A symposium will be held this weekend on "The Sexualization of Children."  Amongst the the culprits responsible for sexualizing little Jack and Jill are video games and online pornography.

According to psychology professor Sharna Olfman of Point Park University, video games present a danger to girls.  It's not the girls' fault, however, it's the boys.  Video games, porn and other media "teach boys about sex" and result in the sexualization of girls.

Olfman elaborates, "'Sexualization' means someone doesn't understand that sexuality is part of a loving relationship."  (I personally disagree that you need to be in a loving relationship in order to sexualize someone...but that's probably why I'm not giving a symposium on children)

That video games/internet "sexualize" children should be nothing new to anyone.  Five hundred years ago, books were criticized for poisoning the minds of medieval aged kids - where did they get their ideas of sex back then?  But I digress.  Games are an outlet for sexuality...so get over it. 

Sex moves the world.  It's the reason we are all here in the first place, and we have it to thank for ensuring humanity survives.  We surround ourselves with sexual images and innuendo in our books, music, movies, websites, tea leaves, ice cubes, peanut butter and video games not only because it makes us happy, but because we as human beings can't help it.

While games video games and other media MUST have a degree of responsibility (see:  Samus's Boob Job), parenting has the most influence on children, and by extension, childrens' sexualization.

There are human beings who need to be addressed before video games can be blamed for something your children will grow in to naturally.  Hopefully this symposium will address the true root of these issues and won't be another blame-the-media fiasco.

With the new iPhone 3G recently unveiled, the question of gaming on it is inevitable.  While Apple hasn't officially discussed the iPhone as a video game platform, the App Store, a virtual online store where you can download software by Apple and other iPhone developers onto your iPhone or iPod Touch, will make it almost too easy.  Also, games like Super Monkey Ball and Cro-Mag Rally were demoed at WWDC.  It almost feels inevitable that the iPhone will be jumping right in to the portable gaming arena.

In the same way that Wii has blurred the lines of gaming, the iPhone could soon blur the distinction between "mobile gaming" and "handheld gaming."  Should we just make a "Portable gaming" category on this blog to be safe?

The iPhone already has several favorable things in place if it wants to become a gaming machine. 

With gaming-related functions in touch screen and motion sensing technology, the iPhone easily rivals both the Nintendo DS and the Sony PSP.  More and more developers become interested in the iPhone by the day, and having the ability to do what pure gaming systems do simply leaves the door open for third parties to get excited about the possibilities.

And there are oh so many possibilities.  No doubt one of the most exciting things about the iPhone 3G:  it's GPS capable.  Can you think of games that could take advantage of the GPS?  Tag?  Sardines?  Geography games?  Find your Facebook friend in the mall?  Get lost and try to find your way back as soon as you can?  I'm sure the developers will be more creative than me, but the GPS is a total X factor.  (in fairness, it should be noted you can give GPS to your PSP with some diligence)

If it wants to get into gaming, the iPhone also has history and circumstance on its side.  In 1995 the Sony Playstation gained a solid foothold in the console market because users were looking for a cheap DVD player (it also played CDs in the days before Napster, kids).  To many of these early PSX owners, the video game option was a plus.  The dual functionality of the Playstation as a gaming system and a reasonably priced DVD player made it a no-brainer purchase for many.  This supplemented the system's installed userbase; coupled with gamers buying the Playstation for gaming, each household that didn't have a DVD player (which was most households) could pick up a PSX for DVDs.  The iPhone can obviously mirror this strategy since it's a phone before a gaming platform.  In fact, the iPhone is poised to take this strategy to a whole new level since each individual person could use an iPhone (for cell phone purposes), whereas households only needed one Playstation (as a DVD player).  Convenience sells...just ask Wal-mart.  Set to sell at no more than $199 - twice more affordable than its high end 8GB predecessor - the iPhone looks to have plenty of users ripe for gaming.

But with all these great advantages already in place, there are still a couple issues the iPhone will face as it ponders its status as a gaming machine. 

First, Steve Jobs hasn't even spoken openly about getting into the mobile gaming industry, but the App Store (cute pun) is a clear path to getting games on the iPhone.  Technically, though, Jobs doesn't have to actively campaign for the iPhone as a gaming device - the developers will be the ones who determine that.  Third party developers can make games specifically for the iPhone and distribute them digitally.  Does anyone else think this sounds like the Wii Virtual Console with more incentive for developers (since they can set their own prices and take most of the cut)?  Maybe it's just me.  I don't expect Apple to start making first party games any time soon, so the iPhone's games will have to be all third party - and it's entirely up to the third party developers as to the quality and quantity of software available.  It would be interesting to see if companies like Nintendo, which has many exclusive franchises and their own gaming platforms, would develop for a mobile device.

It should be noted that games haven't historically taken off on other Apple devices.  The iPod games lacked practicality and charisma (though Bomberman wasn't bad), and I haven't played a good game on a Mac since Oregon Trail.

Furthermore, battery life may be one of the most limiting factors.  I know some people who have to charge their iPhones every 3 hours because they do power-intensive things like surf the internet and stream videos.  But of course, that's what the iPhone is for, and if you're not using its functionality, you're not maximizing your purchase.  Hopefully gaming on the iPhone won't suck power like a GameGear and ruin the fun.  At WWDC 2008, Jobs said of the 3G's battery life, "Browsing, 5-6 hours of high speed browsing. Video - 7 hours, audio - 24 hours."  No mention of "gaming," but it sounds more promising than the first iPhone.

As with any integrated tech device which overlaps several electronics industries, the iPhone would have competitors other than Nintendo's DS and Sony's PSP.  In addition to the standard phone manufacturers, Microsoft is ever present in the phone industry and Google figures to enter the integrated phone niche as well.  Competition will directly affect decisions made by Apple and hence the viability of the iPhone as a gaming device.  And while Apple seems to have done more than a few things right with its iPhone, sharing playgrounds with bullies like Microsoft and Google (with Nintendo and Sony waiting on the four-square court) doesn't guarantee a fun recess. 

Regardless, it looks like the iPhone has all the resources it could possibly need to become the first legitimate mobile gaming device ever, and with a C.E.O. as whimsically genius as Steve Jobs, anything is possible.  It will need good third party support if it is to go head to head with the DS and the PSP, but some have already hinted at success as a gaming device.  While some things need to fall into place for this to happen, the video game industry is an ever-changing landscape, and oftentimes, change just feels inevitable.

According to Dr. Jerald Block, a psychiatrist from Portland, Oregon, you WoW addicts are ashamed of yourselves.  Ashamed because you wither away days at a time beneath the wondrous compulsion that is World of Warcraft... 

Block told the Boston Globe, "People feel a lot of shame around computer games. Whereas, it's socially acceptable to have a porn problem."

I'd venture to guess that there are more porn addicts than WoW addicts.  Also, could the guilt be from gaming being more self gratifying?  Or have we simply not accepted gaming as part of society?  [Editor's note:  When can we start talking about porn and gaming together?]  Either way, those of you that are addicted to both porn and WoW are totally hopeless!

The Fire Emblem series is slated to return to handhelds, and although there isn't much information on this soon-to-be Nintendo DS title, I couldn't help but make a list of what fans of this awesome series deserve to see.  The last two Fire Emblem games have come out for the GameCube and Wii respectively, but the game is always best on handhelds.  Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn didn't even live up to the graphical expectations with technical upgrades to console gaming, and if Intelligent Systems won't bother to maximize their resources, they may as well keep the series on handheld systems from now on, where pause-and-play works perfectly with tactical style RPGs (see Final Fantasy Tactics and Tactics Ogre: The Knight of Lodis).  While the GBA Fire Emblem games were excellent, the Nintendo DS has even more bells and whistles to work with.  In gaming circles, the Fire Emblem franchise is appreciated by the most hardcore of fans - and in my experience, it's the more hardcore, the harder to please...

First deserved by the Fire Emblem faithful are improved aesthetics - the franchise needs a facelift.  Although the Fire Emblem franchise has always emphasized gameplay over glitz and glam, a few visual and audio upgrades can go a long way.  The Nintendo DS is much more capable of handling a few extra sprites per character (than the GBA), so it's only natural we should see more battle frames, more idle unit frames, and a little more pizazz.  Past musical scores have always been decent, save for a few annoyingly repetitive tunes (the desert level in Sacred Stones comes to mind).  And on the Nintendo DS, a system renown for its awesome stereo speakers and surround sound (use headphones), there is no excuse for anything less than a spectacular soundtrack.  I'm thinking along the lines of epic compositions like the re-vamped Fire Emblem theme in Super Smash Bros. Brawl with the lyrical Latin vocals laced over that familiar melody.   Whether or not Nintendo composer Yuka Tsujiyoko is on this project, the music better be Grammy-worthy.  No MIDIs circa 1991, please.  Since Fire Emblem is a game with extremely high replay value with a strong hardcore following of perfectionist gamers, you can expect a lot of time to be spent (especially if you're re-setting to save a character), and a few graphical and audio improvements will make the experience much more enjoyable.  

And enjoying the Fire Emblem experience is what it's all about.  In achieving this, the single most important thing Nintendo and Intelligent Systems can give us is a great multiplayer and online experience.  

Imagine battling armies against each other - you assemble your army with a handpicked assortment of units, explore the map, fighting the fog of war and gaining terrain advantages to outwit and rapier your online/WiFi foes.  Rounds can be timed so that laggerts won't ruin the game.  Fire Emblem veterans have long been salivating over the prospect of battling live opponents, and the Nintendo DS is the platform that will make it a reality.

Nintendo also needs to address friend code issue.  Sometimes having to use friend codes gets in the way of the action.  I understand that having friend codes helps keep child molesters out of your Animal Crossing town, but I simply want to connect to someone else and play.  It may take a centralized server to arrange, but the prospect of playing multiplayer free-for-alls or 2on2s online is too juicy to deny.  Nintendo could even give the game a ladder ranking system, which could increase interest in the game (and the tactical role-playing genre in general). 

Really, this game can't come any sooner.  It's set for an August 7th release in Japan.  Hopefully Nintendo/Intelligent Systems come through with what its loyal fans have been waiting for.  Improved aesthetics isn't much to ask, and online play is a natural evolution on a platform as capable as the DS.  Marth and friends won't be the only ones obliged! 

** Update

This game will be called Fire Emblem: New Dark Dragon and the Sword of Light.

In response to the overwhelming replies to Puff's "How Bethesda Butchered Fallout 3" 

(*Quotes were not edited for typos.)

I tried to take into account everyone's comments. (Yes, all of them, from the ones that had absolutely no reason or logic ('Same Gameplay at heart') to even the one's from those living in a magical idealogical dream world: 'And I'm glade(?) they're improving things for the times, and doing things we could only dream about at the time of the other titles.' -um, sir, Elder Scroll's is the fourth of the series of first-person RPGs and hardly the first of the genre, many have dabbled, Ultima Underworld is one my favorite classic games, what they are doing with Fallout 3 has been done to death, so please...)

In efforts to clarify and in hopes to end this debate; Puff simply was trying to say that Fallout 3 is downright misleading. How so? Spin Offs have occured: see Fallout Tactics, (see Fallout Brotherhood of Steel, *barf). If any of those games were called Fallout 3, god help me, we would not have to have this debate. This game is no different. Besides mythology there is no similiarity. My envisioning of Fallout 3 is that it should have the same isometric view, but take advantage of all that fancy smancy technology of now - I am talking about blood stains that stay forever, the car that we've always wanted -physics like GTA IV with car dents that remain forever,  a horizon that never dissapears, a weather system, your player ages, the spirit of Fallout was in DETAIL, and with today's technology we should be thinking PHYSICS not just Halo-style formulas; the Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 isometric view and turn-based system is lost. 'Turn-based combat is possible using Vault-tec Assisted Targeting System (V.A.T.S.), although once your action points are used up, you will revert to real-time combat until they charge up again.' - (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/06/15/fallout-3-gameplay-details-revealed/) Revert to real time combat? Then what is the point of action points then? Hmmm...

In the end, Bethesda's Fallout 3 should be called Fallout: The Last Vault or Fallout: The Brotherhood of Steel War. Don't fault me if you do not like my made up names, you are missing the point and that is why I don't work for that particular department. Take the mythology from Fallout, but do not mislead me and my love for Fallout 1 and 2's isometric rpg turn based strategy. 

*Oh and to the person who said Fallout 2 was not a 'true sequel',' WOW, ok, Fallout 2 was bigger and better, the graphics were improved (through attention to detail), the physics were improved, and everything that was fantastic about the first Fallout 1 was not only left intact, many if not most the kinks were worked out. The gameplay stayed true and it included both those new and old to the series. That to ME is a true sequel.

*Also another comment said 'While I can't pass judgment on Bethesda's take on the franchise, it seems like they are evolving and complementing the previous games, something that is much needed for a game like fallout to receive the sequel it so deserves.' I actually agree with this. We cannot pass judgment on a game that has not come out yet. But that isn't the argument here. Fallout deserves a sequel, it does not deserve retooling (evolving). Do not fix what is and was not broken.

 *:-P Also, this comment by this person...he/she must be working for Bethesda: 'Bethesda have taken the game where they feel it can best represent the Fallout story/mythology, and be engaging and entertaining, and make miiillions!'  Oh yeah, we know that, and the millions is whats driving this game to be created, not the hunger to recreate the true spirit of Fallout 1 and 2. This is not like Super Mario jumping to Mario 64, I believe that that was a necessary change because there is really nothing left to do in the Mario side-scrolling series (EXAMPLE: New Super Mario Bros DS) In my opinion, this is more like Final Fantasy X jumping to Final Fantasy x-2... an uncessary evolution  to an already convoluted genre; on top of which, falsely using the role of the sequel.

Singer/songwriter John Mayer revealed to Rolling Stone magazine that he thinks Guitar Hero players are bunch of wannabes. 

He says, "I don't ever want to be the kind of guy who rails against whatever progress has taken place. But Guitar Hero was devised to bring the guitar-playing experience to the masses without them having to put anything into it. And having done both, there's nothing like really playing guitar. I mean, what would you rather drive, a Ferrari or one of those amusement-park cars on a track?"

I'm taking 3 things from this:

1.  John Mayer doesn't want to be the "guy who rails against progress," but that almost sounds sarcastic considering what he says next.

2.  John Mayer implies Guitar Hero players are talentless and lazy.

3.  You are an amusement-park car.  John Mayer is a Ferrari. 

OK, so Guitar Hero may not get your money for nothing or your chicks for free, but it does serve a purpose a real guitar couldn't ever fulfill.  It's a video game, John!  Get off your high horse and realize some people play Guitar Hero not because they want to be like you, but because it's a fun way to spend their time and it makes a great party game to boot [Editor's note:  as long as you can keep the music going!].  Wonder what he'll have to say when Guitar Rising comes out.

Why does this narcissistic mofo have to rain on the Guitar Hero parade?  Mr. Mayer, you are a legit rockstar, adored by millions and date women like Jennifer Love Hewitt, Jessica Simpson and now Jennifer Aniston.   What you're doing is like Arnold Schwarzenegger making fun of high school gym coachs.  Why even take the time to show the world your sense of inflated self worth?  We understand it takes a lot more time and dedication to learn a 6-string instrument as opposed to a 5-buttoned video game, and for that, we gamers appreciate what you bring to the world, Mr. Mayer.  But you are clearly a douchebag.

Recently, I have noticed an uproar in the gaming community over inflated review scores for GTAIV and Konami's upcoming Metal Gear Solid 4.  GTA4 currently holds a solid A-score on metacritic's weighted average while MGS4 has been getting 90-100% scores before even being released to public.  Interestingly, GTA4 has an "only good" B-score for user submitted averages.  This shows that professional gaming editorials are handing out scores higher than what the general public may agree to.  Many gamers are afraid that the same thing is going to happen with MGS4:  Getting a 100% rating is highly unusual and people will point to editorial-publisher relationship ethics; this is a whole different issue altogether.  What I want to delve into is the fact that Nintendo seems to be immune to these allegations.  I have heard the argument that GTA4 does not deserve an A+ score because while it is a solid game, it doesnt really add anything new to the formula.  Well geeze, have you played the latest Pokemon or Mario Party?  It's pretty much the same thing as the previous iteration except with some tweaks and a new paintjob (and in the case of pokemon, it barely even improves on graphics).  If that isn't the very definition of milking a franchise, I don't know what is... and Nintendo commits this act on ALL its franchises.  Somehow the fact that the new Mario Kart adds support for motion control (which is horrible compared to a traditional gamepad might I add), it is innovative enough in the eyes of nostalgic nintenboys to hunk over $40 for the same game you played 3 years ago.

Sony is often cast in the light as the big evil corporate entity that steals your hard earned money with over-priced hardware.  Well, no one is forcing you to buy a new limited edition PS3 .  However, I see people plunker down cash year after year for another revision of the gameboy (an ingeniously milked design btw: gameboy pocket, gameboy, micro, gameboy advance vs sp? come on now) or the 20 different fruity colors of the DS and Wii.  Apparently its okay to be nickle and dimed when you have a smile on your face while day dreaming of your childhood playing duckhunt. 

Now, don't get me wrong here, I am a firm believer in the classic adage: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."  I eagerly looked forward to every reincarnation of Super Smash and thoroughly enjoyed saving princess Zelda from Ganon for the 30th time.  I am just saying that if you are going to be critical of an inflated review score for GTA4, then you gotta use the same metrics in judging games from your favorite 1st party developer.  I don't think GTA4 deserved a 90-100% score, but I could also say the same for a handfull of titles with the word "Mario" in it.