For those of you who have followed me on here for a while, you know that I tend to be analytical in my approach to blogs. That said, I thought I would share my thoughts on a few items that have intrigued me as of late. So, in this blog, I'll be discussing EA's list of digital retailers for Battlefield 3, Sony's Online Pass, and the minor detail that made a certain third person shooter from E3 stand out, and get me thinking about game design. So without further ado, let's get into the topics.

Battlefield 3 Digital Retailer List Snubs Valve's Steam

A few days ago, a list of digital retailers for Battlefield 3 was leaked onto the internet. According to this list, Battlefield 3 would not be available on Steam, Valve's massive digital retail service for PC gaming. To many this came as a shock, as Steam is such a major player in digital distribution, that everyone thought there was no way EA would pass on the service.

Further more, the top listed service was EA's new online service, Origin. Immediately, speculation began to run rampant about why EA was foregoing Steam, while pushing their own service. Some believed that EA wanted to limit their competition (a theory I don't completely disagree with), others sited EA's statements regarding their removal of Crysis 2 from the service (essentially claiming Steam didn't permit developers to properly accommodate their audience, which I personally don't buy) as a reason, and others just thought EA had gone crazy.

For me, this move strikes me as being brilliant for the company, finally provides a justification for the $100 million in advertising for Battlefield 3, and may very well help to stack the deck a bit more in their favor for the battle for the FPS crown. Many of you are probably scratching your heads about that last one, so let me explain.

As most, if not all of you are aware, EA has not exactly been shy in their statements regarding their FPS games and their desire for those games to sell the most copies each year. Now, where this move helps them in their pursuit of this goal, is that Valve has made it a policy that they do not release their sales numbers. This means that if EA released the game on Valve's service, they would not be able to tout their sales numbers for PC, which is by far their best version of the game.

In other words, to remove Steam from the equation and still releasing the game on other digital distributors that do report sales gives EA a strong advantage over Activision, who will still be releasing their game on Steam. It is a big risk, as Steam is far more popular than Origin at time, but with a $100 million advertising campaign backing it, this has the potential to launch their service forward, while still being safe (the console version of this game will likely cover the advertising/development costs). In the end, this lays the ground work for EA to release The Old Republic to the service which should have brand recognition established, increasing the likelihood of its success.

Again, this move is a risk for the company, but in the end, the rewards far exceed the risks.

Sony Announces Their Own Version Of The Online Pass

Last week, it was reported that Sony would be implementing their own version of the Online Pass that has been used recently by other publishers, such as EA and THQ. I have been very vocal in my support of such programs in the past, and my support is unwavering with this announcement. This year alone, Sony has posted some major losses due in no small part to the tsunami that struck Japan, as well as the bombardment of hacker attacks that came at them in the wake of their civil case against George Hotz.

When these events took place, I thought that Sony would likely implement a similar program. It made too much sense for them to have passed up. While I have nothing against gamers that buy games used, I believe that it is permissible if a company chooses to make it to where an optional portion of the game is not immediately available without either buying the game new or purchasing the pass digitally. This provides incentive for gamers to support the companies making the games they enjoy, and used game retailers have been adjusting prices of used games to accommodate this added fee. In the end, the only place where the gamer is effected by the pass is with the trade-in value, but they can always sell the game for more than they would get for trading he game in.

So in the end, I've gotta say kudos to Sony for doing everything they can to ensure the profitability of their products (which leads to better games in the future).

Ghost Recon Future Soldier Adds A Degree Of Realism That No Other Shooter Appears To Be Showing

Out of all the games that were shown at E3, none got me thinking about the video game industry and game design more than Ghost Recon: Future Soldier. Not because of the its implementation of futuristic technology, any sort of brand new technology or gameplay mechanic. To put it simply, I was most intrigued by the presence of civilians on the battlefield.

For most FPS games, and particularly military FPS games, civilians have become something that are either non-existent, or exist as a "game over" obstacle to be avoided. This got me thinking about my own military service and stories I had heard from others that I served with. In a real combat zone, civilians are almost always present, and in most modern conflicts are often used against us as a means to shield our enemies. Unlike in games that do feature civilians, accidentally shooting one in a firefight, or perceiving one as a threat and killing them is not a "game over" moment. Though it might turn out to be the wrong decision,  there are instances where use of deadly force would be authorized.

As a personal example, when I was in Afghanistan, there was an incident that occurred while my unit was on a walking patrol. We were in the middle of crossing a "T" intersection, when  a car turned and started towards us at an elevated speed. I signaled for the driver to slow, while holding my weapon pointed in his general direction. As I watched, he continued to drive towards us at the same speed and began reaching into his passenger seat, as if he were grabbing something. At this point, I signaled for him to stop and brought my SAW up to where I was aiming at his vehicle. He continued driving at us, not slowing in the slightest. At this point I placed the weapon on fire, brought my free hand to the weapon to steady my aim at him, squeezed the slack out of the trigger and................. He came to a screeching halt. Had I puled the trigger back anymore, I would have killed a civilian who was guilty of nothing more than being a complete *** idiot.

When the mission was over, many of the Infantry soldiers that were on the patrol that day congratulated me on the way I handled the situation. Some stated that had it been them, they would have fired. The thing is, had I done so, I would have been within the rules of engagement. It wouldn't have been a "game over" for anyone other than the civilian. This is what I want to see implemented in a game. I want to see true moral dilemmas in combat, and have them effect how those in your unit react to you.

I'm not suggesting a traditional morality system where everything is black or white, and the game plays to it at every advantage (Army of Two: 40th Day being the worst offender I've seen), I want it to be subtle, but with real consequences. Say that scenario were in a game. If you shoot the civilian, your squad will not be horrified by what you did, but the local populace might be and more enemies appear at a point later in the game. Or if you choose not to, later on a similar instance happens and this time it is a car bomb.

This is where I believe the real future of the military FPS lies. Not with advanced destruction or prettier graphics, but with a better sense of what is on the line. It'd make you think twice about firing that AT4 into the hotel to kill the sniper. What if there are civilians inside? Changes the entire landscape of the genre.

That concludes this blog. I've got a few more topics that I've been thinking about lately, but haven't really taken the time to blog about (too many great games out right now that have been commanding my attention). Here in the next week or so, I'm hoping to get a few more blogs out. Let me know what you think about this blog below and feel free to share if there are any topics that have made yo think recently.