Three’s company, third time’s a charm or three strikes and you’re out. Take your pick. Good things are coming in threes this year with the release of Gears of War 3 (20/09/2011), Battlefield 3 (25/10/2011) and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (08/11/2011). Now, before you get all excited and read on, thinking that you’re going to get some inside scoop or some tasty insider information on the three titles, I’m going to tell you, your s**t out of luck.

This is about me.

Can you smell what the Goose got cooking?

I have to be honest, I was a bit anxious when I heard that three industry heavyweights were releasing their third instalments of what would arguably be three of the most popular franchises in modern times, all over three consecutive months. To give you an appreciation for my anxiety, I have to take you back to the birth of my next generation console experience.

Gears of War was the first game I ever played on the Xbox 360. Being a huge Halo geek from my days on the original Xbox I simply could not bear the thought of not owning and playing Halo 3 until my fingers bleed. At that stage, gaming was pretty much the only way to pass the time. It was a kind of self-indulgent escapism. Apart from the odd substance enhanced Tekken battle or Gran Tourismo marathon at a friend’s flat, gaming was a pretty solitary affair.
Halo and Halo 2 would become the pimple-faced, squeaky-voiced pubescence of my gaming life.
While the single player component of these games satisfied my bedtime-story, fluffy-slipper-wearing inner child, the multiplayer gave me funny warm feelings on the inside that I couldn’t quite get my head around. To understand their significance, you have to understand the simple truth of how they served to shape the face of the modern age.

Halo was unquestionably the renaissance of console gaming.

Even the Master Chief hates Mondays…

Microsoft in its infinite and omnipotent wisdom gave the industry open access to the code and programming principles it used to develop the series and thus, the industry standard was borne.  On a player level, it altered the foundations of gaming as a whole and began the shift from casual time wasting to interactive, competitive entertainment.
As far removed as the Halo games were from the mushroom-stomping, brick-bashing, princess-saving joys of Mario, the pure rawness of Gears of War was what took my gaming to an entirely different level.
I would be the first to admit, going from the original console to its futuristic replacement puts a significant slant on ones perception but graphics aside, it was the entire visceral experience, including the rich depth of the story, that drew me into the world of Sera and made me give a damn about the lives of Marcus Fenix and Dominic Santiago.

The same old game play quickly made playing Halo 3 like sucking the wrong end of a dog

Considering Halo 3 was the sole reason for my Xbox 360 purchase, my preference for the third person shooter came as quite a shock. Halo 3 was quickly ‘clocked’ and cast aside. The call of Gears multiplayer not only saw a much beloved title sit gathering dust, it was what eventually tipped the scales in favour of an upgrade to broadband.

To say that Xbox Live blew my mind was an understatement. While I was aware of its existence, I never had the desire to ‘pay to play’ beyond what was the initial outlay for the title. Gears and Live changed all that. What astounded me was the overwhelming abundance of like minded individuals, all doing what I loved, playing games. I learned quickly however that the world of on-line play wasn’t all raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens. The word ‘noob’ rung in my ear; along with the squeal of hyperactive twelve year olds.
This harsh reality of on-line play lead to the mass culling of my ‘friends’ list, down to a more select group of acquaintances and an even smaller group of actual friends.

Almost two years on and MW2 multiplayer is as popular as ever

The vast majority of my closer on-line friends came from playing Gears of War and Gears of War 2. November 2009 saw a fracturing of that core group, when I eventually succumbed to the peer pressure and bought into the Call of Duty franchise with Modern Warfare 2. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 in 2010 served to further splinter the group but it was a band wagon, for reasons that remain a mystery, I never jumped on.
Given my passion for Gears and my more-than-like of MW2, pre-ordering the top of the line editions was a no-brainer (yes, we in the ‘business’ still have to buy the odd game). Given the hype around Battlefield I believe I’ll be taking the plunge there too.

It’s from here that my aforementioned anxiety springs.  While I’m in the position to be able to afford purchasing all three titles (the ‘Epic’ and ‘Prestige’ editions fall between the $200-$300 mark), a lot of people, including my friends, are not. Many will face the ‘either-ither-or’ choice and that is where the lines in the sand will be drawn.
Game franchises have become a polarising force in the gaming industry. While what console you have has become more of a personal preference, the game you play can serve to define you as a player in the eyes of the community.  You only need to look on some of the on-line forums to see the amount of hatred generated over what is essentially how you like to spend your ‘Friday nights in’. Most commonly it boils down to ‘game X’ being more realistic than ‘game Y’. What amuses me is that this often comes from individuals too young to have an informed opinion on the realities of war. When was the last time you saw a ‘real’ person walk away from a shot-gun to the face or a ‘real’ soldier re-spawn at the end of a battle? The actual real-life professionals I have known literally wouldn’t be caught dead playing today’s modern shooters. That’s something that they would prefer to leave at the office.

Nothing says 'real' like blood on the screen

So, the real question comes down to; after I’ve finished each campaign (I do like a good story after all), which side of the three multiplayer fences do I sit on? Whatever my decision, I would no doubt alienate some and draw ridicule from others. The trend towards experience based unlocks and performance perks proves the old ‘time equals money’ adage. The longer you devote to your game of choice, the more you are going to get out of it and therefore the greater the value in your entertainment dollar.  It is dog eat dog world and the loyalty based systems are devised and strategized by the industry to capture your hard earned cash. Their primary purpose is to divide the community.

We’re talking the big business; someone’s got to keep Cliffy B in Rolexes and Lamborghinis.

Ciff Bleszinski, quite possibly the biggest douche in history… still makes pretty good games

Adding to the conundrum of which camp to sit in; how can I base my decision on past experiences? All three publishers had rather dubious last outings.

Broken

With Gears of War, the second instalment was rife with multiplayer problems. Unbalanced weapons, poor matchmaking, a seemingly insurmountable ranking system and the dreaded ‘host advantage’. It led to so many updates, they ended up breaking more than they fixed. The disillusioned faithful either returned to the tried and true Gears of War or jumped ship altogether.

Nazi Zombies… The only reason to play

While not a direct sequel, Black-Ops quickly became a bad word and had many Call of Duty punters crying foul. The return of Treyarch to the franchise had World at War purists excited for a return to what made COD great but it ultimately failed to deliver on that expectation. In the end, all it did was split the COD community and leave Treyarch scratching their heads. With the rather public dust-up between Activision and then heads of Infinity Ward, Vince Zampella and Jason West (you may remember such words as  ”insubordination” and “breach of contract”) a thing of the past, Modern Warfare 3 may serve to reunite the community and get the modern war component of the Call of Duty series back on track.

The warning signs were in the beta

For what is really only a poor cousin to the Battlefield series, under the Electronic Arts banner; Medal of Honour promised much and delivered little. From what I’ve read on-line, those who purchased the limited edition for access to the ‘exclusive’ Battlefield 3 beta were immediately disappointed. It will be interesting to see how much of 2010’s Battlefield: Bad Company 2 versus how much of 2005’s Battlefield 2 goes into the retail release of Battlefield 3.

Taking all this and giving it the Gooseman spin, I can pretty much sum my fence decision up in nine words; ‘At the end of the day, it’s night time’. For those struggling to find the meaning, what I am trying to say in my own weird way, is that I am not one to buy into the hype. I have ‘matured’ in my gaming enough to I believe that I have reached an epiphany (sudden realisation of absolute truth). Gaming is more about hanging out with my online buddies than it is about what game I’m playing. Purchasing a copy of each is most likely a subconscious effort to cover all my bases, giving me the opportunity to socialise with all my friends. ‘Ranking up’ and ‘Prestige’ are secondary. Ultra competitiveness went out the window when I accepted that I will only ever be an average gamer at best. I’m not knocking those who do take it seriously or play competitively; good on you for being passionate about what you do, just be conscious of why you’re doing it and try not to be so hard on those who simply play for fun.

Oh well, I’ve got my place on the couch sorted, I’ve hidden the credit card bill from my wife and I’m bound to have plenty of Red Bulls in the fridge. Roll on September thru November!