Divekick, the cheeky new fighting game from the Chicago-based Iron Galaxy Studios, permits your character three basic motions: 1. You may hop back; 2. You may jump straight up; 3. You may “Divekick” diagonally down from that jump. That’s it. Though it resembles a traditional fighting game—there are health bars and an offscreen MC telling you when to go—it is so simple, so fast, and so addictive that is has much more in common with Bennett Foddy’s brilliant Get on Top (itself based on the legendary Fight of the Sumo Hoppers).

Like most parsimonious games, Divekick encourages you to test the limits of its simple rules. Unlike modern fighting games, which are so loaded down with features that casual play often feels random and chaotic, you quickly develop in Divekick tactics and countertactics, laying bare the common denominator of most fighting games: rock, paper, scissors.

When I first played the game, at this year’s Game Developers Conference in San Francisco, Iron Galaxy had set up a big, arcade-style booth on which to play their game. The closest you can get to this right now is by buying the game for the PlayStation Vita, and playing against a friend. Each of you literally holds one end of the device. It’s a great way to kill ten minutes, and if you’re overwhelmed by or not patient enough to master modern big budget fighting games, this is about the best you can do. Try it.

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/this-fighting-game-only-has-two-buttons-its-also-incredibly

1. The Sonic Ring Noise

2. The Mario Jump Noise

3. The Tetris Game Over Noise

4. The Zelda Secret Noise

5. The Street Fighter 2 Hadouken Noise

6. The Half Life Headcrab Noise

7. The Pacman Waka Waka Noise

8. The Contra First Gun Noise

9. The Diablo Drinking a Potion Noise

10. The Doom Monster Groan Noise

11. The Goldeneye PP7 Noise

12. The Final Fantasy VI Running Away Noise

13. The Metal Gear Solid Alarm Noise

14. The Castlevania Whip Crack Noise

15. The Angry Birds Every Noise Noise

16. The Paperboy Paper-on-the-Doorstep Noise

17. The Moral Kombat Get Over Here Noise

18. The NBA Jam He’s on Fire Noise

19. The Gears of War Chainsaw Noise

20. The Wii Tennis Racket Hits Ball Noise

21. The PlayStation Startup Noise

22. The Final Fantasy VII Equip Noise

23. The Silent Hill Radio Static Noise

24. The Super Mario Tube Noise

25. The Mega Man Death Noise

26. The Mario Kart 64 IMMA GONNA WIN Noise

27. The Ocarina of Time Hey Listen! Noise

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/27-video-game-noises-that-you-will-never-be-able-to-forget

If you pay attention at all to the gaming or the gadget media, you’ve been subjected, over the past few months, to competing mass lubrications of the global consumer appetite by Microsoft and Sony, two of the planet’s bigger corporations. Just what are they preparing us for? Two starkly different versions of our entertainment future, or so we’re told.

In the first, the Xbox One, Microsoft’s cloud-computing, voice-reacting, all-seeing big rig, will filter all of your leisure media — games, TV shows, streaming video — through a single, uncannily responsive interface that does what you want when you ask it, or gesture at it, much of the time, like a butler who is surly because he knows better than you do.

In the second, gamers, or some Reddit-approved notion of that baggy word, rule the living room, and the PlayStation 4 is a testament to their sovereignty. It is a pure parallelogram of play, sacrificing not a single quark of brute computational testosterone to media functionality or gesture control or any of the other sundry concessions to the rest of the household that might dilute the purity of the device.

Now, just in time for the Month of Ritual Commerce, the consoles are here. And though the Xbox One does not come out until Friday, the battle of these diametrically opposed, world-historically conflicted entertainment futures has already been joined. How? By rival games that express these totally diverging philosophies? One a hard diamond of pure gaming, the other, a gesture-controlled, voice-activated, game/TV futurething?

Well, err, no. The first skirmish of the war for our gaming future was actually over 360 pixels.

Dubbed the “Xbox One Resolutiongate,” the biggest “difference” debated between the two consoles thus far is that Microsoft’s machine runs Battlefield 4 and Call of Duty: Ghosts (two basically not-good games) at a lower resolution than Sony’s does. Hardly definitive or big-picture stuff, or even “stuff” at all. (And today, another “point scored” for Sony: Xbox One won’t support Twitch, the streaming service, when it launches on Friday.)

That the first flap of the release window came over something totally insignificant to the majority of people who will buy these systems is proof of just how little of substance we actually have to grasp with regards to the Xbox One and PS4. Here at BuzzFeed, we’ve been playing with both of them for the past week, and yet a weird sense persists that we hardly know anything about them, except for the messaging.

Right now, these two consoles are, literally and figuratively, black boxes, lists of specifications and fine-difference features that promise a lot and reveal very little. So, I could tell you that the PlayStation 4 is a major aesthetic upgrade from its predecessor (it is); that the controller feels significantly more substantial (it does); that the system UI rarely lags (it doesn’t); that the games, taken as a whole, look a little nicer (they do); and that it lacks a single feature that I found memorable, apart from more horsepower. And I could tell you that the Xbox One features a voice-activation system that veers between incredible and unresponsive (it does); gesture controls that seem far from ready (it does); cable and television integration that was easy to set up and easy to use (they were); and neato-peato vibrating motors in the controller triggers. Now ask yourself a question: Do any of these things actually matter to you?

We know a few things for sure: Like the last generation, not a single one of the launch games by itself justifies the purchase of a PlayStation 4 or an Xbox One. A couple of titles (Killzone: Shadowfall and Ryse) look the part, but they are, as games and not demonstrations of visual power, jejune.

Graphics are obvious, and it’s not surprising that game and gadget writers would seize on this small difference and turn it into a larger story — there’s just not that much to talk about yet. Of course, that’s exactly how the discussion of the last generation started, too. We saw article after article comparing PS3 and Xbox 360 graphics side by side, and endless explanations of why Microsoft’s system looked ever-so-slightly better than Sony’s.

Of course, that didn’t end up mattering. Despite a terrible slate of launch games and a disastrous hardware bug, 360 became incredibly popular because of a handful of terrific exclusive series, a great matchmaking service, and excellent streaming media capabilities. The PlayStation 3, despite a foolishly high launch price, a near total hardware redesign, and a terrible slate of launch games, became incredibly popular because of a handful of terrific exclusive series, free multiplayer, Blu-Ray, and a pretty great subscription game service. Both systems peaked in sales and quality releases around the same time, and they have sold basically the same number of units.

And 360 and PS3 were vastly different pieces of computing hardware that arrived at more or less the same point. Xbox One and PS4, on the other hand, have similar PC-based guts and offer many of the same social and media bells and whistles. Even the controllers and the systems themselves look more alike than ever. My point is this: These two boxes are going to play most of the same huge games — from Call of Duty to Madden to Watch Dogs to GTA 6 — and each will have a smattering of must-play exclusive games from developers like Naughty Dog and Epic.

Everything right now is simply speculation. In 2006, Naughty Dog was best known for games about anthropomorphized animals; no one could have predicted that they would make games as transcendent as Uncharted 2 and The Last of Us. And Epic, now famous for the 360-defining Gears of War, was essentially known in 2005, when that console launched, as a company that made computer graphics engines. In other words, if you buy one of these systems now you’re probably doing so for psychological reasons (loyalty to a brand, preference for one of the handful of exclusive studios that still exist, desire to be first). Basing a major purchasing decision off of the available facts about a console at launch (unless it is substantially defined by its hardware, like the Wii) makes very little sense.

Take this mixed review of the PlayStation 3 from 2006, written by Ben Kuchera, then at Ars Technica:

I think my main problem with the PS3 is that philosophically, it’s a confused system. It doesn’t really know what it wants to do. The 360 wants to be a social system; it wants to get you online, talking to people, playing these fun little minigames, and going for the high score and bragging rights. It wants to bring you together and make you remember what you love about gaming.

None of this is wrong, at all. It’s a normal reaction to a new console, to the available data. But it gets at just how little we know when we “review” new console hardware. The 360 didn’t succeed because it was a “social system” dedicated to “gaming” with “fun little minigames.” The PS3 didn’t fail — and then succeed — because it was “confused” and then not confused. The whole idea is that we don’t know exactly what is going to make these consoles succeed or fail, and we may not know for quite some time.

All of the living room functionality included in the Xbox One is a good case in point. Ordering your console to switch from TV to a game, or to sign in, or to turn off, is certainly a cool thing. Integrating your cable box with the rest of your entertainment is certainly a cool thing. And yet, will anyone really pay $500 just to make the “input” button on their remote obsolete? Will a low-cost, more polished competitor from a major technology company join the market? We don’t know. No one does.

Last week I attended a demonstration of the Xbox One user interface in a Manhattan loft space rented by Microsoft and gussied up to look like a living room. I watched an Xbox rep actually surprise himself by using gesture controls to swipe through photos shared to SkyDrive, the Microsoft cloud storage service. “I didn’t know it could do that,” he said.

The Xbox One and PS4 are exciting — I get that; it’s been a long time since there were new consoles. But we’re all discovering what they can do, and what will make them rise or fall, together, as we go.

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/no-one-knows-which-console-you-should-buy

Update, July 1st, 2013: An account linked to Adam Lanza reveals an obsession with a first-person shooter called Combat Arms.


Adam Lanza was a gamer.

This fact has been reported, re-reported, and rehashed to the extent that it’s now part of the killer’s capsule bio: Young. White. Male. Asperger’s. Loner. Gamer. This was predictable — not just that this young, withdrawn man played games, as so many do, or that they were violent, as so many are, but also that this detail would capture people’s attention; that the media would repeat it in an insinuating way, and that it would make the public uneasy. My son plays those games. My son loves those games. I play those games.

Even more predictable, though, was this response:

And it’s a response I understand. I remember the misinformed coverage of music and games after Columbine, and I’ve had heated email exchanges with the anti-game crusader Jack Thompson, who once led the closest thing this country has ever had to a cohesive anti-game lobby. I’ve felt defensive about this before, both as a child demanding access to what were in retrospect completely inappropriate games, and as an adult who plays and is paid to occasionally write about them. I feel a hint of defensiveness now too, and cringe at conclusion-jumping like this:

But this discussion has become stale and repetitive, and the knee-jerk defensiveness of gamers and games writers has become dogma. Hashing out the same gamers-as-victim fantasy — which was constructed at a time when gaming really was a fragile subculture, not a $50 billion-plus industry — seems both absurd and insensitive in the shadow of real, and heartbreakingly pure, victimhood.

Take this, from The Inquisitr:

The saying “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” comes to mind in this instance. Video games don’t kill people; people kill people. In fact, the most deadly school massacre in the United States occurred in 1927 at the Bath School in Bath Township, Michigan. No video games were available in 1927, yet 45 children aged 7 to 14 lost their lives.

This line may have made sense in the ’90s, when Doom — a proudly violent and necessarily unrealistic game — was questionably labeled as a “murder simulator” and blamed outright for multiple school shootings. But today, it has a disingenuous ring to it.

Our understanding of the relationship between media and violence has become more nuanced since the early days of the first person shooter (update: for those of you who don’t want to follow the link, it describes a *lack* of proven link between gaming and murder, internationally).

In the meantime, real, existential threats against the gaming industry, in the media, and in Washington, have faded away.

And in response, the gaming industry has grown more brazen and complacent — in those last few years before Thompson’s humiliating disbarment, as gaming went well and fully mainstream, emboldened developers raced to create the most offensive games possible. They had won, and it was time to gloat. I remember the bizarre resurrection of the infamous Postal franchise, Postal 2, a game that let you urinate on other characters until they vomited. The game cheekily encouraged players to terrorize Habib’s stereotypically appointed corner store, and gave players a can of gasoline, matches, and (wink!) a captive room of dancing gay men. I remember Soldier of Fortune, a game that proudly advertised part-by-part bodily destruction in character models. You could blow off arms and legs, or hollow out opponents’ guts.

Games like Postal 2 and the Soldier of Fortune series were not representative of the industry as a whole and were clearly intended to offend, so it was easy for defensive gamers to deflect criticism — these were niche titles, after all. But Grand Theft Auto 3 was not a niche title, nor were any of its wildly successful follow-ups. The Battlefield and Call of Duty series have become some of the most successful entertainment franchises in history. Much of the deliberate provocation of the early 2000s has become standard in the world’s top-selling (and far more realistic) games. Modern Warfare II’s notorious airport massacre scene drew criticism, of course. But the next sequel in the franchise became the fastest selling game in history.

All this is to say that while uninformed anti-game sensationalism may be unproductive, gamers’ reflexive defensiveness is worse. It’s prevented us from having a meaningful conversation about an industry that is emotionally and morally stunted, where per-title revenue can dwarf even the most successful films of all time but which seems immune from discussions of taste and artistic merit. A higher-up at one of the largest game publishers in the world once confided in me that when his bosses showed him early footage from a popular first-person shooter produced by another studio in the company, he couldn’t bring himself to watch to the end.

It’s not crazy to feel uneasy that young men’s most influential entertainment products, the cultural touchstones they do and will reminisce about in adulthood, are built around the premise of empathizing with a man with a gun in his hand, who kills not in the crudely symmetrical and grim manner of war but gleefully commits mass slaughter. These games become more like action movies with each passing technological generation, approaching photorealism and pulling players into actual, active theaters of war. These are first-person games with first-person narratives, differentiated from films only by a lack of distinction between viewer and protagonist.

Historically, it’s easy to see how the industry ended up here, how one mega-hit FPS franchise led to another, then another, then another. But that doesn’t make these games any easier to defend on their merits — and it doesn’t mean that this is the games industry we necessarily want. These games are cultural monuments to violence; they are about killing and being killed, and sometimes little more. I’ve played and enjoyed plenty of them, and I imagine I’ll keep doing so. But to dismiss outright worries about what these games are, and why people enjoy them, is a lazy cop out.

We can let ourselves feel guilty as we play these games, and talk about why that might be. We can allow ourselves to wonder what it means that members of Seal Team Six were disciplined by the Navy for divulging classified information in a video game consultation. We can freely ask if these games have any causal force when it comes to violence, or if they’re just a reflection of the culture of a country that’s been at war for a solid decade.

We can feel free to acknowledge that the thought of truly violent and insane people playing and enjoying games about killing makes the stomach churn, in the same way we might be discomforted to find out a killer enjoyed beloved but violent movies. We can stop obsessing over the media blaming the games industry — it hasn’t had real consequences in this country before, and it’s doubtful that it will anytime soon — and take a moment to consider what’s it’s become, and what it should be. This is good. And so is this.

Most of all, we can let the media say it loud and clear: Adam Lanza played games. Probably violent ones. Stating that fact is not a problem. Pretending that it doesn’t — or rather, absolutely can’t — tell us anything about a person? That is.

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/jwherrman/no-lets-talk-about-video-game-violence

Yesterday, Microsoft introduced its new game console/living room rectangle, the Xbox One, to the world. Here are 13 really cool facts that you may have missed in the excitement.

1. To test the new controller, Microsoft presses each button on it two million times.

That’s about seven years of typical use. Also, a yellow robot arm swings the controller side to side, like a gamer throwing a fit. That depends on how angry the gamer is.

2. The D-pad is better.

Gamers hated the weird circular d-pad on the 360 controller. The designers at Microsoft took away those weird webs between the four directions and gave the d-pad its own dedicated circuit board. That means more control. Microsoft prototyped over 200 new controller types.

3. There’s no lump on the back of the new controller.

The design and prototyping teams in Redmond made over 200 prototypes for the new controller, and the most noticeable change is the removal of the bulbous battery pack from the back of the controller.

4. It also has rumbling in the triggers.

A subtle difference, maybe. But you’ll notice it. This technology was considered for the Xbox 360 but dropped. And it still has the traditional rumbling in the hand grips, so don’t you worry, rumbling fans.

5. Some of the the games will need Microsoft’s servers to run.

The 300,000 servers Microsoft will be dedicating to Xbox Live are necessary to handle all of the streaming data that will be generated by the new consoles, but it will also be a place for game designers to offload processing duties. This will free up the processor in the Xbox One to handle more tasks on its own. This one is potentially a mixed bag, though.

6. The case was designed not to clash with TV shapes.

The two main panels on the top of the console are both 16:9 rectangles, the international standard for HDTV.

7. The new Kinect is actually dumber than the first one.

Rather than handle complex processing in the Kinect itself, the new Kinect routes those computations to the console. It acts, according to John Link, a senior program manager at Microsoft, like “a traffic cop”.

8. Also, it can see more: 6 people instead of 2.

9. The Kinect can now see you in the dark.

It does this with infrared detection.

10. And it can now detect your heart rate.

It does this by combining infrared and normal camera readings of blood flow in your face.

11. And it can tell who is holding which controller.

Like, who specifically, by profile.

12. And if you’re happy or sad.

13. Skype calls received over the Xbox One will be displayed in 1080p.

So, if your internet connection can bear it, it should be a pretty big jump up from typical webcam Skype or Facetime.

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/13-little-things-you-may-have-missed-about-the-xbox-one

1. Crash Bandicoot 3: Warped (1999)

2. Age of Empires II: Age of Kings (1999)

Breaking news from the scroll at the top: Xbox unveiled at 2001 Consumer Electronics Show!

3. Final Fantasy VIII (2000)

4. Shenmue (1999)

5. R4: Ridge Racer Type 4 (1999)

6. Ape Escape (1999)

7. Cool Boarders 4 (1999)

8. Jak and Daxter: The Precursor Legacy (2001)

9. Ty the Tasmanian Tiger (2002)

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/9-ancient-game-websites-that-are-somehow-still-aro-92fc

Shuhei Yoshida is a big deal. He’s the president of Sony’s Worldwide Studios for Sony Computer Entertainment. That means he oversees the development of first party Sony games.

David Cage is also sort of a big deal. He’s the head of Quantic Dream, which made Heavy Rain. He’s also known for going on and on.

During a panel discussion at a game conference this week, Yoshida actually fell asleep as Cage was talking.

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/watch-this-playstation-executive-fall-asleep-during-a-panel

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/jwherrman/the-phone-is-the-center-of-microsofts-univers

How Should A Gamer Girl Be?

Women and girls who play video games are up against a lot: one-dimensional female protagonists, sexual harassment by male gamers, objectification, and a litany of weirdly specific — and impossible to fulfill — criteria for what “real” gamer girls should be.

If male gamers and nerds have always, to some extent, been challenged to prove their “authenticity” to others in the community, those tests have been based in knowledge and skill. With female gamers, it’s quite a bit more complicated — and more than a little sexist.

What gamer girls (and, relatedly, their comic book cousins, “fake geek girls”) should and shouldn’t do (and what they should and shouldn’t look like) is a frequently heated topic of Internet discussion, particularly on Tumblr. (See the gamer girl tag in particular.)

Here are just a few of the confusing, and often paradoxical, rules set forth by Internet people (gamers and non-gamers alike) on what a gamer girl should be.

1. A gamer girl shouldn’t announce that she’s a gamer.

(The original, non-gaming version of this comic can be found here.)

And even though people keep doubting the existence of girl gamers …

2. … gamer girls shouldn’t identify themselves as girls or make themselves known as such.

3. Real gamer girls don’t ever play Mario Kart or use pink controllers.

4. A gamer girl should not be cute or TOO overtly feminine.

It looks like she SHOULD still be hot, though, with a LITTLE cleavage at least.

5. A gamer girl CAN be hot if she’s headless and in her underwear …

6. … but not if she’s a whole person who wants nerd “street cred.”

7. Gamer girls are not sexually aggressive, i.e. “sluts.”

8. Instead, gamer girls are submissive and quiet — “the heroine to complete your story.”

This, from a truly remarkable (but not in the good way) piece of writing called “Date A Girl Who Plays Video Games.”

9. Gamer girls need to take extra care not to annoy the guys they play games with.

In sum, if gamer girls are like …

… then I don’t blame you.

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/katieheaney/how-should-a-gamer-girl-be

People attend the PlayStation 4 launch event in New York, February 20, 2013. Brendan Mcdermid / Reuters

Here are some words and phrases that were not spoken last night during Sony’s press conference, which may be still going on, announcing the PlayStation 4: Multimedia, Television Show, Movie, Win the Living Room, Entire Family, Trojan Horse and Three Screen Experience.

(Also, “And here it is:” and “The PlayStation4 will cost:”, but, you know, details!)

The most common noun, I’m sure, was “gamer”. This word was less spoken than incanted, chanted, repeated with such monastic frequency that it seemed to take on new, possibly mystical significance. The event took place in the Hammerstein Ballroom, but unless you gazed skyward to the lovely 20th century frieze, you would hardly have known.

Sony, which wrapped the room in reflective blue futuretape and mortared the audience at intervals with incandescent lasers, had constructed a temple to something much different from god or culture. Last night was the inaugural rite in the Church of the Gamer.

The Church of the Gamer is a revival religion, a long time coming, and it is for the true believers. We have been told for years now that the importance of the “Core” gamer, the 13-35 year old male who plays long and expensive games, is dwindling. To the scattered remnants of the Core, the Church of the Gamer has thrown open its doors. Here, there is no place for the last ten years of console dogma, largely a race to open gaming to a more diverse audience through television and cinema and gyroscopic wands. The new church has no such colonial aspirations. Instead, it means to consolidate power.

Each bull issued from the procession of pontiffs onstage last night was designed to curry favor with a specific sect of gamer, and I think the most useful way to understand the Church is to describe each one.

Irish video game developer David Perry speaks during the unveiling of the PlayStation 4 launch event in New York, February 20, 2013. Brendan Mcdermid / Reuters

1. The impatient gamer.

Also known as “all console gamers”, this gamer does not understand why he or she has to sit for seconds or even minutes at a time as things download and other things whirr to life. The PlayStation 4 boots up instantly to the place in the game at which you shut it off. It will allow immediate access to downloadable games, streaming what you play as you download in the background. It charges its controllers even while resting. Instant Gratification is a tenet of the new faith. Gamers of the past will be seen as stoic, pained apes.

PlayStation 4’s lead system architect Mark Cerny shows the new Dual Shock 4 controller during the PlayStation 4 launch event in New York, February 20, 2013. Brendan Mcdermid / Reuters

2. The “social” gamer.

These gamers skew young and are somewhat poorly understood. They play online games like League of Legends and like to share what they do as they do it. Remarkably, many of these gamers are content to sit and watch others of their kind play, from a distance. The controller on the PlayStation 4 includes a button dedicated to sharing (whether or not this will be an argument lodged by Kindergarten graduates prior to Christmastime purchases remains to be seen). Social gamers can share recorded video or live streaming video with their friends, who can watch it on any of the screens that they possess. And they will share these videos to the “first social network with meaning dedicated to games”. This is probably a good thing, because something tells me that Jimmy Social Gamer does not really want to broadcast his triumphs on the Fields of Justice to Cheerleader Jane over Facebook, unless times have changed much more than I think.

3. The “console wars” gamer.

This gamer reads a lot of websites about games and is aware of the significance of certain developers to certain hardware manufacturers. To this gamer, the fact that Sony has convinced Blizzard (the makers of World of Warcraft, who haven’t made a console game in decades) and Bungie (the makers of Halo, without which Xbox would be a memory) to come into their tent holds deep meaning. This gamer, who could also probably be called the “game politics gamer”, the “tea leaves gamer” and “get a life”, is constantly checking the wind for signs that one console maker has the upper hand. This gamer will be enticed into the Church of the Gamer because he or she perceives it to be an ascendant power.

4. The independent gamer.

Jonathan Blow is the creator of probably the most famous independent game ever made, Braid. Last night, amidst the studio heads with amphetamine eyes, Blow sauntered out onto the stage, condescending and ornery. It was surreal, like watching Godard address an audience of Hollywood executives and Aint It Cool readers. He announced that his new game, The Witness, will be available first, and for a time exclusively, on the new PlayStation. There is a growing class of gamers who worship people like Blow, and an even larger class who respect what he represents. These people, who will probably not attend weekly services at the Church of the Gamer, nonetheless might get baptized.

5. The “shootey-drivey-vroom-vroom-boom-boom” console gamer.

These gamers generally go wherever things explode most righteously and shine most blindingly, and have also not figured out yet that computers are always this place. These gamers were the ones erotically gasping in the audience last night at the phrases “supercharged PC architecture” and “8 gigabytes of RAM”. Most of the games displayed last night, from the new Killzone to Drive Club to Capcom’s Deep Down (these gamers could also be called the “two syllable gamers”), were designed to massage the limbic systems of these gamers. Loyal only to the console that explodes and shines best, this part of the Church coalition may be its most fragile, pending Microsoft’s new Xbox and the coming living room computers.

Yoshinori Ono of Capcom speaks during the PlayStation 4 launch event in New York, February 20, 2013. Brendan Mcdermid / Reuters

6. The fantasy gamer/gamer who is extremely into Japan.

I counted at least three games featuring dragons last night. These gamers are basically so far in the bag for the Church of the Gamer that no Japanese person appeared on stage until an hour and a half into the presentation, despite it being a worldwide announcement from Japan’s proudest company. If you want to know more about these gamers I guess you can email me. Just know that Microsoft doesn’t understand them and Nintendo isn’t Japanese enough for them.

People are seated before the unveiling of the PlayStation 4 launch event in New York, February 20, 2013. Sony Corp is expected to showcase a new PlayStation console on Wednesday in a pre-emptive strike against Microsoft Corp’s bid to make its Xbox the world’s leading hub for household entertainment. Brendan Mcdermid / Reuters

The Church of the Gamer, like all religions, requires a degree of faith. As the clergy write the canon law, this faith will be tested by a series of questions, which are easy enough to predict: why does this system cost so much? Why is my internet not fast enough to stream these games? Why do I have to pay to use this gaming social network when the best social networks are all free? Why would I buy this mid-rate living room PC when I can buy a newer one, with access to more games, that is much more powerful and works just as well with my television? When is the cloud gaming I read about going to be fully functional? Who in the world owns a Vita?

But those are questions for the days ahead. Last night as I stumbled out onto 34th street, rubbing my eyes, I had the distinct feeling that I had just heard a very good sermon: rhetorically nimble, surprising, uplifting, short on specifics. It has been a long time since gamers had been the audience for one of those, directed as they’ve been at their less interested partners, kids and grandparents. Is there still enough belief in their blood for a great awakening?

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/do-you-believe-in-the-playstation-4