Recently in opinion Category

Thousands of sites on Wednesday went dark in protest over the controversial and broad nature of SOPA and PIPA, the anti-piracy bills that are being considered in Congress, bringing awareness to millions of web surfers. Just take a look at this Twitter account scanning through the complaints about Wikipedia's blackout to get a general idea of how many homework assignments went unfinished (there's some frank language in there, so tread carefully).

Both bills have been critically debated by many within the tech industry over the dangers that the incredibly broad nature of the powers they propose to use against illegal sites hosting pirated material inherently have.

Imagine shutting down a street because someone decided to paint their house with something obscene, and you'll get the gist of just how broad those powers could be. Never mind that you buy your groceries at a corner store on the same street. That's just too bad.

Now it looks like the doubts that many have had over both has finally earned some action on Capitol Hill. Or rather, inaction.

According to Reuters, both the Senate and the House of Representatives had decided to delay a critical vote on the bills scheduled for the 24th for the foreseeable future. SOPA and PIPA aren't dead, but it's clear that Wednesday had been a wake up call for many of the bill's supporters...some of whom have withdrawn their support.

And according to ProPublica's Nerd Blog, opposition in Congress surged following Wednesday's blackout as you can see in the image above. That number includes a few of the co-sponsors for bills.

Everyone sees eye to eye that there's clearly a need to deal with piracy. But it's just as clear that passing legislation with deep, and potentially devastating, flaws is not the way to do it.

Today is marked with a number of protests across the 'net in opposition to two bills: SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) which is being considered in the House and PIPA (Protect IP Act) which is in the Senate. Over the last few months, there has been a groundswell of opposition from many notable tech giants such as Google and Facebook aided in no small part by a large number of independent individuals concerned over both.

I'm no lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, though the good news is that there is quite a bit of information out there talking points on why both of these are simply bad approaches to the same problem.

On the surface, both bills propose to do the same thing - fight copyright infringement, such as piracy. The problem is that the language in both is so broadly written creating a legitimate concern for potential abuse.

No one is arguing that protecting copyrights is a bad thing. What many are more concerned about is that both of these bills define their powers in such general terms that they can actually stifle open access to information through the collateral damage caused by censorship.

For example. Tech Out like many others has a number of articles focusing on games. If any of the rights holders decides that we're infringing on their copyrights simply because we have a screenshot of one of their titles, sites like this could be blocked on the internet and starved of hits from search engines which will be required to scrub their results.

Or worse, the San Bernardino Sun's website could be blocked simply because it hosts Tech Out. Wikipedia, for example, could be attacked in the same way over its entries on musical artists and film despite having so many other articles on different topics. The bills are attacking the same mosquito in a china shop with tanks.


Granted, these are extreme examples, but they fall right under what SOPA and PIPA in their current forms will allow. The White House has also sounded off in its concerns over both bills, tacitly disapproving of their approach while not dismissing their intentions.

This debate has also demonstrated how technology has reshaped dialogue in today's world by uniting so many groups in the fight ahead across the 'net. Sites such as "Good Old Games" which specializes in selling classic PC titles has joined in the fight from overseas. Groups of individuals that might never have gotten to know each other have pitched in by gathering online to share their ideas on what to do to help educate and simply spread the word on why this matters to a worldwide audience.

It's a series of small steps, but ones that have sparked plenty of new debate as politicans and individuals of every stripe have voiced their opposition to what both bills fail to effectively and convincingly address making it a fight against censorship that few can afford to lose.

Tech-Out conducted a highly unscientific poll of its team of contributors to name 2011's best game, and "Batman: Arkham City" took the top prize.




Current and former staffers for The Sun and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers comprised the majority of our panel. We don't get to cover games full time (I spend most of my days as a business reporter), but we like games and like to share our opinions on which titles are worth playing . As for Arkham City, here's what contributor Reggie Carolipio, who also reviewed the title, had to say:

Arkham Asylum resurrected the Dark Knight's career in gaming in much the same way that Christopher Nolan's Batman resurrected his onscreen legend, and Arkham City delivered even more high-flying crimebusting and street-level beat downs than its predecessor. Squeeze in a who's who of bad guys ranging from the Penguin to Two-Face, a host of storied side missions, the Riddler, and Arkham City isn't so much of a sequel as it is a new chapter in the Caped Crusader's career.

We liked other games, too. The runners up are after the jump.

It's over. After 22 years, one of the first magazines dedicated to reporting on a young and rapidly growing console market has finally decided to call it quits. According to a report by IndustryGamers, November's print issue will be GamePro's last and the website will close on December 5th.

GamePro joins Computer Gaming World as another casualty of a medium under pressure from the digital space. CGW, later known as Games for Windows in 2006, covered the PC gaming industry for over 27 years before shutting down in 2008.

As a kid, GamePro was as good a reason as any to hit up a place like Waldenbooks for the latest gaming gossip. It was different, entertaining, and like many other magazines at the time, trying to find its own voice in an industry where everything was still up for grabs and Vic Tokai had one man on their customer service line.

Its pages reflected the childish excitement of the time - rough, colorful, and illuminated with plenty of art that clearly wasn't on any of the game boxes. It even had its own comic strip and a spandex hero who showed up at CES before there was an E3.

And this was all before the 'net became the monster it is today. GamePro, EGM, Gamer's Republic, and a score of others were only the channels in those heady days through which audiences could tune into whether Zelda was going to have another sequel, see who would stoke the 16-bit fires with more trash talking hardware ads, or share tips and cheat codes.

Unfortunately, changing market conditions in the face of an ever-growing digital world have made it difficult for several print outlets to sustain themselves, especially in recent years.

IndustryGamers reports that GamePro's editorial team will be folded into PC World and that GamePro's website will eventually point visitors to PC World's instead. There is no word yet as to what options will be given to the rest of the staff, or if there will even be positions for them in PC World going forward.

Whatever the case might be, I wish them all the best in landing on their feet along with a sad farewell to another gaming legend. Thanks for many years of thumb blistering memories and excitement.

Today marks the 10th Anniversary of Microsoft's Xbox, the console that launched a revolution and raised the stakes in the ongoing war between the gaming giants. To many, most especially its biggest fans, the Xbox brand has proven to be a worthwhile gamble on the part of Microsoft and a tremendous success in ousting rival Sony from the top spot and standing firm in its place as a serious challenger for billions of gaming dollars.

Halo became the killer app that would go on to become a multi-billiion dollar franchise. Western developers would make dramatic splashes through its hardware expanding on what players should expect from a console. Titles such as Bethesda's Morrowind and BioWare's Knights of the Old Republic would help set the kind of foundations that would eventually propel these and other Western developers into superstardom. And when the Xbox 360 hit, fans only wanted more and Microsoft obliged - though RRODs were far less appreciated. Yet that didn't even slow the Xbox juggernaut from rolling ahead on multiple social fronts.

Business site, Gurufocus, notes that CFO Kevin McCarthy has stated in a recent conference that its Xbox Live service now boasts over thirty million plus subscribers. Xbox Live was introduced in 2002.

In October, Yahoo reported on Microsoft's quarterly report revealing that over 57.6 million Xbox 360s have been sold worldwide and remained the "top selling" console in the United States, a place it has held for nine months straight.

With Netflix and a host of other social tools introduced to the console since its inception and building on the Live model begun with the first Xbox, Microsoft's foray into a high-stakes arena strewn with dramatic risks and billions of dollars has evidently paid off.

Helping to celebrate this anniversary, Xbox Live users get a free avatar prop up until this Saturday. Also, Venture Beat's Dean Takahashi (Opening the Xbox: Inside Microsoft's Plan to Unleash an Entertainment Revolution) has written up a two part piece on Microsoft's Xbox journey from the first console and into today's market with the 360.

It's a remarkable success story that has propped the software company up as a member of the worldwide console triumvirate alongside Sony and Nintendo. As for what the next ten years will do for gaming, who can say? But one thing's for certain - Microsoft's Xbox will do everything it can to be there in making it happen.

"Modern Warfare 3,"the latest edition of the "Call of Duty" series is in stores today.  That means a few things:

1. Activision, the game's publisher, is going to make a lot of money.

2. People are going to argue on the Internet over whether the game is any good or not.

3. The game's advertising campaign will tell potential buyers that "there's a soldier in all of us," which is absurd.


The third item - the commercial-  is the only one that I have a problem with. I think the way the advertisement pokes fun at the "noob's" initial challenge in playing a competitive first-person shooter is actually kind of clever, but the silly tagline needs to go away.

Although I can understand why some people would be offended by the idea of a war-themed game, I don't see anything inherently wrong with using a game to tell a story about war, which has been a fact of life throughout human history.

For example, I thought "Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare," (2007) generally did a good job of imagining what could happen in a modern conflict in the Middle East and Russia. Although the story was definitely told with Hollywood sensibilities, the concept of U.S. Marines and British commandos fighting against members of revolutionary movements in not-Saudi Arabia and Russia, seemed to be a reasonable reflection of the anxieties of our time.

But the game is still, as the saying goes, only entertainment. I have never served in the military nor reported from a war zone, but I nonetheless think Activision's "there's a soldier in all of us," is ridiculous. The soldiers and Marines who have been to Iraq and Afghanistan, have chosen to do so knowing not only that the United States of America is at war, but that the wars have become decreasingly popular among the general public.

Combat troops also have to meet physical requirements, pass basic training and be strong enough to actually fight. All you need to do to play Call of Duty is pay $60 for a copy.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't play the game if they enjoy doing so. But if the advertising team for Madden claimed that playing that game somehow meant players are NFL-caliber athletes, every one would realize how ridiculous that statement would be.

Given that no one is likely to lose their lives or limbs playing Call of Duty, Activision needs to get a new tagline.

Rockstar greeted everyone hitting their homepage today with a dramatic flourish by revealing a huge, Grand Theft Auto V logo and word that a trailer is coming on 11-2-11.

It was pretty much a foregone conclusion that we knew Rockstar was working on it in some capacity and hopefully the trailer will be more than just setting the logo and still shots of the game to music. But Rockstar has been relatively quiet in the last few years on GTA, so any news at this point will undoubtedly set the 'net ablaze with speculation.

Whatever the case might be, I'm excited. Despite GTA IV's flaws, it was a ton of fun, though I'm hoping that they add in more worthwhile rewards for collecting things. And an NPC relative who does more than ask to go out bowling.