Category Archives: Little Bits of Gaming Main Menu

And There They Go: F1 2020

I used to be a huge Formula 1 fan, my era was eighties and nineties. I have to admit to not really being into the sport today like I used to be. Ayrton Senna was my driver, and when he died at Imola in 1994, for me, F1 died with him. Still, I continued to watch for a while after Senna’s death because of one man, Michael Schumacher. Shuey was the bad guy I loved to hate, my pantomime villain. Then when Schumacher retried (the first time) from the sport in 2006, I really had little interest anymore. But even so, I still think F1 is a fantastic sport and do have an interest in it to this day, I just don’t have the passion for it like I used to. My interest for the sport extends to F1 games, the latest of which. F1 2020 from Codemasters is released tomorrow… if you have the Deluxe Schumacher Edition, if not, you’ll have to wait a few more days. I’ve had my review copy for a little over a week now and I’ve put in a good few hours. So, time to take a look at the latest F1 offering from Codemasters.

The Game

Right, let’s get the elephant in the room out of the way first. An F1 game is an F1 game, is an F1 game to be honest. You’re hardly going to see any major advancements over last year’s edition. But that’s not necessarily a bad thing at all. The thing about the Codmasters’ F1 franchise is that they are quite simply sublime. You’re just not going to find a better Formula 1 game around… well Codemasters do have the official licence, so it’s not like they have too much competition in that regard.

F1 2020 SCREEN

The game kicks off with you creating your avatar. Look, sex (yes, you can be female), name, nationality, etc. Then it’s to the main screen where there are a multitude of options available. Solo play allows you to take part in various singleplayer races and events. There’s the basic time trial with you tearing around any of the twenty-six tracks (twenty-two official F1 circuits and four shorter variations) in the game on your own just trying for fast times, this is a great mode for trying out car set-ups. Grand Prix mode allows you to create your very own season. Choose a car and driver and then create your own season with between one to twenty-six races, you can even have twenty-six of the same track if you want. Set your difficultly from the wide range available, use driving assists and so on. Choose the length of not just the races themselves from only five laps to full length, but you can also tinker with the entire race weekend too. Short or longer practise sessions, one shot or full qualifying. You can create your very own race season.

Both the Time Trial and Grand Prix modes allow you to race using any of the cars in the game. There’s the official Formula 1 2020 cars, a selection of classic cars from 1989 to 2010 or even race in the Formula 2 2019 cars.

Then there is Championship mode. This one is split into two separate modes itself. First up is Championships where you can take part in various pre-set events such as a full F1 2020 season, Classic Championship, F1 Sprint, F2 World Tour and even a Legendary Tracks event. A wide variety of races across both F1 and F2 featuring several decades of cars. The second mode features the Invitational Events, twelve special events with specific restrictions and challenges. Checkpoint Challenges where you have to race through checkpoints before your time limit runs out, Pursuit in which you have to catch and overtake all opponents within a lap limit, Time Attack is self-explanatory and Overtake Challenge where you must overtake a set target number of cars within a time limit. Each of these challenges are on set tracks using a specific car. So that’s your singleplayer options, and I’ve not even talked about the extensive career mode (later).

F1 2020 MENU

Then there are the multiplayer modes. Weekly Events are usually tied with the current, real-world F1 season. Leagues allows you to take part in or set-up custom made online league races. Then there are both ranked and unranked single online races. Finally, there is the return of split-screen mode where you and a friends can enjoy some couch F1 races together on the same screen. Just to finish, there’s a theatre mode which allows you to relive some of your finest moments in a highlight reel, as particularly interesting races are compiled into handy highlights which you can save and re-watch whenever you like. Plus, there’s a showroom where you can look at any of the cars in the game from the 2020 season, the 2019 F2 season and even all the classic cars in much more detail.

What’s New

F1 2020’s biggest new feature is an all new My Team game mode. Here, you can create your very own team instead of playing as one of the officially licensed ones from the grid. To be honest, I’ve been screaming out for a create a team mode in an F1 game since playing F-1 Grand Prix Part III on the SNES in 1994 (loved that game). Yeah, it’s great jumping into a Ferrari, McLaren, Mercedes or whatever. But when it’s your own team, it just feels a bit more special. The My Team mode offers you the chance to be a driver/owner and even throws in some light management gameplay too.

You start out by creating a team name before choosing a main sponsor. Different sponsors offer different benefits. For instance, one sponsor may offer you a bigger initial payout, but smaller bonuses per race. Or maybe your chosen sponsor will give you a smaller sign up deal, but bigger bonuses. If you meet you sponsor’s goals through the season, then they are more likely to offer you even more money, money you’ll definitely need to keep your team afloat. Next up is your engine provider choice, again, each of them has their own benefits, but you have to be careful not to spend too much and keep an eye on your bank balance as you still have to sign a second driver to join your team. Drivers have varying skills that can be levelled up as you race and they gain experience. Then, as long as you’ve not blown your budget, you can create your team. Next you have to choose and design your car’s livery, there are only five pre-set liveries to choose from, but more via DLCs. The livery customisation really is little more than just being able to change colour schemes, it’s very basic really. There are no Forza style custom creations here. Once that is done, it’s then on to designing your team badge that will be on your car and driver overalls, etc. Finally, you have to select an overall colour scheme for your team. Once all that is done, you’re then ready to unleash your newly founded F1 team on to the grid.

In between race weekends, and back at your team’s HQ you can invest in R&D to help improve your car, upgrade your factory facilities to help improve your drivers, sponsors and general car build. Hire drivers from the driver market, create new helmet designs, give your driver a new pose/celebration, design overalls. Then if that’s not enough, you’ll also have to find things for your employees to do between races. Hold parties, send drivers on training, make promotional films, etc. All actions that can increase your team’s morale and profile, improve work ethics and so on. There’s really quite a lot to keep an eye on when maintaining your team. It’s a very light management aspect over dedicated F1 management games that never feels like it’s taking away from the main event of racing. It’s a nice balance between F1 simulation and a management game.

F1 2020 MY TEAM

When you do hit the track, your custom team will not be very competitive at the start, this is why you need to invest in new tech and research new parts. You’ll really struggle at the back of the grid (if you’re not playing on easy) and it’s a slow progression. Keep the sponsors happy and the money rolls in, invest that money on factory improvements, R&D, better drivers and before you know it, you’ll be fighting it out on the track for points and maybe even the championship itself. The My Team addition is the biggest to the game and is bay far and away the stand out feature of F1 2020.

The standard career mode has also seen some new features added. The pre-Formula 2 races are back from their introduction in F1 2019 and been improved upon too. Now you can choose to race a short three race season, a mid range six race season or even go for a full on twelve race season in F2 before advancing to the big leagues in F1. Though they seem to have removed the story element that was in the previous game. Then even the F1 season itself can be adapted to suit your tastes. Like the F2 introduction, you can change the length of your F1 season, add and remove races. You can essentially create you own custom season from all the circuits available. Both the My Team and standard Career modes feature a ten year career to follow. If you play with a full race weekend and full race length, that’s a lot of F1 action for your money.

F1 2020 CAR

Then there have been some general tweaks and refinements. I personally found the cars, both F2 and F1, a bit easier to drive in this game over previous ones. They seemed more stable and controllable. A virtual rear view mirror has been added and so has a ‘casual’ mode which allows you to make your driving experience a little easier if you’re looking for a more arcadey F1 game over a simulation. Podium Pass allows you to unlock new avatar items and you can even create your very own trophy cabinet to show off best victories and accolades. Then there are two brand new tracks for the 2020 season with the first ever Vietnam Grand Prix at Hanoi and the return of the classic Dutch GP at Zandvoort. Both tracks offer some great and varied racing.

Overall

I may not have the passion for the sport like I used to, but I do still enjoy playing the games and this is the best F1 game around. The refinements over last year are not huge at all, but they are noticeable. I found the cars handled far better, more nimble with less under-steer than the previous games. The career mode is as great as it was previously and allows you enjoy the F1 circus your way with so many options and variables. Make the game as easy or as hard as you like with a multitude of gameplay tools. Turn on traction control, breaking assist, make the AI easier, change the number of laps per race and so much more. Pretty much any and everything can be tinkered with and fine-tuned to suit your personal play style and difficulty level. You can even alter the amount of races per season and pick and choose specific tracks to race. Or you can go full on pro career mode with a full season, full race distances, full race weekends and zero assists, high AI difficulty at the flick of a button if you want a genuine Lewis Hamilton feel.

The addition of the My Team thing is great. It has the right balance of management sim and yet it doesn’t feel overbearing. There’s a good deal to take in, yet it’s not so in-depth that you feel lost on all the options and variables of running your own team. I felt a sense of pride and it all seemed much more personal when racing in my own created team over just choosing one of the pre-existing ones. Slowly building your team from the ground up, taking on an inexperienced driver and watching them grow via experience made earning a half decent finish in the middle of the pack feel really deserved, in a way that jumping into a Ferrari and securing podiums regularly just does not do. The My Team mode is brilliant.

F1 2020 BOX COVER

But there is one thing I found disappointing if I’m honest. I’ve been playing the special Michael Schumacher edition and for me, I found the extra content severely lacking. F1 2019 also had a special edition, a Senna & Prost version. The extras allowed you to not just drive some of their iconic cars, but also drive as and against Senna & Prost too in special race challenges. You could even play as either in the career mode. The extras in F1 2019 showed there was potential to grow in new titles with similar ideas.

This Schumacher edition really has very little going on. There are four of his iconic cars and some cosmetics for your avatar… that’s it. You can play as Shuey I guess, if you select him for your avatar, but I don’t remember seeing him in the driver’s selection for the My Team mode. I’d just thought that with having the licence to one if the most celebrated F1 drivers ever, that Codemasters would really do something with it, and they haven’t. I’ve never been the world’s biggest Michael Schumacher fan, but I do respect him (mostly). Personally, I’d love to have seen Schumacher specific challenges, memorable races of his that you could relive either as Schumacher or one of his rivals. Drive into the side of Damon Hill to cheat your way to win the championship, play as Rubens Barrichello then after out-driving Michael Schumacher all weekend and in the race, be told to move over to let him win, that kind of thing. Actually drive as and against Shuey in specific challenges and memorable moments from his career like you could with Senna & Prost from last year’s game. But all that’s here is the option to use Schumacher as your avatar, the four cars and some minor cosmetics. It just seems like a waste of the license to me.

F1 2020 Schumacher

Plus this year marks the seventieth anniversary of Formula 1 too. There is a little bit of DLC to celebrate this momentous occasion… and again, it’s nothing more than a small handful of cosmetics. You’ve got seventy years of F1 history to celebrate, so how about some classic cars and drivers? Brabham, Häkkinen, Moss, Fangio, Lauder, Clark, Mansell, to name a few. Maybe some older tracks that haven’t been seen for years like Estoril, Brands Hatch, Sepang, Fuji, Hockenheimring, Imola… well maybe not Imola? They could have featured the original tracks and updated ones. A documentary looking at the history of the sport or at least some of its more stand out moments good and bad? It’s not everyday you can celebrate seventy years of something is it? There’s so much Codemasters could’ve done with the seventieth anniversary of of F1, but what you get instead is a new car livery and a helmet/overalls design. For me, the extra content is really not worth the extra money at all. Seven decades of the sport completely ignored.

F1 2020 70

Conclusion

So is this worth buying? If you’re a die hard F1 fan, then you’ve already made up your mind. This is an F1 game, very, very similar to the previous entries (which were great). There are no huge strides of advancement here, just the same thing as before, updated with the new 2020 line up. But that really is the crux of the problem with these yearly update-style games, I’m pretty sure they could just update the new info with a bit of DLC instead of a whole new game. The My Team addition is great, best thing about F1 2020, but again, I’m pretty sure they could’ve been added via a piece of DLC.

But saying that, this is still a damn fine racing title, you’ll not find a better F1 game around. If you are going to grab this, I’d suggest just sticking with the standard edition of F1 2020 as the DLC extras are bare-minimal and a step backwards from last year’s Senna & Prost content. I got my review copy for free and I still felt let down by it if I’m honest. Unless Codmasters have more planned for the Michael Schumacher licence in the future, then I really don’t see the point in spending the extra for it here. Then the seventieth anniversary of F1 is just completely wasted here too. Great game, amazing addition with the My Team thing but the DLC is really a let down.

Still, at least you can actually drive a full season in the game, unlike the real 2020 Formula 1 championships…

My Love For Digitiser, Thanks Biffo And Hairs!

I have a very strong memory of me always checking out Digitiser on teletext just before I left for school as a teenager…

Okay, so perhaps some context before I really get into this one. Teletext was a ‘on demand’ (I guess?) service we had here in Blighty on our telly-boxes before on demand services really existed. You’d press the ‘teletext’ button on your TV remote and be presented with an on-screen world of information, news, weather, sport, holidays, interactive games, daily magazines and so on. It was like an early internet before the internet took off proper… with a slightly lower abundance of midget porn.

There were literally hundreds and thousands of pages crammed with info. Different TV channels had varying versions of the service, each with their own pages. Each page would have to be inputted manually via the TV remote using a simple three-digit system. Popping in page 370 (though it did move about a bit) would take you to one page in particular I loved to read on a daily basis, Digitiser, or Digi for short, was a daily (except Sundays) video game magazine and was crammed with gaming news, reviews, opinions, readers letters, tips and so much more.

A Very Brief History Of Digitiser

Digi 1

Originally starting out on the channel ITV on the 1st of January, 1993, before moving over to Channel 4 later that year. Digi fast became hugely popular, bringing in 1.5 million readers weekly. That fanbase mostly came from the fact Digi was honest in it’s journalism (unlike a lot of paper published gaming magazines at the time) and how the main writers behind Digi had a wicked, irrelevant, Python-esque and often very near the knuckle sense of humour… which often landed them in a lot of trouble. The two main guys behind Digi were Paul ‘Mr Biffo’ Rose and Tim ‘Mr Hairs’ Moore.  Of the two, it was Tim Moore who was the established journalist, having written for and been published in a few magazines previously. Paul Rose was originally working at Teletext as a graphic designer but had no real experience as a writer, but he did have a vast knowledge of gaming. Between the two, they birthed Digitiser, Tim’s more professional journalistic approach, mixed with Paul’s more rough and ready writing, coupled with his graphical skills is what really formed the backbone of Digi. Between the two, they crafted weird and wonderful characters, off the wall scribblings, and pissed off plenty of gaming magazines and gaming publishers along the way too.

See, real paper publications relied on advertising to bring in some coin, ads funded by the game publishers. To secure ads and keep publishers happy, most (if not all) print magazine publications would not necessarily be entirety truthful when it came to game reviews. As an example, a poor game could get a very reasonable review in a print mag as this would keep game publishers happy, because their terrible game looked pretty decent off a review. This would mean that game could sell more copies despite it’s awfulness. In turn, publishers would be more likely to pay for more ads in the magazine, which would bring in more money for the publishers of said magazine. But Digi didn’t rely on ad space, so they didn’t feel the need to keep game publishers happy… so they could be much more honest, often brutally so. It was Digi’s honesty that really made me want to read their reviews and listen to their opinion’s more so than your typical gaming magazine. This did rub some publications up the wrong way as caused some friction between Digi and some print magazines.

In 1996, the duo of Paul Rose and Tim Moore were broken up. While Paul was away on paternity leave, Tim ran a news story about well-known and respected gaming magazine editor, Dave Perry (yes, that Dave Perry). The story claimed that Dave had gotten into serious trouble from his bosses for poor sales of their magazines, a story that Dave threatened legal action over. Tim was ordered to the editors office and was told to disclose his source for the story. Tim refused and so he was escorted from the building, sacked leaving Paul Rose to do Digi on his own.

The latter years of Digi were brilliant, but a slow death. Instead of calming down now that Tim was gone, Paul actually pushed things to be far more mad-cap and irrelevant. I could go on and on here, but I’m supposed to be looking at some of the more memorable moments of Digi. There’s loads of backstage stories of friendships, betrayal, controversies and so on, someone should write a book (I write books). This was just meant to be a quick explanation of what Digitiser was, and I’ve gotten a bit carried away with that. So…

Digitiser ran from 1993 to 2003, there were a few reasons why Digi eventually ended. In 2002, Teletext gained a new editorial team. This team began to lose patience with Paul as he continued to push and push was was acceptable to be shown on the service. His double entendre, risqué jokes, questionable characters and so on. The editors didn’t want to get rid of Digitiser and Paul Rose completely, just try to control him. They reduced the Digi output from six days a week to just three. They took control over the humour and edited jokes and even removed entire paragraphs of writing in case they had any hidden naughty jokes in them. The much loved characters were removed too. It just stopped being Digitiser really and became just another gaming publication, it lost it’s identity. Then there was also the 9/11 terrorist attacks, yes even that affected Digi. See, Teletext as a company made a lot of revenue from their holidays and when those planes hit the towers, people didn’t much fancy flying for a while. This downturn of of holiday makers put a massive dent in Teletext’s holiday side of the business, they had less money to spend and Digi was one (of many) of the pages in teletext that saw massive cutbacks.

Digi End

Digitiser’s viewing figures plummeted due to the changes, and Teletext began receiving weeks and weeks of angry emails of complaint from fans. The suits panicked and asked Paul to bring back all they had told him to remove, but for Paul Rose, it was already over and done with, he handed in his notice at the end of 2002. But just as a thank you to the fans, he did bring back Digi to it’s former glory for a four month run before he left. Digitiser officially ended on the 9th of March, 2003.

And with that rather meandering introduction to what Digitiser was, on to some of my favourite memories of its (slightly over) ten year run. However, memories can fade and people tend to misremember. I mean, I started this very article by stating that I have a very strong memory of me always checking out Digitiser on teletext just before I left for school as a teenager. But here’s the thing, I left school in 1991, Digi started in 1993. So memories may not always be 100% reliable, I must have read Digi before leaving for work not school. I guess what I’m trying to say is that what follows it how I remember Digitiser, and it may not be entirely factual.

The Honesty

The first thing that comes to mind when I think back on Digi is just how to the point Paul Rose and Tim Moore really were. Not being bound by the bondage of advertising revenue mean they didn’t have to be loyal to game publishers. If they didn’t like a game, then they really let you know. There was no pussy-footing around here. This in turn added a lot of validity to what they did. When they posted a positive review, you knew it was because they generally liked the game an not because the publishers of said game turned the thumb-screws to get that prise.

This honesty also came across when they would cover big gaming events like E3, or replying to readers letters and so on. There was just a whole sense of quality with their journalism that coated any and everything they wrote, serious or not.

The Humour

My own humour taste is really quite broad. I like very dry and even dark humour, but then I also like completely irreverent and silly humour too. It’s the latter that was the style of Digi. For me, Paul Rose and Tim Moore were one of the great comedic double acts. Laurel & Hardy, Pryor & Wilder, Reeves & Mortimer, Morecambe & Wise… Little & Large?

They just had this completely non-sequitur and surreal style that I found hilarious. The little quips in reply to reader’s letters, fake adverts, April Fools, the Amiga bashing, crazy top-tens. Every page of Digi was crammed with jokes, comments and jibes that kept me laughing through the day at school work. And let’s not forget some of those reveal-o gags.

Digi c3po-3

See, teletext had a feature were text or an image would be hidden on the screen, and when you pressed the ‘reveal’ button on your TV remote, whatever was hidden would then be shown. Most pages didn’t really make much use of this feature, or of they did, it was poorly implemented. But Digi was different. They used the reveal gimmick to full effect. From just showing a Digi catchphrase to parodies of films and TV shows to mocking celebrities and even some of the most bizarre but wonderful randomness on TV at the time.

The Characters

These were perhaps one of the most famous elements of Digi. Now, Paul and Tim created dozens and dozens of characters over the years. I’m not going to sit here going through all of them, I’ll be here for weeks of I did. But I do want to just look at some of my favourites. These characters were used for all sorts of reasons. Replying to reader letters, popping up in fake ads, just completely random moments and comments or even for long running features.

Digi Characters

Fat Sow was a rather brutal pig who wasn’t afraid to speak her mind, often creating controversy along the way.

Gossi The Dog was the one who broke big gaming news on Digi. Remember how Tim was sacked for that Dave Perry story? Well it was Gossi who ‘really’ broke the news to the public.

The Man With A Long Chin or The Man for short was Digi’s main mascot. He became so popular that he started keeping a diary of his crazy antics.

Mr & Mrs Nude were… well nudists. The Nudes hosted the tips page of Digi and would often disagree and get into arguments. But they still remained very much in love and their relationship remained in tact.

Phoning Honey spent his time on Digi making prank phone calls to game shops to annoy the staff. He would make complains about broken consoles, faulty games and the like with hilarious results. The phone calls were actually genuine too, often made by Paul or Tim, then transcribed and displayed on Digi under the Phoning Honey character.

Digi Ring Sir

The Snakes, oh how I loved The Snakes. They were a couple of teenage serpents who created ‘the bantz’ before it became popular. Streetwise, beat-boxing snakes who were very likely to cuss you and your mum bad.

Mr T would appear on the Digi pages and offer some questionable advice on all sorts of topics and issues. He even had his own agony aunt style problem page. Just don’t mess with his bins! Crazy Fool.

Zombie Dave was one of the more sneaky characters on Digi. If there was one thing Digi loved to do, then that was getting very risqué jokes past the editors. Using an zombie to deliver cleverly hidden swearing was just the ticket. All Zombie Dave could so was moan and groan. However, his lack of vowel speech hid words that really shouldn’t have been published on teletext.

Mar10 Day

Every gamer knows what Mario Day is. It’s a time when the gaming world celebrates one of the most famous gaming mascots in the world, Mario. The celebration is always on March the 10th… Mar-10… Mar10. Now, you’d think that given Mario is Nintendo’s biggest and most famous mascot, that it was the Big N who came up with Mario Day, but it wasn’t. As I said, everyone celebrates it, even Nintendo themselves.

Mario Day

But the whole thing actually started on Digi…

And there’s actual photographic proof too…

Mar10 Day

Yes it was a fan of Digi who wrote in and pointed out that, with how the date was written at the top of the teletext pages, that March the 10th read Mar10. From that day forward, Mario Day was born. Personally I think Al_Hine should get on the phone to Nintendo and ask for royalty payments, covering the last two decades, because they’re using his discovery.

Digitiser Still Lives

Even though the teletext version of Digitiser came to an end in 2003, the brand itself is still very much alive. Paul Rose secured the rights to the Digitiser name and still uses it today. Digitiser 2000 is a website set up by Paul Rose where he carried on that Digi crazy irrelevance. Yakking on about games, readers letters, lengthy but interesting opinion pieces and the like. And yes, still with that trademark Digi humour and its characters.

Then the site has its own spin-offs too. First there was the YouTube show. Digitiser: The Show, which made its appearance in 2018. Yes, even in person, the show was just as mad-cap as it’s text-based counterpart. Hosted by Paul Rose himself and featuring a host of famous and popular YouTubers… and Paul Gannon (love him really). Digitiser: The Show was just brilliant, stupid but brilliant. That off the wall humour was there, the fan favourite characters (now in 3D) where there and it made many a Digi fan very happy indeed.

Of course, it had to happen. The spin-off from the spin-off and in 2019, the unthinkable happened. Digitiser Live. Over two hours of Digi goodness and laughs with Paul Rose, more famous and popular YouTubers… and Paul Gannon (support his new book!). The live show was a huge success and another one was planned for this year, but then that there Covid-19 thing put a kibosh on that plan. So it has been postponed until next year instead.

Digi Live

Paul Rose has kept the Digi name alive for the fans over the years, and we very much appreciate it too. Now, Paul has very recently re-branded his YouTube channel from Digitiser to Biffovision. He’s not necessarily turning his back on Digi and gaming, but just that he wants his channel to be about more than just Digi. Paul also makes short comedy films and all sorts of videos well worth checking out. I recommend his long running, very funny/strange Mr Biffo’s Found/Lost Footage series.

But it’s not just Paul Rose who has been keeping the Digi name alive over the years. Thanks to some amazing work by Chris Bell and a lot of Digi fans. There is the most exhaustive and comprehensive guide to Digitiser on the interwebs called Super Page 58. Chris has helped me out on a few things for this very article and most of the images used have come from the Super Page 58 site. If you’re a die hard Digi fan like me, then there simply is no better place to get your Digi fix from in terms of its history.

Personal Impact

You know, it’s only now as I write this that I realise it was reading Digitiser that encouraged me to start this very blog. I always wanted to write about games, but back then, never believed that could happen. Writing just wasn’t something I thought I could do. Thankfully, modern technology allows pretty much anyone to create their own blog and yak on about anything they want. I started this blog because I wanted to be like Paul ‘Mr Biffo’ Rose and Tim ‘Mr Hairs’ Moore, I wanted to tell people what I thought about games. Share my views and memories, and it’s this blog that has allowed me to write even more, to the point of writing books… actual real books. Everything has even managed to come full circle as my book MICROBRITS even featured on teletext itself… kind of. See, part of the previously mentioned Digitiser Live event of 2019 gave teletext a rebirth of sorts via what was called Chunky Fringe.

Chunky Fringe was a warm-up show to the main Digitiser Live event and featured several specially made teletext pages offering a variety of oddities and curios, including my book (thanks Alistair)…

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Yes, I the long time Digitiser fan, actually finally became part of Digitiser in 2019…. though I do want to quickly add that I have since updated MICROBRITS and it’s a much better book now than it was then. Yes I am ending this retrospective look at Digitiser promoting my own work, that’s the great thing about having your own blog, you do whatever you want.

Anyway, I have to say an absolutely gargantuan thanks to Paul Rose and Tim Moore. Thank you for all the work that went into Digi, all the irrelevant humour, the honest reviews, the crap you had to put up with from the suits. Thanks for everything and inspiring me to write myself.

Why Microtransactions Are Gaming Cancer… An Article Not By Me

I hate microtransactions. They are the cancer of the gaming world. But just how devious and reprehensible companies are who use microtransactions to fund their games is really quite shocking.

I could knock up an article explaining why microtransactions are an unnecessary evil, but I really don’t need to. A friend and fellow passionate gamer recently published the following article that looks at just how disgusting the free to play/microtransaction model of gaming really is. Please do give it a read right here, it’s a real eye opener.

 

GTA V Again, And Again, And Again: What’s Happened To Rockstar Games?

I’ve been a fan of Rockstar Games since the beginning, since before the Rockstar name existed in fact. Back when a quartet of young Scottish game enthusiasts set up Acme Software, to be renamed DMA Design. From their first ever proper game, Menace in 1988, through some of the best games released on 16-bit computers with the likes of Lemmings. And then they made Grand Theft Auto in which would go on to redefine the gaming industry with the ground breaking Grand Theft Auto III from 2001, the game that was a figurative and literal game changer. Right up to today with their latest release, Red Dead Redemption II. Rockstar Games are responsible for some of the greatest games ever made in the last thirty odd years.

It’s been an amazing journey… but things seem very wrong at Rockstar Games from my perspective. Once, they were a powerhouse of game development and publishing, behind some of the finest titles ever to be released. But now? Now they have become lazy and complacent. Swapping that amazing legacy and reputation for money and more money. The next generation of consoles in on the horizon and this is the opportune time for studios to showcase what they have got planned for a whole new world of gaming. Sony recently revealed their latest monster, the PlayStation 5 and so to did several software houses show their wares, Including Rockstar Games. Bearing in mind that fans have been crying out for some new Rockstar titles for years now. Yes I know that RDR II is not exactly old, but it is coming up to it’s second birthday in a few months time. In those two years, Rockstar have revealed nothing. Other studios have been showing what games they have planned, some big name studios even managing to knock out multiple titles just a handful of years apart. So of course, Rockstar revealing their games for the the next generation of gaming was always going to be big news.

So what exactly did Rockstar Games reveal… the long awaited GTA VI, maybe the much fan-requested Bully II, perhaps the return of Max Payne, a sequel to L.A. Noire or possibly a return top the Manhunt series… or even an all new and exciting IPs? No, Rockstar reveled that they would be re-re-releasing GTA V on the PlayStation 5 and Xbox One Series X.

For those that want a count on this. GTA V was first released in September of 2013. That’s (almost) seven years ago now. The game was originally released on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. It sold and sold very well, so Rockstar re-released the title on the then/now current generation of consoles, the Xbox One and PlayStation 4, as well as a PC port… and it sold well again. Now, Rockstar are re-re-releasing GTA V yet again for the up and coming new generation of consoles. Seriously? That’s three generational releases of the same game in what will be over seven years by then. GTA V has sold in the region of 120 million copies and made around $6 billion along the way. Rockstar have made their money on this game already, and then some. Do they really need to keep milking this cash cow so damn much?

GTA V MILK

Seriously, what has happened to Rockstar Games? Let me just take a quick look at their most recent history in terms of games.

2008 – 2013

GTA IV.
Bully: Scholarship Edition.
Midnight Club: L.A.
GTA IV: The Lost and the Damned.
GTA: Chinatown Wars.
GTA IV: The Ballard of Gay Tony.
RDR.
RDR: Undead Nightmare.
L.A. Noire (published, not developed).
May Payne 3.
GTA V.

That’s an impressive list of games and really great DLCs. There’s not one bad game in that list, some better then others sure, but not an out and out terrible game at all. That’s a five year period of several top quality titles and DLCs, proving you can have both quality and quantity. Now, let’s look the the following seven years.

2013 – 2020

RDR II.

Okay, so I’ll also count the GTA V re-release too… the first one. But just look at the drop off in production. Yes I know games get bigger and more expensive to develop, but Rockstar are not one small studio. They are worldwide with multiple studios all over the globe. They now have more people working for them today then they did between 2008 – 2013 when they knocked out several high quality titles. So now, with a bigger staff and more money to spend, all they can do is release one game and re-re-release the same title again and again? What’s happened man?

Look, I’m not saying that I want yearly GTA titles, but how about more than one new game every septenary for starters? I’m going to bring up Ubisoft here, often cited as one of those kind of studios that just churns out the same game over and over but with a few slight changes. Let’s look at their Assassin’s Creed series for this example. This is one of their franchises that people say is tired and that Ubisoft just keep rehashing the same gameplay mechanics over and over (just like Rockstar and their games). Yeah, I can agree with that. But in 2017, they released Assassin’s Creed Origins to high critical praise. A game that was nominated for and won a few industry awards. A game that is very well liked among the gaming community as a whole. An epic sized game with a gargantuan open world map full of things to see and do. A game that changed the formula of the franchise. Then they followed that up with Assassin’s Creed Odyssey in 2018. Again, much like the previous game, a title that was very well received among gamers and critics alike. Another huge open world map with plenty to see and do. Oh, it’s also worth noting that Ubisoft also released plenty of single player DLC for these two games too, including giving away two remasters of older Assassin’s Creed games. Then of course, they also have Assassin’s Creed Valhalla coming out this year too, which is looking just as epic as the last couple of titles.

AC Origins

So that’s three AAA titles in the same franchise all released between 2017 – 2020. Three games with massive open world maps, with tonnes of gameplay, with single player DLC to add even more gameplay. Oh and that is just one franchise within the Ubisoft empire, they have more including The Settlers, Tom Clancy, Far Cry, The Crew, Watchdogs to name a few. All with new titles either already released over the last few years since Rockstar first released GTA V, or up and coming new titles over the next few years. Now just look at Rockstar Games again with their RDR II and re-re-release if GTA V. How have they gone from multiple quality games and great DLCs released between 2008 – 2013 (and even before then) to one game and the re-re-release of the same game (and no great DLCs) between 2013 – 2020?

If Ubisoft and other worldwide studios can make multiple well received games within their respective franchises, then why can’t Rockstar Games do this anymore, like they used to? I actually already know the answer to this. It’s the staggering success that is GTA: Online. They are making  so damn much money from microtransactions tied to GTA: Online that Rockstar just don’t really need to make games any more. They can sit back and just watch the money roll in without having to spend cash on expensive game production. They can re-re-release GTA V… again, because they know idiots will still go out and buy it… again.

Of course, the leaving of one of the best gaming programmers/producers, Leslie Benzies has been a massive blow to Rockstar… much more than they are willing to publicly admit. Then when Dan Houser left earlier this year, they lost another huge and equally important slice of what made Rockstar Games the studio the once were. Rockstar have a total of nine separate studios/divisions all over the world and thousands of employees. So with all that experience, all that talent, all that technology at their fingertips… they can only produce one game in seven years? They can’t have multiple studios working on more than one game at a time? One new game in seven years from a worldwide, multi studio developer/publisher is atrocious. And if you follow the pattern and drop of in production, you’ll not see a new Rockstar Games title in ten years, then it’ll be fifteen years and so on.

I honestly believe that Rockstar Games have sold out. They’ve sacrificed their staggering reputation for money.  They have become microtransaction whores, it’s not about making great games anymore, it’s abut making money and more money. And you know what, there’s got to be a point when they creative minds at Rockstar just get bored and leave, like Dan Houser?

Wasted

I loved Rockstar, yes, that does read ‘loved’. But now, it’s quite clear they are no longer the same company they used to be. I guess you could put the blame on their parent company, Take-Two. But then again, if the big-wigs at Rockstar Games were unhappy about the lack of creativity, the lack of output, the lack of games… then why have they stayed with Take-Two for so long? For me, Rockstar have proven that they are dead. Not financially, not even close. They got plenty of money in the bank from all the idiots buying Shark Cards for GTA: Online. But creatively? They’re long gone. All the GTA VI rumors, I just couldn’t give a fuck now. GTA VI should’ve come out four years ago, we should be on RDR III (and RDR II six years ago) by now, we should have Bully II, we could be playing all new IPs from them. But instead, we got GTA V, GTA V, GTA V and more GTA V.

I think I’m done with Rockstar Games now. For me, they’ve been on the rocks for a while, but this whole GTA V re-release again has really cemented their laziness and greed. I’ll just wait and see what Leslie Benzies and Dan Houser get up to instead.

Dan Leslie

 

A Boy’s Best Friend Is His Mother – Psycho: A Retrospective

So Psycho is sixty years old today, and as it’s one of my all time favourite films, I’m doing a huge celebration. I’ve already looked at the making of the film, and now, is time to look at the Psycho franchise… all of it. A quick, obligatory SPOILER warning right here, as I’m going to go through each film, including the endings and then offer my view. Plus I’m not just covering the films here, I’m doing the films, the TV shows, spin offs, and the books… everything. This is going to be a big one! Any and everything Psycho I can find will be covered in detail. So, you have been warned… SPOILERS ahead! I repeat, this is going to be a big one. You’d better go grab a glass of milk and sandwich.

First up, the movies…

Psycho

Psycho Poster

Originally released sixty years ago today on the 16th of June, 1960. The film tells the story of Marion Crane (Janet Leigh), a young and attractive real-estate secretary from Arizona who steals $40,000 (over $350,000 in today’s money) from a client of her boss. Her aim is to use the money to start a new life with her lover, Sam Loomis (John Gavin) who lives in California. Marion sets out on the long twelve hour, seven-hundred and fifty mile drive from Arizona to California, stopping off to trade in her car with Arizona plates for a second-hand California plate car. Then gets back on the road for California and Sam.

During a heavy rain storm at night, Marion pulls into the Bates Motel with the idea to spend the night and leave to see Sam fresh-faced in the morning. At the motel, she meets proprietor, Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins). After Marion checks into the Motel, Norman offers to make a light meal for her up at his house behind the motel. But an argument kicks off between Norman and his mother, Norma, so Norman instead suggests they eat in the parlor at the back of the motel office. Here, Marion learns that Norman’s mother is mentally ill and how she can’t live without Norman’s help. The two chat and Marion begins to feel guilt over her stealing the money.

Now in her motel room, Marion decides to take the $40,000 back the next morning instead of running away with Sam. She hides the cash in a newspaper which she leaves on the nightstand before taking a shower. Que one of the most famous scenes in cinema history and Marion is stabbed to death in the shower by Norman’s enraged mother. Norman discovers the grisly crime scene and sets about cleaning it up to protect his mother. After carefully wrapping Marion’s body in the shower curtain, he puts the body in the trunk of Marion’s car. Ensuring Norman has covered everything, he also puts all of Marion’s possessions in the car… including the newspaper with the stolen $40,000 hidden in it (unbeknownst to him).

Marion Shower Scream

Norman then drives the car, body, money and all to a swamp at the back of the motel and pushes the car into it. Norman stands there nibbling away on candy corn as he watches the car and Marion’s body sink into the swamp. Everything has been taken care of and Norma Bates’ heinous crime has been covered up.

A week passes and Lila Crane (Vera Miles), Marion’s sister arrives at Sam’s place in California looking for her sibling. Sam, of course, has no idea where Marion has gone and he had no idea that she was on her way to come and see him a week ago. This is when private investigator, Milton Arbogast (Martin Balsam) turns up asking questions about Marion and the missing $40,000 to both Lila and Sam. After some local investigation, Milton learns that Marion checked into the Bates Motel last week… under a different name. He also learns that Norman has his elderly and ill mother staying in the house. So Milton gets on the phone to update Lila and Sam on what he has learned and says he will try to talk to Norman’s mother before heading back. Milton decides to let himself into the house and tries to talk to Mrs Bates for any info on what happened to Marion. As he is climbing the stairs and nearing the top, mother makes another appearance, and so does her knife as she stabs the private investigator and he falls down the stairs to his death.

Psycho 1960 Milton

After not hearing back from Milton Arbogast, Lila and Sam go to the local sheriff to tell him about all that has been going on. They tell the sheriff that Norman and his mother must have had something to do with the disappearance of Marion and possibly why Milton has not checked in with them. The sheriff is quick to dismiss their theory because Norman’s mother has been dead for the last decade. The sheriff suggests that Milton must have lied to Lila and Sam about Marion and that maybe he plans on chasing Marion to get hold of the stolen $40,000 himself. Neither Lila or Sam are convinced by the theory and decide to check out the motel themselves. While Sam distracts Norman, Lila sneaks up to the house wanting to talk to the said to be dead Norma Bates. Norman becomes suspicious, knocks Sam out and goes up to the house himself. Lila makes her way into the fruit cellar and discovers Norma Bates sitting in a chair… and yes, she is very much dead. Leading to one of the biggest twist endings ever, as it is revealed that Norman Bates dug up his dead mother, preserved her as best he could via taxidermy and developed a very disturbing relationship with her corpse. He would often dress up as his own mother, hold conversations with her and of course… kill as his own mother.

So Norman is arrested over the murders of Marion Crane and Milton Arbogast as well as the murders of two other women previously killed off screen. Now, ‘mother’ has taken over Norman completely as she sits there in her cell knowing people are watching her, as she decides to prove that she’s no killer by not harming a fly…

Psycho 1960 Norman

There really is very little that I can say about Psycho that hasn’t already been written a thousand times over. It’s one of the greatest films ever to be made. It’s writing is sharp, the pacing is terrific, the direction is astounding and the music is etched into my memory forever. Then of course, there is the acting. Janet Leigh is mesmerising as the young secretary who has a moment of weakness and steals $40,000. A stupid mistake that will lead to her bloody and brutal death. Then you have Anthony Perkins as Norman Bates, and an instant classic film character was born. His charm and personality really help to sell the sheltered and shy Norman. A troubled young man who’s life has been destroyed by the death of his mother. Alfred Hitchcock made some amazing pictures in his career, but none of them came close to the genius of Psycho. With how much he had to sacrifice to get the film made, you can really feel his passion on the screen.

Psycho II

Psycho II Poster

Released just a short twenty-three years after the original in 1983. Psycho II is set twenty-two years after the events of the first film in 1982. Norman Bates is released from the mental institution he has spent the last two decades in, now having being ‘cured’ of his insanity. He now accepts that his mother is dead. However, some people are not happy that Norman is being released, one such person is Lila Loomis, Marion’s sister who eventually married Sam Loomis, Marion’s boyfriend from the first film… and she thinks Norman is insane? With some help from his psychiatrist, Dr. Bill Raymond (Robert Loggia), Norman settles back into his home at Bates Motel.

The motel is now being managed by Warren Toomey (Dennis Franz), that’s one less thing for Norman to worry about. So he sets about getting back to a normal life, he lands himself a job at a local diner. An older lady, Emma Spool (Claudia Bryar) is one of the few people around who believes Norman is cured and should be forgiven, in fact it was Emma who landed Norman the job at the diner. After work, Norman meets waitress Mary Samuels (Meg Tilly) who is having boyfriend troubles. Mary has been thrown out of her boyfriend’s place and has no where to stay. So Norman offers up a room back at his motel, FOC… free of charge. Back at the motel, Norman learns that his new manager, Warren has been renting out rooms to drug users and prostitutes. An angered Norman sacks Warren and sets about getting Bates Motel back up to scratch by running it himself. A young and pretty female staying, Norman running the motel? History is beginning to repeat itself.

Soon after, Norman begins to receive phone calls and notes from mother, just as things were going so well for him too. After being sacked, an upset Warren Toomey picks a fight with Norman and he (Norman) suspects that it is Warren who has been making the calls and leaving the notes in order to try to drive Norman back to his old ways. However, as Warren is packing to leave the motel for good, he his stabbed and killed by a mysterious figure in a dress. It seems that mother is back. Sympathising with Norman, Mary decides to stay at the house in a guest room permanently and help Norman get the motel back into shape. As Norman starts renovating his motel, he begins to hear voices coming from the house and even sees mother standing in the window of her room. He goes up to the house to investigate, enters mother’s room and finds it untouched from twenty-two years ago, nothing out of place as if it’s still being used by her. Norman hears another noise that lures him up to the attic, and he is locked in. Meanwhile, downstairs, two teenagers break into Norman’s house and go into the fruit cellar to do what teenagers do… smoke dope and knock boots. Realising someone is in the house, the teenagers try to escape, only the boy is stabbed to death. The girl gets away and tells the police. Mary comes home to find Norman locked in the attic and lets him out, they go back to mother’s room to find it in a state of disuse, not like it was before. Norman begins to think he’s going insane. The sheriff arrives and questions both Norman and Mary about the killing of the boy, Mary says they were both out at the time for a walk. Norman begins to worry that it was him who killed the boy, that mother is starting to take over again. But Mary reminds him that he was locked in the attic, so he couldn’t have killed the boy. Someone did.

Psycho II Norman Phone

Mary calms Norman down and insists he is innocent, she then goes down to the motel to try to find a bottle of booze to make an Irish coffee. Waiting in the parlor of the motel is Lila Loomis and it turns out that Mary is her daughter. It was Lila and Mary who had been making the phone calls, leaving the notes and messing around with mother’s room, dressing as mother, etc. Between them they were trying to convince Norman he was going crazy again and force him to kill, in an attempt to get him re-committed to the mental institution. An act of vengeance on Lila’s part for the death of her sister. However, Mary has genuinely become friends with Norman and honestly believes he couldn’t have killed anyone, she thinks there is someone else involved, someone else who killed the the boy. Dr. Bill Raymond learns that Mary is Lila Lommis’ daughter and tells Norman all about it and their plan to try to drive him insane. Norman only half believes it and is convinced that someone else is involved. If Lila and Mary were only trying to goad Norman into killing but he never did… then who is the real killer? Norman suggests that it could be his ‘real mother’, whatever that means. Mary tells Norman that she wants nothing to do with the whole ruse anymore, that she wants to help Norman and not harm him. Lila however is a different story, she still wants Norman re-committed.

Lila Loomis is in the fruit cellar and she tries to retrieve her hidden mother costume that she has been using to fool Norman. But a mysterious figure steps out of the shadows and kills Lila, so she couldn’t have been the killer either. The police dredge the swamp at the back of the motel and find Warren Toomey’s car and his body inside it. Just how Norman hid the bodies in the first film. Mary tells Norman he should run away otherwise he’d be arrested and taken back to the mental institution. Just then, the phone rings and Norman answers it, it’s mother. Norman begins to talk to his mother, so Mary listens in on another phone and there is no other voice, but Norman keeps talking to mother regardless. Norman begins to debate with mother about killing Mary, so Mary runs off to the fruit cellar to get the mother disguise, complete with a large kitchen knife, to convince Norman that mother can’t be on the phone if she is standing in front of him. Dr. Raymond turns up and grabs Mary dressed as mother, believing she is the killer and trying to send Norman insane again. Mary and Dr. Raymond struggle and the good doctor is killed by Mary when she accidentally plunges the knife into his chest. In Norman’s unstable state, he sees Mary/mother standing over the dead body of Dr. Raymond and believes that she is back. Norman finally snaps and tries to kill Mary/mother to stop her once and for all. Mary runs away to the fruit cellar and finds the body of Lila. Now Mary thinks that it was Norman who killed Lila, so she raises the knife in self-defense. The police turn up, see Mary seemingly trying to kill Norman and assume she is the killer. Mary is shot dead by the police. So everything is wrapped up… except for the fact that neither Norman or Mary were the real killer of course.

Psycho II End

Later, the old lady from the diner, Emma Spool turns up at Norman’s home and Norman had been expecting ‘someone’ too. She tells Norman that she is his real mother, that Norma Bates was her sister. Emma says how she gave Norman to Norma as an infant because she had been institutionalised. It was Emma Spool who was the killer, she was upset that people were picking on and trying to harm her son. So in response, Norman smashes her over the head with a shovel and kills her. Norman then carries the body upstairs to mother’s room and begins talking to her and her to him, as she barks at Norman to open the motel. The whole cycle starts anew and mother has taken over Norman once more.

Psycho II End Shot

You know, for a sequel to an all time classic and released over two decades since the original, this really isn’t too bad. In fact, it has some truly great moments. The whole plot of trying to fool Norman that mother is back is really well done. The tricks both Lila and Mary play on him are cruel, but they work. There are some great throwbacks to the first film (the opening is fantastic). But the ending, the last fifteen minutes or so are a bit, well crap. The whole retconning of Norman’s back story to make this random old lady who is only in the film for thirty seconds his real mother really annoyed me and seemed pretty desperate. It’s also lazy rehash of the first film but in reverse. In Psycho, it’s Norman Bates who is the killer, while the audience are led to believe it’s an old lady. In Psycho II, it’s an old lady who is the killer, while the audience are led to believe it’s Norman Bates. A really good main plot, but just falls flat in the end. But from a directing point of view, this is a very competent film. With Hitchcock dying in 1980, that means he had nothing to do with this one. Still director, Richard Franklin does a damn good job and still maintains a lot of Hitch’s quirks. This feels like a Psycho sequel and not just a cheap cash-in (last few minutes aside). Plus the fact that both Vera Miles as Lila Loomis and Anthony Perkins as Norman Bates returned adds a level of genuineness. Oh yeah, despite his death, Hitchcock still has a cameo in the film too.

Psycho III

Psycho III Poster

So in 1986, the next film in the franchise was released. Yes Anthony Perkins is back as Norman Bates, but he also takes on the role of director too. This one takes place a month after the events of Psycho II in 1982. So Norman has got the motel up and running once more, his ‘real’ mother, Emma Spool from Psycho II has now taken the place of his adopted mother, Norma, from the original Psycho… that role being a corpse. Oh and Norman is bat-shit crazy again, talking to his dead mother (Emma) and her talking to him… which is really him talking to himself. So with that confusing recap out of the way, on with the plot…

Maureen Coyle (Diana Scarwid), a young and mentally unstable nun attempts to kill herself by jumping from the bell tower of the convent. Instead, she accidentally knocks one of her fellow nuns to her death, and so Maureen is kicked out of the convent and renounces her nunship. Out in the hot California sun, Maureen is offered a car ride by sleazy musician, Duane Duke (Jeff Fahey), who is very protective of his guitar. After pulling over to get some rest, Duane puts the moves on Maureen and she freaks out. Duane kicks her out of the car and leaves her to her own devices. Duane pulls into the Bates Motel and meets Norman. Only instead of staying as a guest, Duane is offered the job as Norman’s assistant to help run the motel. Meanwhile journalist, Tracy Venable (Roberta Maxwell) is writing an article on newly released serial killers. Tracy believes that Norman is killing again (he is) and wants to talk to him about his life and supposed rehabilitation. Tracy interviews Norman in the diner (from Psycho II), but he becomes distracted when Maureen walks in. She is young, blonde and pretty… very much like Marion Crane… oh and Maureen is also carrying a suitcase with her initials… MC. Norman has a flashback to him/mother murdering Marion in the shower. Maureen is looking for somewhere to stay and of course, the Bates Motel has vacancies.

Psycho III Maureen Duane

So Maureen ends up checking into the Bates Motel and crosses paths with sleazy Duane once more. Mother is angered that another young woman is staying in the hotel and goes off to kill her in the shower, just as with Marion Crane twenty-two years previously. Only Maureen has saved mother the job by slitting her own wrists. Norman is shocked out of the mother persona and attempts to save the dying girl, while the delirious Maureen mistakes the knife wielding mother as the Virgin Mary holding a crucifix. So Norman rushes Maureen to the hospital and says she can stay the the motel as long as she needs… FOC of course. The night and Duane picks up Red, a woman in a bar. The two head back to Bates Motel for a bit of the old mattress mambo. When Red says she wants more than just a one night stand, Duane kicks her out of his motel room. Leaving Red to make her own way home, she tries to call for a cab at a near by phone box… only for mother to stab her to death.

The next morning and a group of football fans, who are in town to watch the big game, check into Bates Motel. While elsewhere, Tracy still looking for information on Norman for her article and gains access into Emma Spool’s apartment, who by now in the timeline has been missing for several weeks. Digging around, Tracy finds a magazine with the phone number for Bates Motel written on it over and over and over again. So Tracy works out there must be a connection between the missing Emma Spool and the motel. Back the the motel, the football fans are getting a little rowdy from partying. But one guest, Patsy Boyle, the only sober one of the lot, is murdered by mother while trying to find a toilet to use. Norman soon discovers the body and hides it in the motel’s ice machine outside of the office. 

Psycho III Norman Sheriff

The next morning and the sheriff turns up to ask Norman about the missing girl, Patsy, from last night… while trying to cool down with some ice from the ice machine that hides her body. Tracy tells Maureen all about Norman’s disturbing past. A very scared Maureen decides to not stay at the motel, but instead stay with Father Brian who looked over her at the hospital. At the house, Norman learns that his mother’s body is missing. He finds a note from Duane saying that she is in cabin twelve, so Norman heads out to get his mother back. Duane tries to blackmail Norman into giving him money, otherwise he’ll go to the police and tell them all about the whole dead mother thing. Norman and Duane get into a fight, which Norman wins by beating Duane unconscious with his own guitar. Norman puts both the bodies of Pasty and the unconscious Duane into Duane’s car and uses his tried and tested method of disposing of them in the swamp. However, Duane regains consciousness and attacks Norman while he’s driving. The car ends up in the swamp as Norman escapes, but Duane is not so lucky and drowns. Tracy talks to the owner of the diner and learns that Emma Spool used to work there for the previous owner. So Tracy tracks the now very elderly ex-owner down to an assisted living facility and learns that Emma was institutionalised for murder.

Maureen manages to convince herself that Norman is no harm to her and hurries back to the motel to declare her love for him. As the two share a tender moment together at the top of the stairs, Norman hears mother shout at him about having a girl in the house. This startles Norman who, accidentally, knocks Maureen off balance and she falls down the stairs, killing her. An enraged Norman says he will get mother for this. This is when Tracy enters the house and finds Maureen dead and sees Norman dressed as mother holding a large knife. She tries to reason with Norman and explains what she has learned about Emma Spool. It turns out that Emma actually his aunt and in love with his father, but he decided to marry her sister, Norma instead. As an act of revenge and when Norman was just a baby, Emma kidnapped him and killed his father. After being caught, Norman was returned to his real mother, Norma while Emma was institutionalised for killing Norman’s father. Normans seems to listen and break free form the mother persona. Tracy finds Emma Spool’s corpse in mother’s bedroom and as Norman takes of the mother dress, he hears her order him to kill Tracy. Norman raises the knife, but instead of attacking Tracy, he stabs and cuts up Emma Spools body instead. Norman is most definitely insane and the sheriff turns up to arrest Norman. After the sheriff tells Norman they will lock him up forever, he replies, “But I’ll be free…I’ll finally be free.”, as Norman is taken away.

Psycho III end

This one is very typical eighties slasher movie territory. It lacks the suspense and taughtness of the previous two flicks and favors simple jump scares and blood instead. Of course Anthony Perkins is still great as Norman Bates, a character he was seemingly born to play. His role as director is pretty decent too and he throws in quite a few nods and references to the other films, but his direction lacks the subtly of the previous two flicks. The story is just a bit bland and uninspired, well it is the third flick. There are no real surprises, we know from the off that Norman is crazy again, we know mother is controlling him once more, so there’s no real mystery as to who is doing the killing. Yet when the murders do happen, they are disguised as if to try and hide who’s behind them, the face is hidden in shadows or you only see the hand holding the knife… but we already now it’s Norman. It’s all a bit pointless really. The retconning of Emma Spool being Norman’s real mother is reconnected itself to make Norma his real mother again. This makes a lot more sense to Norman’s backstory, but it seems awfully convoluted. Emma Spool should never have been made Norman’s mother to begin with to be honest. Overall, Psycho III is a decent horror flick, it’s just that aside from having Norman Bates in it… it’s not very Psycho. It lacks surprises, it lacks punch, it lacks suspense.

Bates Motel

Bates Motel 1987 Poster

So this one is a bit of a curiosity. It’s an official spin-off from the main franchise and released in 1987. Oh yeah, it’s also the only film from the original franchise where Anthony Perkins doesn’t play Norman Bates. Plus this was a made for TV movie with the idea for it to kick-start a Bates Motel TV show… that never happened. The film is set after the events of Psycho and tells an alternate history, not connected to the films. It focuses on Alex West (Bud Cort), who is admitted to an asylum after he killed his abusive stepfather. While in the asylum, Alex befriends Norman Bates (Kurt Paul). Years later and Norman dies, Alex learns that Norman has left him the Bates Motel and house in his will. When released from the asylum, Alex sets about re-opening the motel.

Long and very boring story short. Some bank manger tries to stop Alex from re-opening the motel by scaring him in a very poor Scooby Doo kind of way. Alex gets some help renovating the motel. There’s something about a suicidal divorcee, a portal to an alternate dimension (seriously) and some other terrible plot points I really couldn’t care about. The film ends with Alex setting up for the motel to receive more guests and the start of a TV show that never begun.

Seriously, this is utter shit. First, you don’t recast Norman Bates… never mind kill him off in a Psycho film. Second, you don’t force in supernatural elements in a Psycho film either. There’s some bullshit about an alternate dimension and lost souls of teenagers being trapped, etc. The acting is atrocious, way beyond terrible. The directing is a mess and the story is nonsensical that plays up for inane laughs. Just don’t waste your time on this one, not even for curiosity sake. But it can be found on YouTube… if you dare… to be bored and angered. Norman Bates himself only has literal seconds of screen time too.

Psycho IV: The Beginning

Psycho IV Poster

Released in 1990, this sequel/prequel is another made for TV movie that brings back Anthony Perkins as Norman Bates as well as writer of the original Psycho, Joseph Stefano. On the surface, this flick has a lot going for it. Flat out ignoring the terrible, previous Bates Motel monstrosity and bringing back the original’s writer too. Anyway, a radio show is having a talk on matricide, hosted by Fran Ambrose (CCH Pounder) and accompanied by Dr. Leo Richmond (Warren Frost). They receive a call from someone called Ed… Ed is actually a rehabilitated Norman Bates using a fake name (Ed Gein?). Ed begins to tell his story of matricide, how he killed his own mother. The film jumps around the timeline telling Norman’s past from the 1940s and 50s through flashbacks as Norman discusses his life over the phone.

So, when Norman was six years old, his father died leaving him alone with his mother, Norma (Olivia Hussey). Norma’s mental health begins to decline as she seemingly suffers from schizophrenia and borderline personality disorder. She starts to dominate and punish Norman for any and everything, no matter how trivial. She teases and torments Norman, then punishes him when he reacts. The two are happy living together alone in relative isolation. Then in 1949, Norma get’s herself a lover, Chet Rudolph (Thomas Schuster). Chet is an oafish brute who bullies and terrorises Norman (Henry Thomas), while Norma does nothing about it. Business at the motel begins to suffer due to a new interstate being built near by.

Chet continues his bullying of Norman until he can take no more. Driven by anger and jealousy that Chet had now become his mother’s main focus of affection. Norman kills both of them by lacing some ice-tea with poison. After the funerals, Norman steals Norma’s corpse and preserves it via taxidermy. Over time, Norman begins to develop a split personality and becomes mother in an attempt to suppress his guilt of murdering his own mom. Norman begins to dress in his mother’s clothes and talk to himself in her voice. Mother takes over and Norman kills two young women who try to seduce Norman. The two girls Norman is guilty of killing off screen, in the events of the first flick.

Psycho IV Young Norman

Back in the present day at the radio station and Dr. Richmond works out that this ‘Ed’ guy is actually Norman Bates. Norman begins to worry that he could kill again. He married a psychiatrist named Connie (Donna Mitchell) and Norman reveals that Connie is pregnant with his child. Norman says that he never wanted a baby out of fear that it will be born like him, insane. He tells radio host Fran that he fears mother could repossess him, killing Connie and the baby. The chase is on to try and track Norman down to stop him from killing his wife and unborn child. 

When Connie returns home from work, Norman takes her to the old Bates Motel and house. He does try to kill her with a knife, but Connie does her best to try and convince Norman that he chose to go insane, that mother does not control him and that their child will not be born like him, that there is always a choice. As Norman realises the truth, they he can chose not to be mother, he drops the knife. He then sets the house on fire to destroy it once and for all. Just barely escaping, Norman says that his is now free. Then there’s a pretty pointless stinger ending with a fade to black and a baby crying.

Psycho IV Norman

This flick really is a mixed bag. First things first, writer, Joseph Stefano has gone on record as saying that this film is a direct sequel to the original Psycho. A film that ignores every other sequel. There is no mention of the whole Emma Spool stuff from Psycho II and III. So none of the previous events happened in relation to this film. Looking at this film with that in mind, this is an interesting picture. I really liked the idea of a prequel looking at the younger Norman Bates and seeing exactly what happened between him and his mother. Henry Thomas does a decent job as the younger Norman Bates too. I honestly think that if this had just been a prequel, it could’ve really worked. It’s the whole framing and story with the radio show and older Norman that just does not work for me, which is a shame as again, Anthony Perkins is fantastic. I guess this is worth a look, just don’t expect anything amazing. Plus, there’s a couple of fun cameos to spot. First one is famed director John Landis and the second is Kurt Paul. Now, who is Kurt Paul you ask? Well he was Anthony Perkins’ stunt double in Psycho II and III… oh and he played Norman Bates in that atrocity that was Bates Motel.

Psycho (1998)

Psycho 1998 Poster

I guess it had to happen didn’t it? Yes Psycho was remade. Directed by Gus Van Sant, maybe remake is not really the correct term to use. This is a shot for shot re-enactment of the original Psycho film. Given this, it’s not really worth me going into the plot, because it’s the exact same plot just moved into a more contemporary setting. The characters are the same, the dialogue is the same (save a few modernisations), everything is the same, except more modern. Instead of stealing $40,000 in the original, Marion steals $400,000 in this version, etc. This is less a remake and more an experiment in recreating a classic movie. This film was slated when it was released and is still very much hated among Psycho fans. I’m a Psycho fan, so what do I think?

I just don’t have the hatred toward this film like others do. Is it as good as the original? Of course not, it’s not even close. Nothing will ever be as great as the original Psycho. But as a film in of itself, it’s a good horror/thriller. There are no surprises here if you already know the original as the plots are identical. But I fail to see how that is a problem when the plot is so damn good. Sure, Gus Van Sant is no Alfred Hitchcock, but his experiment is still a fun one and you can’t help but wonder what Hitch might have done differently if he had a bigger budget and fewer restraints for his version. The acting is decent and Vince Vaughn as Norman Bates is believable. Anne Heche’s take on Marion Crane works. Julianne Moore as Lila Crane comes across as a little more ballsy in this version and a lot less 1960s clueless female. Virgo Mortensen as Sam Loomis is enjoyable and William H. Macy as Milton Arbogast is actually bloody great. That’s about it really, there’s little more to say. Yes of course I much prefer Hitch’s version and that will always be my choice between the two films. But I really don’t mind this remake at all. It’s kind of nice to watch just to see how close it is as a re-enactment and just where things have been altered too. 

And so, with all the films covered, next the books…

Psycho

PSycho Book 2

Written by Robert Bloch and released in 1959. Just as with the film remake, I don’t need to dwell on the plot as they’re the same between book and film. There are a few minor changes. The book kicks off with an introduction to Norman and his mother right from page one. Marion is Mary in the novel and she’s also not in it for much either. The book is more violent. As an example, Marion in the film is just stabbed in the shower, in the book, Mary is beheaded. Norman isn’t the good-looking, young man he is in the film. Here he’s middle aged, over weight, sexually perverted and drinks a lot. Arbogast’s death is different. Then there are some minor differences with the structure of the story. But all told, the novel and movie are virtually identical otherwise.

I just got through re-reading Psycho last week and I still enjoy it very much. It’s a short book and you could get through it in one sitting easily enough. Bloch’s wording seems a bit outdated in 2020 (it is sixty-one years old), but Psycho is still a fantastic read. If you know the film, then there are no surprises here as the plots of both are the same. Still, a very worth while read though.

Psycho II

Psycho II Book

Okay, so this one needs a little explanation before I get into the plot… and I need to get into the plot. So when Hollywood came up with the idea to make a sequel to the movie, Robert Bloch offered his services as the writer. He pitched his idea… which was quickly dismissed. Instead, the studio wanted to make their own picture. And 1983’s Psycho II is what we got. A film I really quite enjoyed. But after being shunned by Hollywood, Bloch became annoyed, so he decided to expand on his pitch for a movie and write a sequel to his novel instead, which he finished and published before the film was released. Yup, this book, Psycho II is very different to the film Psycho II… very different…

So the story picks up twenty years after the events of the first book. Norman has been locked away in a mental asylum and been treated by his psychiatrist, Dr Adam Claiborne. Two nuns stop by for a visit and to talk to some of the patients. One of the nuns chats to Norman, under the chaperone of Dr Claiborne. However, the doctor is requested on the phone and leaves Norman and the nun alone. Of course Norman does what he does best, he murders the nun by strangling her with her own rosary beads. Now disguised as the nun, Norman makes his escape along with the other nun in their van. Shorty after, Norman murders the other nun with a tire iron and leaves her body in the back of the van… after raping the corpse. Along the way, Norman picks up a hitchhiker, kills him and sets fire the the van in an attempt to throw the police off his trail. The police eventually find the burnt out van and work out that the body in the back is of the other nun while the charred remains in the front must belong to Norman. So as far as the police know, Norman is dead. But Dr Claiborne isn’t so sure, he thinks Norman is still out there.

Due to a serious accident involving a bus and several dead civilians, there would be a delay on autopsy of the body in the to confirm who he is. Meanwhile, Norman has tracked down Sam and Lilia Loomis and killed them both. He also finds a newspaper reporting on a story that Hollywood are planning on making a movie based on the events told in the first book… yes this is getting a bit meta. The Hollywood movie is going to be called Crazy Lady and is set to begin filming soon. So that’s where Norman heads next, to Hollywood to stop the production of the film in his own special way. The producer of the film contacts Dr Claiborne about background info on the whole Norman Bates case to help with the film. Dr Claiborne heads to Hollywood himself under the guise of a technical consultant when really, he wants to try to stop Norman, who the police think is dead and not in Hollywood trying to kill anyone. 

Now in Hollywood, Dr Claiborne is introduced to the cast and crew, including the director, Vizzini who Dr Claiborne thinks looks just like Norman Bates. So Dr Claiborne tries to warn anyone who will listen that he thinks Norman in in Hollywood and is trying to kill the people making the movie, Crazy Lady. No one really believes him… until the producer of the flick is found decapitated. Yes, it seems that Norman Bates has been busy. Now things are getting serious, plus Dr Claiborne learns of Vizzini’s disturbing past, that as a boy, he witnessed his mother being raped and killed. It seems that the director of the film has more in common with Norman Bates than just looking like him, and Dr Claiborne seriously begins to question the director’s sanity. Turns out the good doctor is right too as Vizzini arranges to meet with he actress playing the Mary Crane role at the movie studio to ‘rehearse’ the shower scene. Two crazies running around the set of the movie is bad news.

So at the movie studio Vizzini and his lead actress are all alone, and he tries to rape and murder her. She fights back and at the same time, Dr Claiborne is told about the meeting between Vizzini and the actress. Seriously worried the director is insane, Dr Claiborne rushes to the studio while keeping an eye out for Norman Bates. Except Norman Bates is dead. Yes, that charred body in the van was actually Norman Bates all along. The hitchhiker Norman picked up was found and questioned by the police. He killed Norman in self-defense when Norman tried to kill him. The Hitchhiker then set fire to the van to hide any evidence. So If Norman Bates is dead, that that must mean that it was the director of the film, Vizzini who was the real killer. Gone insane after the boyhood trauma of seeing his mother raped and killed and was trying to drum up some free publicity for his Crazy Lady flick.

Dr Claiborne makes it to the studio just in time. The actress manages to kick Vizzini away as he tries to rape her on the set of the shower scene. Vizzini stumbles backward into the shower curtain, where he lets out a scream and re-emerges with a stab wound in the back and drops dead on the floor. The real killer tries to kill the Mary Crane actress, only for the police to show up and shoot them. The killer falls to the floor and he is revealed to be Dr Claiborne. Surviving the shooting, Dr Claiborne is committed to the same asylum that Norman Bates was. Yes, the real killer had been Norman’s very own doctor all along. Norman died in the van early on and Dr Claiborne just kind of snapped when he realised Norman was dead. After being his psychiatrist for twenty years, some of Norman had rubbed off onto Dr Claiborne. 

Psycho II Book 2

So there you have it, the alternate Psycho II, very, very different to the film version. You can see perhaps why the movie studio initially turned down Robert Bloch’s sequel idea, because it really was a bit petty and a dig at horror films and Hollywood in general. When you read Psycho II, you can definitely see a certain level of resentment from Bloch. But is the book any good? Yes and no. The twist is a good one and one not really spoiled early on. Killing of Norman in the opening chapters is certainly ballsy and Bloch does a good job of keeping the subterfuge up. But, there are issues. At times, it feels over-written and overtly meandering. Psycho II is just not as well paced and snappy as the first novel. Plus, while Norman was a bit of a creep in the first book… raping a dead nun in this? I just seems very off to me, as if Bloch was trying to shock for the sake of trying to shock. It never felt organic really. As mentioned, you can feel a sense of petty resentment toward Hollywood and film-making too. It feels like Bloch never really got over having his idea turned down for a sequel movie. There’s quite a few completely unnecessary chapters that could’ve easily been cut to help with the pacing. There’s one chapter that has the lead actor of the film within the book going to a gay bar to research the fact the Norman Bates dressed as his mother. But Norman dressing as his mother had nothing to do with being gay. It was a pointless chapter that added nothing to the plot, plus the gay bar featured big Hollywood actor look-a-likes… why? I think with a bit of editing and a not so bitter attitude toward Hollywood and this could’ve been amazing. But as it is, it’s a decent enough read, a little long winded and thin on actual plot. Nowhere near as great as the first book, but still worth a read with a good ending.

For a while, I thought that was all the Psycho books, but there were a couple more.

Psycho House

Psycho House

Robert Bloch is back with his third book in the Psycho franchise, released in 1990. Again, a new story not connected to the films, but serves as a sequel to Bloch’s Psycho II.  Set ten years after the events of the Psycho II novel. The plot revolves around how the Bates Motel has been turned into a tourist attraction, based on the infamy of it’s history and Norman Bates’ story. Amy Haines, a plucky writer looking to pen a novel based on the Bates Motel turns up to get some background information and a little inspiration for her book. A teenage girl is found stabbed to death at the infamous house and Amy decides to investigate who is behind the murder. The town is full of suspects and whenever Amy questions someone, they turn up dead soon after. Someone is out there trying to keep the mythology of Norman Bates alive… but who?

Robert Bloch’s Psycho: Sanitarium

Psycho Sanitarium

Despite his name in the title, Robert Bloch did not write this one… on account that he died in 1994 and this novel was released as recently as 2017. In the writer’s chair for this one is Chet Williamson. So this book is both a sequel to the original Psycho and a prequel to Psycho II. Telling to story of Norman Bates’ incarceration in the mental asylum. Norman Bates is gone, taken over by the murderous mother persona following the events of the first novel. Dr. Felix Reed works closely with Norman to try and bring him out from under the shadow of mother. It is rumored that the asylum itself is haunted and when a series of murders begin to happen, the place is not short of suspects, including Norman himself who still has a few dark secrets yet to be revealed.

Now to be honest, I’ve not actually read either of these books, not yet anyway. Which is why I’ve not offered my opinion on them. But I’ve done some snooping around and the general consensus is that Psycho House wasn’t very good at all. A far cry from Bloch’s previous Psycho books, that comes off as a pretty lazy ‘whodunit?’ kind of thing. But Psycho: Sanitarium is said to be great. Despite not being written by original author, Robert Bloch, the novel does maintain the style set up in the first book and even goes on to elaborate and even extend on certain plot points set up in Psycho. All told, it seems like Chet Williamson has put together a worthy sequel to the original book after so many years.

So now the movies and books are out of the way, that just leaves TV…

Bates Motel 

Bates Motel Show

Interestingly enough, and before I really get into this show. The other Bates Motel, the TV movie from 1987 was meant to kick-start a TV show called Bates Motel. Only due to the poor and very much deserved low reception of that TV movie, the show itself was cancelled before it got started. Then just a short twenty-six years later and Bates Motel the TV show finally existed… only this show was nothing to do with the TV movie of the same name. So this show is a prequel of sorts telling the story of young Norman Bates and his mother. Only it’s not a prequel to the films or the books. It’s a kind of an all new re-telling of the history in a more contemporaneity setting. I’m not going to go over each and every episode as that would take way too long, so just a quick summary of each season instead I think.

Season One: After the death of Norma Bates’ (Vera Farmiga) husband, she buys a motel and sets about beginning a new life with her son, Norman (Freddie Highmore). When the former owner of the motel breaks into the house and attacks Norma, she fights back and stabs him to death. With the help of Norman, Norma hides the body and covers up the killing. The town sheriff, Alex Romero (Nestor Carbonell) begins to sniff around after the missing person, Norma and Norman do their best to keep their secret.

Season Two: Norman’s teacher is murdered and suspicions begin to build around the Bates family. Norman’s estranged brother, Dylan (Max Thieriot)  starts asking questions about their family history. While Norma begins to worry about Norman’s state of mind.

Season Three: Norman’s mental health begins to get worse and worse, yet he denies that anything is wrong. Norma increasingly becomes worried about what is happening to her son and grows increasingly more concerned about just what he may be capable of. While Alex Romero’s suspicions on the Bates’ continues.

Season Four: Norma fights to find some professional help for Norman’s state of mind. Norman’s grip on reality begins to slide more and more. Unable to pay for expensive treatment, Norma agrees to marry Alex Romero for financial support to help her son. An enraged Norman learns about the wedding and attempts a murder/suicide of his mother and himself. Norma dies, but Norman survives.

Season Five: Norma has been dead for two years and Norman is alone to run the motel. Out in public, and Norman seems to be coping well, but it’s when he’s behind closed doors when he loses his grip on reality. He begins talking to his dead mother and her to him. A beautiful young woman called Marion Crane books in for a stay at Bates Motel… but just how will Norman Bates react?

Bates Motel Show Marion

So I did start watching this show and made it to about halfway through season three… then I just got bored. Now, I’m not saying it’s not a good show, the problem is me. I just can’t get into these long winded American TV shows. I just found this whole thing crammed with filler and fluff to pad everything out. Yes I know the history of Norman Bates and his mother isn’t really a deep one… and that’s the issue I had with this show. Five seasons, each season with ten episodes at around fifty minutes each. It was just too much. If this had been a three seasons, six to eight episodes each, then I probably would have held my interest more. There’s the main story of Norman losing his grip on reality and his relationship with his mother… that was great. Both Freddie Highmore as Norman and Vera Farmiga as Norma being utterly fantastic. But then there’s all this guff going on with Norman’s brother, drug dealing, love triangles, etc. I just didn’t care about to be honest. From what I watched, I really did enjoy this show, but I soon got bored and just didn’t bother with season four and five. And as far as I understand, season five is where the plot catches up with the whole main plot of the first film. But just to be clear, this isn’t a prequel to the film series or the books. It’s a re-telling of the whole Norman/Norma history and when the show does get to the meat of Marion Crane turning up at the motel, it does things very, very differently. If your a Psycho fan, then this is well worth checking out. 

Okay, so there is one final thing to take a quick look at… a Psycho video game. Yes, a video game…

Psycho

Psycho Game Cover

Oh yeah, there was a Psycho game. Developed by Starsoft Development Laboratories, published by Box Office, Inc. and released in 1988. Psycho saw a multi-platform release on the home computers including the C64, Amiga and Atari ST.

The game was an action/adventure type thing that uses a verb interface, telling a new story ‘inspired’ by the film series. You play as a detective hired to find a missing curator of a museum. I’ll let the back of the box cover the plot…

Precious jewels and an unwitting curator have been hoisted from the Metropolitan Showcase of Art. Tracing the crime to the menacing Bates Motel, you are the only detective willing to take the case…

Travel to the Bates Motel to unravel this strange mystery. Enter both the Motel and the forbidden house on the hill to search for clues. Keep your eyes alert and your back to the wall as you encounter the psychotic Norman Bates and his curiously silent mother. Prove yourself worthy of the title, Master Detective, as you plot your escape with the stolen jewels, captive curator… and your skin intact!

Just a couple of things I want to quickly cover with that description. You never go to the motel at all, the whole game takes place in the Bates’ home. Plus Norman/mother don’t make much of an appearance either, only twice in fact. Your biggest enemies in the game are not the main character(s) but dogs and ghosts.

Psycho Game Mother

It’s one of those search everything kind of things with a few little puzzles thrown in to annoy you. Kind of like one of those classic Lucasarts adventure games… only not as polished or as well written and designed. The Amiga and Atari ST versions both feature some fairly nice (for the time) digitised images taken from the first film and the presentation is pretty good. But the game itself is a slow, cumbersome mess. Even so, if you know what you are doing, the game can be finished in five minutes or so. I mean, here’s a complete walk-through for the game from start to finish…

Look in mailbox to find and read a letter.  Open the door of the house go inside. Find a vase, dig and search it to find and take a key. Go through the middle door of the foyer to the kitchen and open the dumbwaiter. Use the dumbwaiter to go up, take the gun and ammo you’ll find. Go down in the dumbwaiter to the second floor and open the bathroom door to the right and take the caffeine pills. Down in the dumbwaiter again to the gardener’s room and search the pile of coal for a key. Open the door on the left to find the missing curator. Back to the dumbwaiter and up to the second floor again. This time, go into the master bedroom on the far left. Open and search the closet for some medicine. Back down in the dumbwaiter and use the medicine on the curator, hell give you a combination. To dumbwaiter again and go back to the bathroom on the second floor. Shoot ‘mother’ with the gun. Go upstairs to third floor, then through the door on the left and open the attic. Shoot ‘mother’ again. Open the safe with the combination you got from the curator, take the jewels and leave out the front door you came in by. Done.

Psycho Game Screen

There you go, the entire game covered in a single paragraph. Psycho wasn’t very well reviewed when it was released. Nor should it have been, it’s horrible.


And so, that’s everything Psycho related. From the original novel in 1959, through the movies, other books, a TV show and even a little known video game. Psycho has been a pretty long and successful franchise. A franchise that has spanned from 1959 – 2017, fifty-eight years of Norman Bates and his mother.

I hope there’s still more Psycho to come too. Personally, I’d love to see another remake more in line with the novel. I didn’t hate the 1998 remake as many others did, but I will always say that doing a shot for shot re-enactment, with a modern day twist was very much redundant. So I would very much like to see someone else interpret Robert Bloch’s novel their own way and make a new version of the story. I’m looking forward to reading the other two books that I’ve missed up to now, as bad or as great as they may be. I just love me some Psycho.

Psycho Fanart

Okay, so one final Psycho thing to go over for it’s sixtieth birthday. I explore and try to explain why the teaser trailer Alfred Hitchcock created for the film is the greatest movie trailer ever made.