The Top 5 reasons why I want (or should that be 'need'?) a PlayStation 3

Gaming is a bit of a guilty conscience of mine. I don't spend many months of my life cocooned in my own bedroom trying to complete a game or blowing up Nazi's. I tend to go in and out of phases from time to time when I get bored and think 'oh, I haven't played this in a while, let's have a play.' As it currently stands, this household contains a PlayStation 2 and a Nintendo Wii (the former being my own). I do quite like to spend a fair amount of time on one game but not excessively. For example, I spent about 3 or 4 days playing Need For Speed: Carbon and got to the end. I was well chuffed. And again, I can spend forever on Time Trials on Gran Turismo 4 trying to beat my best time on a certain track. The Wii however, is a totally different experience. I tend not to be as competitive with that. It isn't taken too seriously. And since the Wii isn't technically mine, there isn't much on offer for me. Mario Kart is good but that's not really an adrenaline pump. I needed something with a bit more of a spicy flavour, so I did a bit of research into some games that the PlayStation 3 has to offer (I cannot stand the XBox360. XBox's are for the hardcore gamers aka NERDS) and I was somewhat in awe at what I saw. These are my 5 reasons for me to own a PlayStation 3, especially in this upcoming year...:

Grand Theft Auto IV

Grand Theft Auto has always been an old favourite. I was hooked when I first played Grand Theft Auto 3. And as I have grown up, so has the franchise. I know it's been out for a while but the fact remains - It's epic. The graphics have come a long way from the really shocking and appalling graphics of...er...San Andreas. San Andreas was good. Brilliant, in fact, but it was terrible how bad some things were. Trees would pop up of nowhere. People would be too blocky and the amount of glitches. Also, you could steal a fighter jet. You could fly around on a jet pack. That's good...to some extent. So when Rockstar went away and created 4 and re-created Liberty City, when I saw the results I was gobsmacked. Visually it was so clear. The cars had more realistic handling. Niko Bellic had a more realistic looking head and fingers whereas CJ just looked like a square balloon with a smiley face drawn on it. And webbed hands. Niko could also be thrown out of the car if he isn't wearing his seatbelt. Yet, the game still doesn't take itself too seriously despite being given this new century makeover. It's still got that underline smutty fun that's plagued games of the past. GTA is a dangerous series. It comes under a lot of scrutiny from people about the fact that you essentially have to go around stealing cars and shooting people to win the game. But the same theory applies to something like the Sim's when you phone out the firebrigade on a false alarm or on RollerCoaster Tycoon where you build a coaster and then purposely make it crash. If anyone has a ounce of common sense, they aren't going to recreate what they see in video games. So with GTA IV, don't do what Niko does. He's a computer based image and not real. He's just a vehicle to do what you can't do in real life. All with the added benefit of you not going to jail and stuff.

Gran Turismo 5

Gran Turismo 4 was, and I suppose, still is, for it's time, absolutely stunning. And it's a PS2 game. It's photorealistic and boasts a huge array of cars. Most of them being Japanese cars. The tracks are packed with colour and are bright and vibrant. All the cars are unique and each have different artificial physics. Fantastic. So why do I want Gran Turismo 5 if 4 is already all these good things? Well, the answer is simple really. 5 is more than 4. 5 is stated to have a bigger selection of cars (a rumoured 1,000 so I've heard) and more tracks. Ferrari and Lamborghini are lined up to be in GT5. . Grand Turismo have never had them two together in their games before. There is a 'driving from the seat' element too, adding more to the 'real driving simulator' feel that the series boldly states. And, if I read correctly on a GT5 forum, the almighty Bugatti Veyron will also be appearing on there too. There may not be any high classed British tracks on the list yet, like Silverstone or Donnington Park, but there is a London track and Dunsfold Park, famously the Top Gear Test track. Which only adds to the brilliance of this game. 4 was big. I've been playing it since forever and still haven't completed it. Chances are I will never complete it. If GT5 is going to be bigger then it looks like it's going to be a lot of fun trying to complete that. Especially with such big names that previously haven't appeared in the series.

Split/Second: Velocity

Since the utterly insane Burnout guys at Criterion haven't released a game since Burnout: Paradise, I found a game that is seems like just as much fun whilst we wait for a planned TBA Burnout. Split/Second is very similar to Burnout. I stumbled upon Split/Second in a newspaper article that said something about dropping things from helicopters to stop your opponents. I thought it sounded cool. Turns out, that when I watched the trailer, that's not all that happens. As one races around a track, they can trigger off certain parts to stop their rivals taking first place. For example...blowing up an airport control tower and send it plummeting into someone elses path. Or heck, blowing up the whole damn airport to stop the rest of them. It's like Burnout but on whole different level. High speed. Explosions. Car crashes. It's like it's been lifted right out of a Michael Bay film. The aim of this is very similar to Burnout. Try not to get in the way of things. In Burnout's case, it's other cars. In Split/Second's case, it's cars, buildings, cars, towers, helicopters, cars, and every-damned-thing. It's about having the reactions and pulling off the right moves, hence the name but it looks so good, I don't think I can hold the temptation much longer. Oh and there aren't licenced cars which means you don't feel bad for smashing them to kingdom-come. However, there is one game that does offer that "freedom" of smashing a car with a badge.

Blur

No, not the 90's Britpop band, but the game that looks like a cross between Mario Kart and Deathrace. On acid. Blur showcase's the real big names in the motoring industry. Ford; Lotus; Audi; and even Koenigsegg. Again. It is very similar to the Burnout games and indeed Split/Second. But, like I said, this is like Mario Kart. What you do is you pickup pickups and use them to (how do I put this simply?) stop the others winning. And there could very well be an explosive outcome. I was watching a gameplay trailer and cars fly through air when being hit by mines and bolts of electricity. It's insane. It looks very good but I'd still say it wasn't photorealistic, which in all honesty, I prefer on. It's a fantastic, arcadey arcade game. It looks highly playable. It doesn't look difficult at all. I mean, what's difficult about smashing and blowing up cars?

Test Drive Unlimited 2

I own Test Drive Unlimited on the PS2. I waited ages for it to be released and when it was, the PS2 version wasn't all that it was cracked up to be. It was a love/hate thing. I loved the cars and the fact that you could test drive them before buying them. I loved the fact that that the very real Hawaiian Island Oahu was entirely mapped out. It takes forever to get to one side of the island to the other. Brilliant when you have an Aston Martin V8 Vantage...Then there's the downside. It wasn't as good looking as the PC and 360 counterparts; it didn't feature Ferrari; and certain aspects were missing. However, TDU2 is a whole different game. It's still got the exotic cars and the exotic locations, but now there's more. It is claimed to have more cars like the new McLaren MP4-12C and the Aston Martin DBS and even offroad vehicles like the Audi Q7. It will feature a 24 hour day cycle and a weather system (which affects handling); and more routes. Because, not only is Oahu present in the game, but Ibiza too. That's two mapped out islands. How? You'll never have to go to either island ever if you own this. With the added benefit of being able to travel through them in a supercar. Yes, it's not the real thing but for less than 50 quid...what you pay for is rather spectacular.

I know the title says "5 reasons" but I think this deserves a mention...

Hmmm...Atari know how to make a good game. They've been doing it very well for a very long time. I read the other day that they are going to be releasing another game before the end of the year. A game series that, let's be frank, did what Grand Theft Auto did, a whole lot earlier. I am talking about, of course, Driver: San Francisco.


Atari and Rockstar really don't like each other. But this game is head and shoulders above GTA. Not only because it was the original sandbox 'drive were you want' game, but now this has done something Grand Theft Auto could only dream of. Fully damageable, licensed cars in a sandbox environment. And it doesn't stop there. Unfortunately, we can't let Tanner get out of the car. What he does is he shifts from car to car which means he doesn't steal them and that makes not only better than GTA but cleaner fun! It teaches kids not to steal. Wonderful! They've also reverted back to the Old Skool type of game they had originally with a classic location (San Fran') and the classic style of game. There's a lot of chases through alleyways packed with cardboard boxes. It's like a 1970's cop film. Tanner has now hung up the keys to his 'copycat' Ford Mustang and now has a very sleek and very realistic Dodge Challenger. And that's all cool by me! Rockstar...beware!

Why I Don't Like 'Indie' Anymore

"I love Indie. No. I used to. Now I hate Indie. Indie is now what I don't like. Indie is horrible. Bluergh!"



That's how I feel about what is branded "Indie" in today's age. 2010. And Jimmi don't like. Yes, other people like but I sure don't. I don't like what it's become. It's not refreshing. It's not clean. It's not anything.

I remember back in a time of 5 or 6 years ago when Indie was thriving. It was Independent Rock that caught me. Indie now feels more like Indie Pop. Indie rock was awesome. We had Franz Ferdinand, The Killers, Kaiser Chiefs, The Fratellis, Snow Patrol, Kasabian and Kings of Leon to name but a few. Now as of 2010, we can see that most, if not all of the bands, have changed their formula (except for The Fratellis, who are no longer with us). These bands are nothing like the ones we have today. They have the eccentric frontmen, pounding distorted guitars, clever, thought-provoking and poetic lyrics - It really is an art form. A canvas oil-painting of a French Riviera or Mediterranean sunset. Something anyone could enjoy just a little bit. Now, Indie is exactly that, but painted with only one colour. Grey. It's still the same quirky 3 and half minute tune but it's boring. It's lacking depth. No wonder Kaiser Chiefs and The Killers use these big anthemic synths and Snow Patrol have the singalongability (yes, I just made up a word). You do get the bands that delve into the Rock and pop like Florence and the Machine but that's pop. That's fully acceptable. And then Franz Ferdinand who describe themselves as 'Dirty Pop' have hard driven guitars, grinding synth stabs and these liquidy basslines. And then you go mad half way through a song with an acid trance solo, which is exactly what they did with Lucid Dreams from Tonight: Franz Ferdinand.

And what of today? Listed next are some bands that have been getting airplay for the past year or so. I don't see why...Starting off with The Drums.

The Drums are an Indie outfit from New York. They have a lead singer, a guitarist, a bassist and a drummer. And that's it. No lead guitarist. No synths. No extra instruments. "Ah, but you don't need all them instruments, do you? Look at Muse. There's only 3 of them and they cover them basis." Yes, that is correct. But Muse have this massive sound. And they do delve into other areas of the spectrum. The Drums are just weedy. Clean guitars, tiny drumkits and a lead singer who looks like a reject from the 80's. As for their songs, you can't really do much with it, just listen and think "well that's another 3 minutes of silence I'll never have again." "I want to go surfing" they boldly claim in their song Let's Go Surfing. Starting with whistling and, wait, is that even a bass guitar? Why is it not pounding my eardrums? And as soon as another member of the band joined the lead singer guy, Jonathan Pierce (Not to be confused with the shouty Robot Wars commentator Jonathan Pearce, although it easy to see why you would be confused. They have nearly the same name), I immediately stopped the video because it got boring and switched my attention to Best Friend. No, not my best friend, their song Best Friend. Have a listen...



Some people call that a music video. I don't know what it is. And the dancing! Our old washing machine, which decided to become possessed by the devil and try to escape when it broke, moved out of the cupboard it's housed in with more grace. There isn't any artistic flair. There's nothing funky that catches your eye. At least paint the walls. Put a curtain up! Heck, save on that and just hang a picture on the wall. And then...All hell breaks loose! For The Drums decide to better whatever they've been doing the past 2 and a bit minutes by...putting the stuff away! The band then just leave poor Jonathan by himself, dancing. I've seen people dancing by themselves and it's not a good sight. Especially when they don't know they look like a fool. And then there's the endless amount of credits at the end. How many people do you need to shoot 3 and a-half minutes of one shot consisting of putting away your instruments and some dad dancing? At the most, 1. 1 guy can press play on the tape player, record, make tea, edit and publish. Not ten bazillion! And 1 guy can also put the gain up on the amplifier. Give it more drive!

And don't even get me started on Vampire Weekend...
Sounds like a couple of girly nights in watching Twilight. Ergo, not a very good one. Vampire Weekend reside in New York. You may have heard a Vampire Weekend song. A-punk goes Eh-eh-eh-eh.


Maybe I should have stressed that it's more like Ay-ay-ay-ay. Hence the name, probably. Not just, 'a punk'. It's more up-beat than The Drums song. By up-beat, I do of course mean you could put a more dignified movement to it. Punching the air on the ay's. And that's as far as it goes. Many of their songs have these really quick repeated riffs that are only 2 seconds long but take the rest of the afternoon to think "what was that all about?" Okay, so what abouts their latest offering, huh? Well, a song that I've heard being played a lot on Radio One is White Sky. White Sky gets off to a promising start. There's some synth in there. There's the guitar. Tick them boxes! But then...everything changes for the...erm...chorus, I think it's supposed to be; to quote line one.
"Ayyyoooo, ayyyi-a-ooooo, ayyyooooo, oooooooh-oooh"
What? Erm...yes. Definitely a chorus in structural terms but what sounds like the noise you make when you've had all your teeth pulled out with a pair of industrial pliers by a blind man. Check it out. 1:06 in the brilliantly choreographed video.



I assume they don't have an official video yet. I only wanted it for the track. So could you believe my luck when I found dancing sumo's? It's in time and everything. That's brilliant. Oh, back onto the song...It started off so well and then there's this whining. Are they even lyrics? It sounds like pain. It is pain. To me. Hat's off to them though, they used a synthesizer. And pan pipes in A-punk. Wait...Pan pipes? Sounds a bit folky to me...
Oh no...
Not that, anything but that...
Folk...
Indie Folk...
I am of course referring to Mumford & Sons, who are British! Horray! But they are a Folk band. Boo! Folk originates from before the 13th Century. Music comes in and out of waves, but there must have been a reason why it took a very long time to get to become popular 2010. 600 years to be more precise. It's all about maidens and valleys and other things from the 1400's. We don't have maidens any more. We have women. We don't have valleys anymore. It's easier to call it a hill. Mumford use guitars, drums and keyboards, all acceptable in today's standards. Then there's an accordion. The most famous thing an accordion has done was the theme tune to 'Allo 'Allo and become a handy tool for the French busker. Mandolins, Dobro's (steel resonator guitars), doublebass and banjos are all used. Whistle for the Choir by The Fratellis used a Mandolin in the solo and Travis used a banjo in Sing. Perfect for one offs. Not if you sound like a removal company. Moving on, I've had enough of Mumford & Sons. I'm not even finding a video of dancing sumo's to accompany this bit of text. It's not worth it.
Deezal Dwee? Dweezal Dee? Dweezal Dwee? Denzil Dwee? Oh...no. Darwin Deez. The opening to Constellation by however many are in the band, cleverly starts with 'Twinkle, twinkle little star, how I wonder what you are?'
PLAGIARISM! Somebody tell Mozart!

Looking through my research, I've noticed one thing. The bands that I mentioned at the very beggining. Franz Ferdinand, Kaiser Chiefs, Kasabian, etc. all have on thing in common. They're all British. Apart from The Killers. They're from Las Vegas but they seem to be more popular over here. The same with Kings of Leon. Vampire Weekend are from America. The Drums are from America. Deisel Dweezal is/are from America. Mumford & Sons are from the past. It's America! America are taking our formula and trying to make it better. It hasn't worked. Sorry, America, but you can't do Indie like the Brits. We invented it after all. Independent rock started out from Britpop. You can't get any more British than Britpop. Whenever I've heard these on the radio without paying much attention to the announcement before the track, I would have thought the American bands sounded British. I looked into it more and found out that it's not our problem. But there is one band that I wish was ours. They are American. And they aren't too bad. Ladies and Gentlemen, White Rabbits with Percussion Gun...



And why do I find it good? They use pounding drums - Albeit they're only two floor toms but they work - distorted guitar, a melodic bass, upright piano and solid singing. It goes to show that they can do it without sounding weedy or looking geeky. More of this stuff please, America...because this is one of the songs that'll make 2010 memorable.
But, it does also go to show that with these selection of tunes, 2010 isn't for guitar based bands anymore. Guitar bands are going out of phase for now. Synth and pop are being revived. Which is why the top songs of this year for me are mostly pop songs. Guitars have been thriving for a good part of 10 years. Now I think it's time for them to subtly hang in the background and look cool. Unless they have something big and outrageous accompanying them. In which case they can stay at the front and yell about it!