Not content with unveiling a game in which members of Green Day become pigs, Angry Birds maker Rovio announced three high level hires to its new North American office today, suggesting that the company is taking its beachhead in the US very seriously indeed.

Yesterday’s news of a Green Day-themed version of the popular Angry Birds game may just be the start of a whole new round of Angry invasion of American popular culture, it seems. Finnish game studio Rovio Entertainment, the organization that loosed the birds and their pig nemeses onto the world at large, has made three important hires for it’s newly-opened Los Angeles office that suggest that, when it comes to Angry Birds domination, we ain’t seen nothing yet.

According to a report in the Hollywood Reporter today, Rovio has brought Rachel Webber, Michele Tobin and Naz Cuevas on board to work in the Santa Monica office. Those names likely aren’t too familiar to you, but where each of those three have come from will be. For example, Webber was previously in charge of managing relationships at Tumblr before becoming the company’s Head of Business Development for North America, responsible, in part, for the construction of Rovio’s planned video animation division. Similarly, Cuevas – now Rovio’s Senior Director of Consumer Products and Retail Strategy, and the man responsible for keeping the 1000+ company who have licensed the rights to the Angry Birds brand for use in everything from clothing to candy and back again both happy and in line with the company’s view of what the characters should, and shouldn’t, be able to do – had a former life as Senior Manager at the licensing division of Freemantle Media, the company behind American Idol and America’s Got Talent.

Perhaps most impressively, Tobin had been responsible for the Entertainment division of Millennial Media, another unfamiliar name but an award-winning, Inc. 500 company responsible for mobile advertising with a client base that includes Coca-Cola, Proctor and Gamble and AOL, amongst many others; her new role will see her building both more partnerships with outside companies as well as what’s being described as “a direct sales pipeline with the biggest brands in the US.”

In joining Rovio, the three will work under Andrew Stalbow, Rovio’s General Manager of North America. In a statement announcing the hires today, Stalbow placed emphasis on the ambition to grow Rovio from a video game company to a force to be reckoned with in mainstream entertainment: “As an entertainment company spanning games, animations, consumer products, retail and media partnerships, it’s natural for us to expand our reach in North America out of Santa Monica. We’re thrilled to announce the hiring of Rachel, Michele and Naz as we work with our partners in the United States to execute our strategy of delivering incredible experiences for our fans,” he said.

Rovio has already made a great deal of headway into the exploitation of the Angry Birds brand; having these three join the company and spearhead its North American growth, it looks as if the company is planning on continuing to grow as fast as possible. Soon, you won’t be able to get away from the idea that all pigs are thieving monsters.

Get excited, people: Google Play gift cards are now for sale at Target, GameStop, and RadioShack.

Holy crap, guys. Guess what. No, guess. Go ahead, guess. Wrong! You can now buy Google Play gift cards! Isn’t that exciting? Guys?

Oh well, that’s the news — news we saw coming almost a week ago. Google has partnered with Target, GameStop, and RadioShack to sell $10, $25, and $50 gift cards for its Google Play digital marketplace, where you can buy Android apps, movies, music, movies and TV shows, and digital magazines.

Perhaps more interesting is what you may not do with your Google Play gift card. You may not use your Google Play gift card to purchase “Android app subscriptions, magazine subscriptions, or hardware and accessory purchases.,” according to Google.

Also, according to the Google Play gift card terms of service — yes, everything has a terms of service — Google Play gift cards may not be used by any one under the age of 13. Why? Because, technically, no one under the age of 13 is allowed to make purchases through Google Play at all. Further, Google Play gift card owners between the ages of 13 and 17 may only make purchases on Google Play with their gift card — anything that costs more than your gift card balance is out of reach thanks to rules with Google Wallet, to which your Google Play gift card connects.

In other riveting gift card news, Walmart is now offering $100 iTunes gift cards for just $80. As Fortune’s Apple guru Philip Elmer-Dewitt explains, the only caveat is that you have to give your personal information — name, email address, and payment info — to Walmart, which can then use it for its own purposes, or that of its subsidiary companies. It cannot, however, sell your identity to third-parties.

Marvel’s Deadpool game will have a number of twists, not the least of which is that the protagonist knows he exists within a video game. And he’s ready to have fun with it.

High Moon Studios has already shown what it can do with licensed material, having worked with the Bourne and Transformers franchises. Now the Activision-owned studio is targeting its first comic book license, bringing the Merc with the Mouth to Mature-rated life. Marvel’s Deadpool stands out from the super hero crowd for many reasons, including his ability to say whatever he wants and do whatever he feels like doing.

“Deadpool is a character who knows he’s a comic book character, and in our case he knows he’s a comic book character in a videogame,” said Sean Miller, game director on the Marvel project at High Moon Studios. “He’s making this game for himself. This is a game that he wants to play. The takeaway from that is that he really lets us do things that we can’t do in a lot of other games in the Marvel universe. He talks a lot. He’s irreverent. He’s funny. He’s a wise ass. He’s also really powerful. There’s no other character that loves kicking ass and getting paid for it — and eating chimichangas — more than Deadpool.”

Deadpool’s superhuman healing power, which he got from Wolverine, allows him to take intense amounts of damage. The game will feature this ability, showing first the damage and then the healing. This will include the dismemberment and all the outlandish stuff from the comic books.

“Deadpool is a martial artist and a swordsman,” said Miller. “What’s cool about this for us is that Deadpool isn’t just restricted to knives or swords or guns. It’s about using all those things, and it’s about changing the way that you play the game based on what it is that you’re using. So the seamless transition between gun play and melee is really important to us.”

In the comics, Deadpool is known for being insane. In the game, he literally will have multiple voices in his head to show this split personality. The developer is embracing this antihero as the ultimate case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. In fact, the character will learn things from listening to his different voices, just as the player will. And this dialogue, as shown in the early build, was very funny. So players will be laughing while they’re slicing and dicing enemies, or blowing them away with really huge guns.

“Because the voices inside his head don’t know what the other one knows, there’s some great fun in the conversations that he has with himself,” said Miller. “As a character who knows he’s in a videogame, he’s also aware that you have the controller in your hand. His fate is tied to the way you play the game, so he’s going to be playing with you while you’re playing with him. Those extra voices actually do a good job of giving us another way to explore who Deadpool is and how you interact with him.”

In sticking with his comic-book personality, Deadpool will make quips and remark on just about everything that happens in the game. He’s got quite the personalities. And since he’s the star of this show, everything is seen from his perspective, through his filter. High Moon promises that other Marvel characters will appear in this adventure, although they’re only confirming Psylocke at the moment. These characters may look different than fans are used to, since Deadpool has enhanced or modified things based on his unique perspective.

“Like in many of the comics, the level starts with Deadpool as a mercenary on a mission,” said Miller. “This is not a Deadpool team-up. This is not a Deadpool X-Force thing. This is a Deadpool game. He’s been paid to assassinate a crazy billionaire media mogul, who has got his own personal militia. He’s been doing some things that are not quite right, so somebody has paid Deadpool to go and kill him. This becomes the impetus that brings Deadpool into a much larger story.”

High Moon is working with Marvel comic book writer Daniel Wayne, who’s penned the last six years of Deadpool, to create a unique story that fits in with the current Marvel Universe. And it’s a story that only Deadpool can solve. The story spans everything from the world everyone knows to some places that Marvel fans will be very familiar with.

The demo showcased why Deadpool will be one of the rare Marvel games that’s rated Mature. The Punisher was the last game to push the violence quotient that high. But while that game was somber and dark, Deadpool is funny and gory. His personality, as brought to life by actor Nolan North, makes the blood and bullets seem a bit less deadly. It’s so over-the-top that the game doesn’t get dragged down into any type of darkness. It’s violent, but funny. And you want to pull that trigger or use those swords just to hear what his voices will say next.

“The game has a lot of violence, a lot of suggestive themes and things like that, but it’s all done with an eye towards entertainment value just being good clean fun to play,” said Miller. “Deadpool has fun at everybody’s expense, including his own. And we get to go along for the ride and see how he pokes fun at the videogame universe, at the Marvel Universe, and all these things.”

Deadpool, who has appeared as a minor character in games like Marvel vs. Capcom 3 and Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2, is anything but ordinary. Miller said that in choosing this project, which isn’t attached to any movie in the works, the studio wanted to give this character justice.

“We like to looked at what we wanted to see in a game as a fan of this character, and our Deadpool game takes it to another level,” said Miller. “He’s an anti-hero. I would say that he challenges what it is to be hero.”

And while this game will certainly challenge players in how to creatively kill off enemies, it will be a fun ride. Deadpool is coming. And the gaming world may never be the same.

AT&T iPhone owners who want FaceTime will need to upgrade to a Mobile Share plan, but this new policy may be against the FCC's new net neutrality rules.

AT&T already announced that it would be rolling out shared data plans for their new mobile customers, but it looks like the separation between subscribers won’t just be how their data is distributed–application use may have limits as well.

We reported last month that AT&T may be planning on limiting access to FaceTime for iPhone owners based on their data service. Unfortunately for AT&T, it looks as though this may be in violation of FCC rules on net neutrality.

What we know about the limits

As of last week, AT&T made it known that using FaceTime over its 3G and 4G mobile network — a feature that will become available with iOS 6 in the fall — will be available only for shared data plan users. Users who are gripping tight to their tiered and unlimited plans will only be able to use the video chat app while connect to a Wi-Fi network. As wireless carriers are known to do, this limit in functionality is likely a push to get users to sign up for the new shared plans.

What we know about the law

According to Public Knowledge’s senior staff lawyer John Bergmayer (via NY Times), this attempt to prohibit use of a particular application puts AT&T in violation of the FCC’s rules on net neutrality. He refers to the Open Internet Rules, specifically one that states that mobile providers cannot “block applications that compete with the provider’s voice or telephony services.” The fact that the FCC used the term “telephony” aside, this raises a legitimate question as to the legality of AT&T’s app block. Mr. Bergmayer stated that there is “no technical reason why one data plan should be able to access FaceTime, and another not.”

While the FCC is currently not making a comment on this case, there is some precedent already set on the issue that may give us an indication as to how this will play out. Back in July, the FCC ruled that Verizon couldn’t block tethering applications in the Google Play store. Verizon tried to institute that blockage because apps made available a service that Verizon was charging for. Because of the FCC’s ruling, tethering apps are now available for Verizon customers.

What it means for other service providers

If AT&T is allowed to put up a firewall to prevent certain users from accessing an individual application, a somewhat startling statement will be made. Does this mean that other applications will see a similar block, like Skype on Windows Phones or other third party applications on any given service? It conjures up a somewhat frightening scenario in which app access becomes a tiered system. Only top data subscribers get access to top apps. If AT&T puts limits up on a game like Angry Birds, there could be riots in the street, but what about less popular texting apps or products like Google Voice, which directly conflict with AT&T’s services?

At the moment, this FaceTime debate only concerns AT&T users. Sprint has stated that it has no intention of charging extra for FaceTime access. Verizon has also not made any indication that it will put similar limits on iOS 6′s flagship video chat program. If nothing else, this may just give AT&T iPhone owners a reason to leave for another carrier. Then again, iPhone users have lived with Wi-Fi only FaceTime for this long. Maybe they don’t really need to video chat on 3G or 4G.

Does the $200 price point for the new Microsoft Surface tablet sound a little bit too good to be true? We examine why it might not be too far fetched.

When Engadget broke the news that the Microsoft Surface would be sold for $200, it caused quite a stir. Can it possibly be true? Microsoft is refusing to comment. An anonymous source kicked off the fuss by saying that the Microsoft Surface for Windows RT tablet would be going on sale on Oct. 26. That’s believable enough because it’s also the launch date for Windows 8. What’s harder to swallow is the idea that even Microsoft can afford to sell it for $200. (By the way, in case you are wondering, Windows RT is a version of Windows 8 for ARM devices such as tablets.)

Competition is good for consumers

This kind of pricing is the sort of thing that capitalism fans always argued should come about because of fierce competition in the market. In theory, companies vying for our affections will drive prices ever lower. In practice, it rarely happens for a variety of reasons, or it happens until the competition goes out of business and the survivor can charge whatever it wants.

In any case, if it is true, then it’s great for consumers currently considering buying a tablet. Stats from IHS recently suggested that Apple’s share of the tablet market is heading toward 70 percent with a range of Android manufacturers accounting for the bulk of the rest. Of course, that was before Google launched the Nexus 7. If you were to buy a tablet right now and you wanted the best value for your money, it might be tough to see past the Nexus 7. If you want the best tablet and price is of no concern, then the iPad is the obvious choice.

Microsoft would really stir things up by releasing a 10.6-inch tablet at a $200 price point. Unfortunately, beyond the inclusion of Windows 8, we don’t know much about the Microsoft Surface right now when it comes to specs. However, the 10.6-inch display and the choice of 32GB or 64GB storage is enough to suggest a higher price. So, how could Microsoft afford to sell it at $200?

Could it be a loss leader?

It would not be unheard of for a company to sell a product at a loss in order to stimulate sales of other products or services. It might be a practice that’s more common in major supermarkets, but tech companies do it too. Sometimes, they can afford to lose money on something to gain market share. Microsoft poured cash into establishing the Xbox brand, building a user base for Xbox Live services. Once it was established, it began selling hardware that did turn a profit. The Xbox 360 made money and there was room to sell it below cost because it could be subsidized by a subscription to Xbox Live. Clearly it’s a high risk strategy, but Microsoft knows it can pay off.

Techland at Time conservatively estimated the build cost of the Surface and suggested that Microsoft would lose at least $50 on each one, if it sold for $200. As it turns out, Microsoft lost more than that on the original Xbox. VentureBeat suggests a loss of $168 on each machine sold.

That still doesn’t make it likely, but it is a possibility.

Bundle it with a contract or subscription

This is one of the most popular theories floating around. You get the tablet for $200, but to use it, you also have to sign up for a two-year contract or a subscription to a service. The fact that carriers are backing away from subsidizing tablet costs suggests that it won’t be a 4G contract scenario. Microsoft also won’t want to limit sales channels.

Maybe it’s a subscription to Office 365, as the Guardian blog suggests? A subscription bundle could also involve Sky Drive, Xbox Live, or the newly branded Xbox Music (previously Zune Music). A monthly subscription that bundles all of Microsoft’s offerings and maybe even ties in a deal with a third-party service could be in the cards, as well. Some kind of tie-in with a subscription to services seems far more likely than a straight grab for market share that Microsoft will look to capitalize on later.

Partner problems

There are some compelling arguments against the suggested price point. As our own Geoff Duncan points out, Microsoft has to keep its RT partners onboard. It is expecting Dell, Lenovo, and Samsung to make Windows RT devices, so a loss-leading Surface tablet wouldn’t help, especially when you consider Microsoft’s licensing fee on top of manufacturing costs and marketing. A $200 Surface could make it impossible for them to compete.

Does Microsoft have to do this?

Amazon might be losing a small amount of money on each Kindle Fire in order to build a market share and sell content, but they aren’t taking a huge risk. Google makes a modest profit or breaks even on the Nexus 7, but once again, the profit comes from elsewhere. Google makes its money on content and advertising. Apple makes a huge profit on every iPad sold and then makes more from selling content. Microsoft does have to work hard to break in here, but there’s room to maneuver.

There’s some middle ground between the bargain basement $200 price and the premium $500 plus price. The competition outside of the iPad is not unmanageably intimidating. A lower price could help Microsoft establish a foothold with the Surface. Selling a big tablet with decent specs at a break-even price or a slight loss is probably necessary if Microsoft expects to catch up with the competition.

Microsoft doesn’t have to be as aggressive as $200, but if they go with that price point, the Surface would fly off the shelves. Maybe it ultimately comes down to this: How desperate is Microsoft to catch up?

Alleged parts for the forthcoming iPhone 5 are leaking out on a weekly basis. Has Apple lost its secretive ways -- or just gotten better at them?

This year, we have witnessed what appears to be an unprecedented number of believable iPhone parts leaks. Each week, some new component or photo makes its way onto the Web. And if the leaks are real — they certainly look real — then almost nothing about the forthcoming “iPhone 5″ is a secret. Sure, we don’t “know” everything about the device — but more or less, the proverbial cat seems to have slipped out of the bag. So, what exactly is going on in Cupertino? Has Tim Cook lost control? Or has Apple employed some other, more calculated strategy?

Bad Apple

The most obvious answer to the parts-leak conundrum is that component manufacturers in China, and around the world, simply have lost some of their respect (or fear) for Apple now that Tim Cook is in charge and co-founder Steve Jobs is gone. After the company released the “new iPad” last year, its main slogan for the Retina-enhanced device was the made-up marketing word “Resolutionary.” I literally laughed  out loud when I first saw it plastered in 1000-point font across Apple.com. To this day, it sounds like a word invented for QVC, yet Apple used it for months.

For me — a 100 percent Apple outsider — the tackiness of “Resolutionary” was the first visible (albeit tiny) crack in Apple’s meticulously constructed corporate wall. Then came the whole EPEAT debacle. In June, Apple removed all 39 of its products from the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool, a registry that rates consumer products’ for their impact on the environment. The move caused Apple customers — many of whom I would wager had never even heard of EPEAT in the past — to freak out with righteous indignation. The removal of Apple’s lineup was a bold move, after all, from a PR perspective. But Apple has never shied away from bold in the past. Less than a week later, however, Apple completely reversed its decision, and handed its Macs and i-devices back to EPEAT. Not only that, but the company actually said it was sorry. Sorry! Sorry? Apple doesn’t say “sorry.” Even when Apple’s iPhone 4 was found to have a defective antenna in 2010 (no service if you hold it the wrong way), then-CEO Steve Jobs refused to apologize. Instead, he told everyone to “calm down,” and gave away some free bumper cases to end the controversy. For the last decade, Apple has told us what to think, not the other way around. Crack number two.

Cook has strayed from Jobs’s hard-lined path in a number of other ways. When faced with criticism over the treatment of workers of Apple’s manufacturing partners in China, Apple pushed for third-party inspections of Foxconn factories. He decided to pay out dividends to investors — something Steve Jobs avoided. And, most recently, Apple pulled a series of Genius ads after they were harshly criticized in the press.  That’s right: Not only did Apple make some uncharacteristically bad ads, but they were shamed into taking the off the air.

And now we have all these leaks — leaks that fuel the rumors that Apple says hurt its bottom line. After all, if you know a new iPhone is coming soon, why would you slap down hundreds of dollars on something that’s about to become outdated? Perhaps. But if the leaks are real, then the next iPhone is going to be pretty darn boring — like the iPhone 4S again, just a bit taller, with a different dock connector, and a headphone jack moved to the bottom. Whoopie! 

TechCrunch’s John Biggs, who seems equally perplexed by Apple’s softening nature, tries to explain the leaks with the admittedly “far-fetched” theory that “Apple needs to telegraph the changes they are planning to the [next iPhone's] dock and, as a result, are forced to release more test hardware than usual. This hardware is falling into the wrong hands.” In other words, more peripheral manufacturers are getting demo units and some of them are leaking pictures and information — betraying Apple.

Bada** Apple

Far-fetched or not, Biggs’s theory is as good as I’ve heard so far. But I have another, even less-plausible explanation: Apple hasn’t grown weak at all. Instead, Cook has used the great resources at Apple’s disposal to launch a covert disinformation campaign. The leaked Apple parts are not real — or, at least, they are not parts that will make up the sixth-generation iPhone. They are decoys released by Apple, or on Apple’s behalf, to throw the tech blogosphere off its trail. The REAL new iPhone will look nothing like these leaked components.

As difficult to pull off as this might be, it would have a great effect for Apple. First, it would allow the company to still surprise everyone when they officially release the new iPhone. In turn, this would release an endless flow of positive comments from the technology media about the device, and how Apple, under Cook, has “still got it.” Seriously, it would be a virtual orgy of fanboyish congratulations. End result: Apple sells even more iPhone units that it would have otherwise.

It would also show the technology blogs who’s boss. If Apple can trick everyone with fake leaks, then the already-sketchy rumor articles we all know and despise will become even more dubious. Perhaps that will result in more conservative reporting, thus stifling the Apple rumor mill altogether, which would also theoretically help sales.

Wild as this may sound, a similar thing happened during last year’s “iPhone 5″ rumor mess. The tech press was convinced Apple would release a tear-drop-shaped smartphone with a larger screen. Instead, Apple release the iPhone 4 with Siri, a better camera, and slightly improved hardware. The only thing wrong with last year’s confusion was that the rumored device was infinitely more interesting than what Apple ultimately offered. If it could turn the tables and make everyone think that it’s releasing one thing, then actually come out with something way better, then Apple will have won on all counts.

Conclusion

I’m going to save you some energy and call my own theory bunk from the start. Even if Apple has the resources to wage such a disinformation campaign, it would still be a tough move to pull off — one that could very well cost a lot of money. And it’s not like Apple’s iPhone sales are hurting — not yet, anyway. Still, I’m going to hold onto this idea as a dream, a hope that Apple is still the baddest company in town, one capable of creating mind-blowing devices that change what I think is possible in personal electronics; A company that doesn’t say things like “Resolutionary,” and never says “sorry,” even when it clearly should. That is the Apple I knew. And when the new iPhone is unveiled in the next few weeks, we’ll find out if that Apple remains.

Image via Andrey Bayda/Shutterstock

It's been a good run for the premier Nintendo-themed gaming magazine, but Nintendo Power seems to be ceasing production.

Sad news for those of us with overactive nostalgia glands: Nintendo Power is most likely going to cease publication in the very near future.

First published in 1988, Nintendo Power became a pretty massive hit thanks both to Nintendo’s domination of the gaming industry during the late 80s and early 90s and the fact that the magazine had a deal with Nintendo to cover its hardware and games exclusively. As a result Nintendo Power often had the best previews, reviews and strategy guides, while other magazines tried desperately to compete.

Unfortunately for Nintendo Power the inevitable passage of time and the invention of the Internet seem to have conspired to end its nearly quarter-century print run. Print magazines now lag far behind online media in providing rapid informational updates to consumers, and with Nintendo no longer synonymous with video games as a whole, the Japanese gaming giant seemingly has no interest in extending its long-running agreement with the magazine. Ars Technica reports:

… our source says that Nintendo, which was always “difficult to work with,” was uninterested in renewing that contract or in taking part in a number of digital initiatives that Future saw as necessary for the long-term health of the brand. He added that Nintendo doesn’t seem interested in taking over direct control of the magazine again (Nintendo and Future representatives did not immediately respond to a request for comment for this story).

Oh? Nintendo is not keen to explore online options for what has effectively been its print wing for the past two-plus decades? Why, that’s … pretty much exactly what we’ve come to expect from the bizarrely Internetphobic video game company.

Now normally we’d put “rumor” tags around all this information, since it originally stemmed entirely from one anonymous Ars Technica source, but that was before key Nintendo Power employees confirmed the information on Twitter. Though the comments of both senior editor Chris Hoffman and writer Phil Theobald have been since deleted, they claimed they were sad to see the magazine fall apart, and that the editorial team would have “something pretty sweet planned for the final issue.” What that might be, or when this final issue will hit newsstands is still unknown.

If you guys can hold back the tears for a moment, we’d like to say that though we revere Nintendo Power as one of the key early building blocks of our interest in writing about games for far less money than we might make had we actually stayed in school and became a doctor like our mothers wanted, it’s not exactly realistic to lionize the mag as an icon of all things good and right in gaming. Yes, it came to prominence in an era in which video games were still the next big thing and every new advancement was shiny and happy, but if you go back and re-read a lot of those old Nintendo Power issues, it’s quite apparent that for long periods of time the magazine existed purely to sell Nintendo products. Like a J. Crew catalogue, only with fewer sweaters and more pictures of fat Italian plumbers.

We support your right to be bummed by this news, and we are too, but let’s remember Nintendo Power as what it actually was: Another Nintendo entertainment product. On the other hand, it did give us those enjoyably cheesy Howard & Nester comics, so feel free to spend the rest of the afternoon poring over this massive archive of every single strip.

Comcast and Microsoft strengthen their partnership on Xbox with an NBC News app. What does it mean for Xbox's future?

There are almost 70 million Xbox 360s in the wild. More than 26 million of the people using them have Xbox Live Gold accounts, and the majority of their time is spent watching television, not playing video games. Netflix, HBO Go, MLB.tv, ESPN—These are the Xbox 360 goods that dominate time on the box, not Halo and Call of Duty.

Comcast is one of Microsoft’s most consistent partners in transforming the Xbox into an all-purpose living room entertainment hub. Its latest contribution: The NBC News app. Not unlike the ESPN Xbox 360 channel/app—Microsoft really needs to not use the app name here as people still think of television in terms of channels—the NBC News app serves up streaming shows, breaking news, and short features. It’ll be broken into categories like Politics, Lifestyle, MSNBC, and regular old news. There will purportedly be original content made for the service, but Microsoft didn’t provide details.

Current events are becoming popular content on Xbox 360. NASA’s livestream of the Curiosity rover’s descent to Mars as widely watched if user comments online are any indication.

The NBC News app announcement is more significant as part of the Xbox’s broader future though. Comcast is emerging as the strongest of Microsoft’s television partners. It already offers Xfinity cable television service through Xbox Live as well. There have been rumors for more than a year now though that Microsoft is hoping to launch its very own cable television service through Xbox Live, and Comcast has been a rumored partner.

NBC/Comcast-owned content has already been used in demos of Microsoft’s Xbox Television service. CEO Steve Ballmer actually demoed Xbox TV for financial analysts in September 2011, showing off episodes of “The Office.” Word was that Xbox TV would launch in late 2011, but Microsoft apparently wasn’t able to rally enough content partners.

Now analysts believe Microsoft was just regrouping for a more concerted shift into cable with the Xbox 720. Wedbush Morgan’s Michael Pachter said in June that he believes Microsoft’s plan is to partner with a cable service provider like Comcast and offer the Xbox 720 for just $99, much in the same way that people buy cable boxes for cheap alongside cable subscriptions.

The NBC News channel is one more value add for Xbox Live here at the end of 2012. For Microsoft though, it represents something far more. It’s one more stone in the foundation of its future in entertainment.

Namco's decision to hold Ni no Kuni back for more than a year after its Japanese release was rough, but a demo proves it worth the wait.

Namco Bandai announced that it would localize Level-5 and Studio Ghibli’s role-playing game Ni no Kuni: Wrath of the White Witch for the United States and Europe in October 2011, just a little over a month before the game came out in Japan. On the one hand, it was a relief for fans of Hayao Miyazaki’s films like My Neighbor Totoro and of Level-5’s RPGs like Dragon Quest VIII alike. The original Ni no Kuni for Nintendo DS looked as sweet as actually going on a magical adventure since it came with a hardbound book of spells, but that game never made it out of Japan. On the other hand though, Namco said the PS3 version of Ni no Kuni wouldn’t be out in the west until 2013. The game was finished, so what was the hold up? Localization takes time said Namco Bandai. The fans scoffed. Sure it does, but more than a year? 

There was no need to scoff. Namco Bandai swung through New York to preview its upcoming games. These were the same suspects that peopled Namco’s E3 booth, but it was the first time that I’d gotten an opportunity to sample No no Kuni. E3’s blaring lights and thumping bass don’t exactly make for an ideal setting to absorb a quiet RPG, let alone one as emotionally tender as Ni no Kuni. For those unfamiliar, the premise is more thoughtful than the usual RPG rigmarole of angular-haired teens saving the universe from a big monster. Oliver, Ni no’s lead, is trying to see his mother one last time after she’s passed away. Mr. Drippy, the stuffed animal she made him, comes to life and leads Oliver on an adventure to see his mom in “Ni no Kuni,” or “another world.”

Just translating the game’s dialogue and text wouldn’t have been enough for this game to elicit the emotional impact it should. It really needed to be localized, adapted and reconsidered for international audiences with different cultural expectations and social mores. From the brief session I played, the extra time Namco’s spent properly localizing Ni no Kuni has served the game well.

I tackled the first real quest area where Mr. Drippy leads Oliver to a wise old tree in the other world. The tree teaches Oliver some basic wizarding skills like how to cast fire and healing spells as well as ho to create monster companions. The first of these little cartoon beasts is the goofy caped swordsman pictured above.

The whole sequence is beguiling. Mr. Drippy’s ebullient Scottish expounding, the old oak’s patient baritone, and Oliver’s enthusiastic credulity—The acting and dialogue are of a higher quality than in some of the Ghibli films that have been localized for the West. The effort is obviously unfinished as well. Even in this early portion of the game, there are chunks of Japanese text, as when you walk into a new area and its name washes across the screen. 

It’s harder to say how the game will feel in battles over the full 40-hour adventure. After the charismatic story sequence, you set out into the field on an errand for the old oak, getting into fights with scrub monsters on the way. Oliver doesn’t fight alongside his first monster pal, but switches out with him as one or the other weakens. It’s a weird rhythm for an RPG, and at first it feels slow, but after just gaining just a few levels from fights raising basic stats, the battles become more fast paced. They are challenging too; forget to switch out to a healthy partner and you can die all too quickly. This is only the basic feel of Ni no’s skirmishes though. Later on, as your stable of monsters and their skills grow, it will no doubt feel very different. I didn’t even have a chance to play around with its Kingdom Hearts 3D; Dream Drop Distance-style monster raising portions where you feed and play with your monsters to grow their skills. 

Half an hour with an RPG is no way to judge its overall quality. My take away from this preview session was simple: Ni no Kuni looks as wonderful as it did when it was still a Japan exclusive, but Namco Bandai and Level-5’s slow, deep localization will make it perfect for the West.

The fall blitz is just starting but it’s hard not to feel like the best games on the horizon are waiting in 2013.

High Moon Studios delivers a fun game with some killer fan service in Transformers: Fall of Cybertron.

There was a time when Transformers ruled toy chests everywhere. Little metal-and-plastic robots that, with a few deft twists and spins, could be turned into some other, less sci-fi like piece of technology. A car. A fighter jet. A boom box. It’s one of the more delightful products from the ’80s, and one that’s been sustained over the years with additional toy lines, TV shows, movies, and the like… with varying degrees of success (we’re all still looking at you, Michael Bay. Please. Just stop it).

High Moon Studios came along a few years ago, fresh off the middling success of its uneven, but well-conceived, The Bourne Conspiracy, with Transformers: War for Cybertron. The transforming robots game was imperfect as well, but much like the classic cartoon show’s memorable theme song, it offered “more than meets the eye.” A surprisingly pitch perfect treatment of the story and characters was weighed down by repetitive and overly simple gameplay.

High Moon took the criticisms gracefully and hunkered down to develop a follow-up to War. The key focus, as the PR script has stated since the new game was first revealed, was to turn those shortfalls into the new game’s greatest strengths. That sort of thing is often just talk, but High Moon delivered. And then some. Not only is Transformers: Fall of Cybertron a better game, it also delivers an “Ah ha!” narrative that speaks directly to fans of the series’ G1 (Generation one) era.

G1 Is Reborn

Fall of Cybertron picks up immediately after the events of War for Cybertron. The Autobots are still duking it out with the Decepticons on their home planet of Cybertron, a world that is slowly dying as its life-giving Energon reserves near total depletion. Amidst the ongoing struggle, Autobot leader Optimus Prime sets out to save his followers by finding a way off the planet and carving out a new home elsewhere in the galaxy.

The game actually opens as the final stage of Prime’s plan are coming together. The Autobots are aboard their massive escape ship, The Ark, as pursuing Decepticons try to prevent them from reaching a giant space portal that will take them to points unknown. The Ark almost makes it, but the enemy forces, led by Megatron, catch up and board the fleeing ship. A pitched, desperate battle breaks out as both ships hurdle toward the portal. The tutorial then concludes and multi-chapter flashbacks to the events that led up to this climactic moment begin.

If some of these story points sound vaguely familiar, they should. The overarching narrative pushing Fall of Cybertron forward mirrors the earliest moments of Transformers‘ G1 era, and the events that led the two warring factions to the planet Earth. High Moon’s story delivery is a more mature one, a story that honors the past while injecting some added complexity in an acknowledgement of the now-older fanbase. 

The result is fan service at its finest. Fall of Cybertron amounts to the best Transformers story that we’ve seen since the earliest days of the franchise. It’s entirely a G1 reboot, right down to the cackle-inducing music that plays over the game’s end credits. If you have fond memories of running home from school to catch afternoon episodes of Transformers, this is a walk down memory lane that you shouldn’t ignore.

Robots In Disguise

Players will jump into different Autobot and Decepticon personas over the course of Fall of Cybertron‘s 12 chapters, every single one of them a name you know, and probably know well. The controls are generally the same across the board, though each robot possesses a special ability — anything from a grappling hook to ordering around the city-sized Autobot, Metroplex — that injects every new chapter with a different, and unique, feel.

The result is a potpourri of gameplay that jumps between run-and-gun action, stealth, story development, vehicular mayhem, and more. The variety can be a bit too much at times, with a change occurring just as your settling into a groove. This becomes even more pronounced in the latter half of the game, with shorter chapters and a finale that carries a strong “best of everything you’ve played so far” sort of vibe.

The character shifts ultimately serve the story, but they sometimes come at the expense of enjoyable play. The earliest chapters start to drag after awhile, lasting more than an hour apiece and summoning up memories of the previous game’s many corridor runs. The environments are much richer this time around, with more detail and variety bringing Cybertron to life. The pacing is simply uneven, making some parts feel too long and others, too short.

The corridor run sensation is also diminished by the addition of some cool unlockables and collectibles. Scattered throughout the game are audio logs that serve to fill in the larger story and blueprints for new, more powerful weapons. You’ll also earn credits to spend in the game’s store on those new weapons and their associated upgrades as well as passive perks. It’s all relatively simple and light on choice, but it gives you something to reach for in addition to the unfolding story.

It should also be mentioned that, while the pacing is uneven, the different transformers offer some exceedingly enjoyable gameplay opportunities. An early level starring Optimus Prime follows players through a war-torn city, eventually introducing the Metroplex character and delivering some epic-scale “HOLY CRAP” moments. Later on you’ll play as Grimlock and witness the birth of the Dinobots while you take on swarms of Insecticons.

The only real shame here is that there’s not much in the way of surprises for anyone who closely followed Fall of Cybertron‘s preview cycle. High Moon tipped its hand with nearly every cool feature in the months leading up to the game’s release. It’s still a fun game and you’ll still have a blast discovering those great moments of fan service, but the “wow” factor of these reveals is definitely diminished. There’s something to be said for High Moon having something to prove after War for Cybertron, but it would have been nice to see some of the cooler elements kept under wraps.

The Continuing War For Cybertron

Multiplayer was the big win in War for Cybertron that turned it into a more popular item than might be expected based on the single player campaign, and High Moon went even bigger this time around. On the adversarial multiplayer side you’ve got an expanded class-based progression system that now allows players to build and customize the look of their own robot within four different general classes. You earn credits as you advance and then spend those credits on customization items as well as weapons, weapon upgrades, and the like.

Once you’ve got your transformers set up, you can immediately roll out into one of several competitive modes that pit Autobots against Decepticons. It’s always tough to properly assess a multiplayer from pre-release online sessions, but the maps offer up some varied terrain and feel like they’re laid out well. The new Headhunter mode involves collecting the “spark” of downed transformers and returning them to designated collection areas, but overall this is all familiar stuff, only better now than it was before.

Then there’s the Escalation co-op survival mode, which plays out over a series of maps that each offer a fixed quartet of either Autobots or Decepticons to choose from. While the previous game’s take on Escalation was compared with the Horde mode in Gears of War, this revised effort takes a page from the Zombies mode in Treyarch’s Call of Duty games.

You’ll spend credits you earn in-match at a variety of different stations, unlocking new weapons, opening doors to other parts of the map, and pooling your resources for team-wide weapon upgrades. Each of the four characters offers a different buff to the team, things like health and ammo restoration, with the goal of ensuring that a full team works together to topple each map’s 15 waves.

Conclusion

High Moon really delivers in its encore turn with the Transformers franchise. The mistakes of the past have been corrected, and while these might make way for some new problems, the overall execution here is exceptional. Transformers: Fall of Cybertron is a fun game first, but it’s also a return to glory for a fallen franchise. It’s light on surprises and treads an uneven road from beginning to end, but there’s definitely — to paraphrase certain beloved theme song — more here than meets the eye.

Score 8.5 out of 10

The Samsung Galaxy S Blaze Q was once believed to be on its way to T-Mobile on August 15^th. If you don’t pay attention to the calender, it’s now the 21^st and still no Blaze Q. Shortly after the delay, new rumors popped up that the Blaze Q was getting a name change all of a sudden, this time to the equally ridiculously long “Samsung Galaxy S Relaxy 4G”.

Since then, training document leaks and other information has confirmed the name change, alongside yet another piece of news that confirms the name change. Samsung’s own US support site now shows off several pictures of the device bearing the new name. So what do we know ‘for sure’ about the Relay 4G? We now know it is in fact the Relay 4G, we also know it has a 4-inch 720p display, a 1.5GHz dual-core processor, 1GB of RAM, NFC technology, a slider keyboard, and Android ICS powering it.

What we don’t know is probably the most important piece of the puzzle though, and that’s the pricing and release date of the Relay 4G. A question to all the T-Mobile readers out there, are you excited about this device or has all the delays left you caring less and less about the new 4G slider?