<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>DigitalBattle.com &#187; 2008</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.digitalbattle.com/tag/2008/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.digitalbattle.com</link>
	<description>Game News For the Masses</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 04:17:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language></language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>2008: Best Gaming Year Ever?</title>
		<link>http://www.digitalbattle.com/2008/07/03/2008-best-gaming-year-ever/</link>
		<comments>http://www.digitalbattle.com/2008/07/03/2008-best-gaming-year-ever/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:37:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Erich Jurgens</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Offbeat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PlayStation 3]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wii]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Xbox 360]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2008]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[best year]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[games]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[playstation 3]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[xbox 360]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.digitalbattle.com/?p=12322</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
Last year was touted as the best year for gaming. There was an unusually high amount highly anticipated games such as Halo 3, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, and Bioshock, just to name a few. The idea was that after Halo 3, the would be a steady flow of triple-A titles that would keep [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-12706" title="2008" src="http://www.digitalbattle.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/2008.png" alt="" width="470" height="370" /></p>
<p>Last year was touted as the best year for gaming. There was an unusually high amount highly anticipated games such as <em>Halo 3</em>, <em>Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare</em>, and <em>Bioshock</em>, just to name a few. The idea was that after <em>Halo 3</em>, the would be a steady flow of triple-A titles that would keep gamers occupied for the rest of the year, and then some. So what happened? The article will examine several reasons why 2007 didn&#8217;t quite live up to the hype and why 2008 will take the title as best year ever for gaming.</p>
<p><span id="more-12322"></span></p>
<p>First of all, what happened with 2007? Several things, but there are two main reasons. The first of which is the fact that many of the games which were supposed to keep gamers satisfied for quite a while, were simply too short <em>Halo 3</em>, <em>Bioshock</em><em>, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare</em>, all could be beaten in two weeks easily. Not to say that they had no replay value through things such as multiplayer (with the exception of <em>Bioshock</em> of course), but they still didn&#8217;t have the length to overwhelm the player with gratification. The second problem was that some of the major games were delayed. Games such as<a href="http://www.digitalbattle.com/2007/05/13/metal-gear-solid-4-delayed/" target="_self"> <em>Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots</em></a>, <a href="http://www.digitalbattle.com/2007/06/21/spore-delayed-again/" target="_self"><em>Spore</em></a>, and <em>Duke Nukem Forever</em> (Yes, I<em> am</em> kidding) have all been delayed from their original dates in 2007. During the first two quarters of 2007, when the year was starting to be touted as the best year for gaming, it was with these titles taken into consideration. As they began to be delayed, it was gradual, and one at a time. Each time one of these games was delayed, the perception was that it was only a little part of the year&#8217;s line up. The only delay that caused a serious stir was that of<em> <a href="http://www.digitalbattle.com/2007/08/02/grand-theft-auto-iv-delayed-until-2008/" target="_self">Grand Theft Auto IV</a></em>. If the list of what we thought the 2007 line up was, compared to what it actually was, there would be an obvious contrast.</p>
<p>This segues naturally into the first reason why 2008 will be an amazing gaming year, if not the best to date. What all these delays meant was that not only did the 2008 line up grow, but the titles that were added are able to be far more polished than they would have been in 2007. Imagine if <em>Grand Theft Auto IV</em> had been released on it&#8217;s original date of October 16th, 2007. The would be a ridiculous amount of many problems with it. The frame rate would be atrocious, the Playstation 3 version wouldn&#8217;t work, it would freeze far more often, and the pop-in would be on par with <em>Mass Effect&#8217;s</em>, the list could go on. This is an example of what a good amount of polish can add to the game. So not only will 2008 have more triple-A titles, but they will generally be of higher quality than those of 2007.</p>
<p>Not only will they be of better quality, but 2008 titles, from what we&#8217;ve seen so far, are more innovative than their 2007 predecessors. <em>Halo 3</em>, <em>Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare</em>, <em>Uncharted: Drake&#8217;s Fortune</em>, all had innovative elements. However, they were not based on these elements, but rather on perfected designs and game play. In other words, they were examples of game types that were as good as they could be, especially <em>Halo 3</em>. Although it had extremely intuitive features such as save films and the forge, it was focused on perfecting and fine-tuning the game play, which had been introduced in <em>Halo</em>, and <em>Halo 2</em>. The 2008 titles do include quite a few examples of this, such as <em>Grand Theft Auto IV</em>, but there are also a number of titles which focus on a new innovative game play mechanic, or design concept, etc; A small example would be <em>Star Wars: The Force Unleashed</em>, which is completely designed around dynamic physics simulations. A, not so small example of innovation in gaming is <em>Spore</em>. If nothing else, <em>Spore</em> will raise the bar for what innovation means. I&#8217;m sure that anyone who has played with the <em>Creature Creator</em> will agree.</p>
<p>Not only will 2008 titles have a more unique experience when played than the 2007 titles, but, as I touched upon before, they will be longer than 2007 games. <em>Grand Theft Auto IV</em>, for example, has an amazingly dynamic and customizable multiplayer mode. Does that mean it’s better than that of <em>Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare</em>, or <em>Halo 3</em>? No, and those titles are still some of the most played online games, at least on the Xbox 360. What it does mean, though, is that in the long run, <em>Grand Theft Auto IV </em>will be more appealing because it offers a slightly different experience every time. Another excellent example is <em>Spore</em>. At the time of this writing, there have been approximately one and a half million creatures uploaded from the <em>Creature Creator</em> to Sporepedia. Taking into account that the <em>Creature Creator</em> is a small sliver of the game. Of all the problems that Spore could have, I would be shocked if replay value was one of them.</p>
<p>It can’t be denied that there were a number of notable titles in 2007, more than the average year, but when looking back on this generation of games, I think 2008 will be the year that is remembered.There are already enough quality titles that have been release to keep someone occupied for the rest of the year. Of course, we also need to see what 2009 will bring.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.digitalbattle.com/2008/07/03/2008-best-gaming-year-ever/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
