of consumer rights and the ever present industry boogeyman of the used games market. Sony painted itself as the people's choice, while Microsoft advocated the technology and adaptivity of the all digital future that every gaming company is essentially moving towards. There's little doubt who won, at least in the minds of those who care about such things, and Sony's delicious turning of the knife brought to mind some of the great E3 battles of years past. If this was a mission to capture hearts and minds, then they firmly followed the Japanese company back over the ocean.

The truth is, of course, more complicated than what was written on the blogs and expressed on Twitter. Despite their (damaging) public unwillingness to fully divulge their thinking, Microsoft's always on, digitally managed future has from the beginning been based on a gamble. This strategy loses Microsoft a significant chunk of userbase for sure, be it those unable to fulfil the requirements for Xbox One ownership or those who are unwilling to compromise their principals to use the device. What Microsoft has bet on though is that increased security, anti-piracy and connectivity will make up the shortfall from those lost users in both tangible (i.e. revenue based) and intangible (data capture, public mindshare, convenience) ways. This time round Microsoft operates from a position of strength - their massive 360 install base and their position at the forefront of gamers minds (at least in the core territory of North America) means they can leverage their position as the #1 games console onto a new generation of hardware.

At least, that was the plan before this conference. Even if you strip away the hysterical reaction, there's no doubt that Sony bloodied Microsoft's nose in some pretty significant ways. Their announcement of no system-level restrictions on game ownership is significant but perhaps not the dagger in the heart some portrayed it as. It undoubtedly makes a major difference to those who care about such things, but the impact on the mass consumer remains unseen. On thing I will say though is that generally, the people spending money are smarter than most massive corporations would like to believe. Money talks though, and the significant price-gap between the two platforms at launch will cause any shopper to pause a moment.

Even leaving that aside though, Sony's play for the hearts and minds of fans was comprehensive and convincing. Microsoft have made no greater error in the runup to the present than horrible PR management, whereas Sony have expertly played their fans and the videogaming community at large. Their outreach to independent developers might not make much money at the end of the day, but it's a convincing recasting of a corporate entity no less massive than Microsoft as the defender of the 'little man', something which their well constructed press presentation sold effortlessly - smart, knowing but never sarcastic or directly confrontational. Compared to Don Mattrick's charisma void and Phil Spencer's smarmy, stuck up brashness,  Jack Tretton radiated wry wisdom while Adam Boyes brought geek charm and enthusiasm and Andrew House delivered straight-talking business sense. The overall atmosphere was friendlier and more consumer orientated, while Microsoft could occasionally devolve into as mess of Teflon personalities and buzzwords.

And what of Nintendo, the king whose crown has been slipping for almost twenty years at this point? Their decision to not hold a large scale press conference was perhaps a sign of little legitimately groundbreaking news to deliver and while the alternative Nintendo Direct videostream was interesting and well received it did nothing to disprove that idea. More than ever Nintendo seems a company out of time, one which desperately strip-mines its past in order to secure its future. That is not meant to be an insult to the quality of their software, which remains among the finest in the world and consistently produces games of sublime brilliance. Their legacy, their dedicated fanbase and that excellent software platform means that rumours of the death of the company are, in my opinion, greatly exaggerated. But Nintendo is clearly struggling to stay relevant in a world where it is dwarfed by the titans of mainstream populism and unable to connect to an audience that would rather shoot dudes than pretend to be a plumber or a fairy boy.

The 'core bloodline' Mario games continue to cloak innovation that would shame lesser companies inside a familiar shell, but elsewhere there are signs that the well is genuinely running dry. Nintendo's decision to look to Zelda's past in the form of an HD remake of The Wind Waker and pseudo-sequel A Link Between Worlds stinks of stop-gap software selling. In the former's case you're devoting energy and personnel to an already existing game, while in the latter case you're burdening a game with the impossible legacy of living up to an all-time great. It's perhaps telling that the freshest, most vital concepts Nintendo showed were not made by them. Instead, they-that-can-do-no-wrong Platinum games lit the presentation up with the louche, irreverent chaos of Bayonetta 2 and the charming comic stylings of The Wonderful 101. Nintendo's decision to devote on their finest second party design teams, Retro Studios, to another classically styled Donkey Kong game was as baffling as it was disappointing. It was the safe decision perhaps, but not the right one.

Indeed, if there was an overriding theme to E3 this year, it was safety. Rather than use the new generation to foster a new explosion of ideas, publishers and developers seemed instead to focus on using established brands to bridge the gap safely. It's totally understandable from an economic point of view, especially in a rough economic situation, but artistically it's disappointing and in the long run it may prove dangerous. The death of the 'mid-tier' game is a phenomenon that has been much remarked upon but it was more true than ever this time around. The games that were put front and centre at E3 2013 were games that were designed to reinforce the technological and populist dominance of gaming's alpha males - an endless parade of bombast, spectacle, and 'cinematic gameplay', too often delivered from the end of a gun barrel. For all the genuinely interesting innovations which appeared (persistent online worlds with seamless single/multiplayer were an interesting recurring theme) thematically the industry seems stuck in a creative rut.

There's hope though. More than ever, the torch is being carried by independent developers and small scale teams. With graphical sophistication hitting a point of diminishing returns and the ease of all-digital distribution cutting out the need for huge publishing and distribution networks, independent game development is in a golden age that hasn't been seen since the startups of late 80s and early 90s. It was the indies who carried the torch for fun, innovation and interest at this E3, producing charming concepts that were infinitely ore interesting to me than the banging and crashing of the bigger games. Indie development is bigger than ever and seeing those games on the main stages at Microsoft and Sony was curiously comforting to me. It reassured me that no matter how monolithic the entities at the top become, there'll always be an undercurrent of fresh, young blood who are interested in shaking up the status quo. The more options, the more challenges, the more tools there are for developers big and small. the better games will come out at the end. And ultimately, that means we all win.

Persona 4 pedantry - What's different in Golden?

So as promised, here is a big, super amazingly geeky post on everything I can remember that's different in Persona 4 The Golden as opposed to the original game. It'll be broken down into five basic segments - World (everything in that happens outside the TV), Dungeons (everything that happens in the TV and battles), Fusion(anything Persona related), Social Links (any changes related to the social links) and Misc (everything else, mostly system level stuff).

Be warned this post assumes you have played the original game and thus will contain FULL NO HOLDS BARRED SPOILERS FOR PERSONA 4. Fairly warned be ye! Also, although I will not be spoiling the new plot points in Golden, I will be describing new mechanics and interactions, so if you consider that a spoiler, you are also forewarned!

Let's get into it. Alert - dangerous levels of nerdiness ahead.

Persona 4 The Golden review - Shadow World

As the years have passed by, the JRPG has fallen far in the eyes of gamers. From being the must have, killer app that every platform needed (love it or hate it, Final Fantasy VII was one of the most important games in the history of the Playstation), they've now been reduced to curios, outshone commercially by their western counterparts and appealing only to a small niche audience. Critics have lambasted them for generic design, poor stories and weak dialogue, and it certainly seems that barring some exceptions the overall quality of games has diminished as the years have gone by.

One of the exceptions to this downward trend has been the Shin Megami Tensei games, not so much in being niche products (part of the appeal is that they are very niche) but in the fact they've injected some fresh ideas and concepts into the genre.  Dark, heavily based on existing mythologies, and normally set in modern day urban environments, they've become something of a banner series for those who insist the JRPG can still be relevant. In particular, the Persona sub series, after a successful reintroduction to the west in 2006 with Persona 3, has become a fan favourite. Persona 4 followed in 2008 and though it emerged years after the PS2 had been rendered an outdated console, it was widely regarded as a superb game. Over time its legend has grown to the point that many now regard it as one of the greatest RPGs ever made. Needless to say then that when Atlus announced a remake for PS Vita, complete with new content, expectations were high. Whereas the original Persona 4 had sailed under most people's radars, this new version arrives with 4 years of hype behind it, along with a duty to shoulder a platform which lacks decent software to put it kindly.

Is it up to the challenge? Absolutely.