Dead End Thrills, a great site for your downtime/wallpaper needs, is a bit of a favourite of mine. And for good reason.

They take screenshots very seriously, turning them from promotional tool or keepsake into art. And not just the kind of art that you just stare at. The kind that's a little more practical, that you can also turn into wallpaper.

Some of the game's you'll find in this gallery include Portal 2, EVE Online, Mirror's Edge and Modern Warfare, though you'll of course find a ton more at the link below.

To see the larger pics in all their glory (or so you can save them as wallpaper), right-click on the "expand" icon on the main image above and select "open in new tab".

Dead End Thrills [Dead End Thrills]

It's the one I have. Cosplay superstar and Kotaku favorite Omi Gibson does her best leap of Faith.

Her cosplay does a fine job of portraying the Mirror's Edge heroine, and, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is the first Western game cosplay she's done. Omi specializes in Metal Gear cosplay as we as edgy, obscure game characters.

As with Omi's cosplay, the costume, the poses, the pictures, the Omi—they just work so well! She's very good at what she does.

Mirror's Edge was released in 2008, and Omi was released when she was born.

フェイス / ミラーズエッジ [OMI 化郎 GIBSON]

Photographer Mike Kowalek loves taking pictures, whether that be birds, bridges, you name it. But it's his cosplay photos that got him on Kotaku.

He doesn't just take photos, but proper portraits of folks who don costumes, who deserve way more than simple convention snaps.

The images in this gallery have been cropped. The uncropped originals are viewable on Mike's site. Check 'em out!

It's commenter Aikage's turn to play Speak Up on Kotaku again, or should I say Commander Aikage? He wants to know what video game character you relate to the most, and you're going to tell him.

Hello. Who are you?

Which video game character do you relate to the most? Sure, you may not be a super power imbued super hero or a fallen God, but every game has a hero with a story - and these stories are decidedly human. Did you have your girlfriend stolen from you by a "big ape" (Mario from Donkey Kong)? Do you feel repressed by your government (Jade from Beyond Good and Evil, the girl from Mirror's Edge (Sorry I don't know her name))? Were you and your friends betrayed by Griffith and then all of your friends are killed and you are branded for life (Guts from Sword of the Berserk: Guts' Rage)? Does everything suck (Kirby)?

For myself, and I know this is sort of cheating, but I relate to Shepard from the Mass Effect series. I find that lately I'm forced to make a lot of tough decisions with no real winner in any of the outcome. I know that tough decisions are a fact of life but as of late it just seems like there are more than I am accustomed to.

Plus, my wife is an alien.

The new Spider-Man movie trailer is cool. It's also a bit familiar to those of us who played and enjoyed the 2008 video game Mirror's Edge. How similar? Watch. You might notice some amazing, spectacular coincidences.

In 2008, Dan Pinchbeck of the University of Portsmouth created an interactive "ghost story" titled Dear Esther using Valve's Source Engine, and its associated Half Life 2 art assets. The game achieved enormous critical success, and established a devoted cult following. Now the title is set to receive a substantial makeover with the help of Indie Fund, and is due to enjoy a commercial release later this year. Indie Fund is an alternative funding option for independent game developers, founded by a roster of indie vets that includes Jonathan Blow and Kellee Santiago.

According to Indie Fund's announcement, Dear Esther's environments will be re-envisioned by Robert Briscoe, formerly an environment artist for 2008's Mirror's Edge, and will likewise undergo enhancements to its voice-acting and musical score.

Indie Fund claims to have selected Dear Esther because

...it is a unique expression from a video game artist we look forward to seeing more work from in the future...[it] stands out in that it is a mod-turned-indie-game, something that would have been unlikely to get traditional publisher funding, even if it were a more standard gaming experience.

For more information about Dear Esther, check out BeefJack.com's Dear Esther Blowout, which includes a summary of the game's developmental history, and an interview with its creator.

Indie Fund backing Dear Esther [Indie Fund]

You'll only need to one button to play Fotonica, a first-person platform jumping game oozing with style that its creators say is created in the fashion of "ugly 3D of the 90s."

Fotonica is the work of Italian game design studio Santa Ragione—Pietro Righi Riva and Nicolò Tedeschi—who call their game a mix of "jumping, sense of speed and discovery." Its wireframe looks may remind you of trippy musical shooter Rez while its gameplay feels like a Mirror's Edge time trial. There's dot eating, if you want something vaguely Pac-Man like.

It may have a hard time living up to those games—it's certainly challenging to get the hang of—but we think you should give it a go. You'll need to install the Unity 3D webplayer if you decide to go on. If not, simply enjoy Fotonica's visually satisfying trailer.

Fotonica [Kongregate]

My acting teacher taught me a variety of things, such as how to cry on command and sound really excited about floor wax.

But more importantly, she taught me that the hardest roles of my career wouldn't involve emotional death scenes, historical research, or any kind of physical and emotional transformation.

The hardest roles would be playing the attractive, heroic leading lady.

Not because the scenes are demanding in the least. In fact, they're usually some of the easiest: Smile, look pretty. Shoot gun, look pretty. Play hard to get, look pretty. Pouty-lipped reaction shot. Repeat.

My acting coach meant that it's easy to fall into the trap of just going through the motions as the ‘pretty girl.' I mean, who cares about my character's subtext (the emotion underneath the words) as long as I had a low-cut shirt, flat abs, and body oil, right? True – and there's nothing wrong with sex appeal – but it's the job of real actors to take something superficial and give it depth.

This same concept applies to video game heroines.

In the original Tomb Raiders, Lara Croft needed nothing more than D-cups and 9-millimeters to satisfy her demographic. But now that the bar of characterization has been raised, what makes a good heroine?

Personally, I compare it to what I've learned in acting: Leading ladies have to be tough, but accessible. Beautiful, with a vulnerable, ugly side. A strong woman and a scared little girl at the same time. Not to mention outfits and overall style need to make sense. And what about throwing some humor in there? A sense of humor makes her relatable. In other words, female protagonists should be well rounded… and not just in the physical sense.

These high standards of mine are the reason I still don't have a favorite video game heroine. The funniest thing, however, is that each of my requirements have been met – only with different characters.

So, I'm breaking all the rules, throwing on my mad scientist goggles, and splicing together some Frankenstein monsters, to see if I can create my perfect female lead.

Monster #1 – The Witty, Complex Beauty

Elena Fisher's humor (Uncharted series) + Lara Croft's style & weapons (Tomb Raider series) + Bonnie MacFarlane's emotional strength (Red Dead Redemption)

No firearm compares to Nathan Drake's arsenal of one-liners, and while he's not the first wisecracking hero, he's one of the first to have a sarcastic female counterpart who can shoot the jokes right back. Elena's sense of humor could very well be the most lovable thing about her. Combine that charming personality with Lara Croft's short-shorts and pistols, and – well, talk about a firecracker!

You can't deny that Lara Croft's body is as classic to video games as Mario's red hat. I loved her style in Tomb Raider: Underworld, and frankly, I'd wear the same thing if I were chimney jumping like a spider monkey in a hot, sticky jungle. To top off a beauty like Lara with the quick wit of Elena, I'd add Bonnie MacFarlane's full range of emotions.

Bonnie is a real, relatable woman in a man's world. We see her as a protective landowner and a respectful daughter. We watch her take a liking to John Marston, which turns into a silent love, and eventually… we see her realize that love can never develop, as she kicks the dirt like a sad little girl.

While Elena's humor and Lara's style are good first steps toward creating a dynamic heroine, it's really the imperfections and heart of Bonnie that round out this Frankenstein monster.

Monster #2 – The Hot, Parkouring Zombie Assassin

Zoey's relatability (Left4Dead) + Faith Connors' acrobatics (Mirror's Edge) + Rubi Malone's fashion (Wet)

The Zompocalypse is going to happen. We've all accepted it.

While we know virtually nothing about Zoey from Left4Dead, gamers are obsessed with her. I realized it's because she is one of the most relatable female characters around. She's extremely normal – a girl you could easily run into on the street. I guarantee if the outbreak happened tomorrow, I would be Zoey personified… but I'd wish I had the skills of Faith Connors.

Imagine being a survivor among zombies with the ability to parkour. Talk about a game-changer! Faith's unique, real-life free-running ability given to a sharpshooter like Zoey produces a character that's only missing one thing: some sexy style.

Wet wasn't exactly Game of the Year, but its star, Rubi Malone, knows how to dress. Her style is practical, sexy, and gives off a "Don't screw with me" vibe. Why do I think my down-to-earth, Apocalypse-surviving heroine needs more than just jeans and a hoodie? It's the classic saying, "Look good, feel good," because hell, if I looked like Rubi at the end of humanity, my ass-kicking ego would be bigger than a free Lady Gaga concert.

Monster #3 – The Loyal, Independent Phasewalker… with a Sword

Lilith's Phasewalk (Borderlands) + Alyx Vance's complexity and independence (Half-Life series) + Lightning's gunblade (Final Fantasy XIII)

Video games are fictional, and the best thing about fiction is that you can give characters unrealistic features, such as incredible super powers. Lilith's Phasewalk in Borderlands allows her to turn invisible and slip out of danger, then reappear in the center of the battle with a shockwave of pain. Yet, this amazing power is given to a character that's hard to get close to. Imagine this power given to a strong, sassy, beautifully complex character like Alyx Vance.

Alyx, more than Gordon Freeman, is the face of Half-Life 2, giving us a real human with which to connect as we control a voiceless hero. Maybe I'm just a sucker for that wink of hers, but Alyx's personality is a breath of fresh air in the video game land of superficial beauties.

Lilith and Alyx? They're all about guns. So, we'll stick with what they're familiar with and throw in a sword. The Gunblades from Final Fantasy are undeniably cool, and the one wielded by Lightning is probably the most gorgeous of all. Lightning's weapon, Alyx's depth, Lilith's powers – yeah, I'd play that game.

There is an obvious shortage of multifaceted female protagonists. Even in Game Informer's "30 Characters Who Defined a Decade," only six were women. In our male-dominated world of games, I'd love to see more female heroes that break the shallow mold and show us their gritty, even ugly side. And hey, a few more funny girls wouldn't hurt, either.

So, those are my creations – what are yours?

Lisa Foiles is best known as the former star of Nickelodeon's award-winning comedy show, All That. She currently works as a graphic designer and writes for her game site, Save Point. For more info, visit Lisa's official website.

EA's Medal of Honor touted itself as a realistic look at modern warfare. Military experts and soldiers consulted on the game to ensure its accuracy. Those in-game ads, though? EA consulted with itself.

In the game, there are tattered fliers for Mirror's Edge and Battlefield: Bad Company. Both titles, of course, are EA games.

The likelihood of a soldier coming across these fliers while on patrol are low, but possible.

Personally, stuff like this doesn't bother me. Easter eggs like this — knowing self-references — are great. Really like when game developers are willing to break the fourth wall and toss a wink-wink nudge-nudge to the player. Yes, even if that knowing look is an EA advert.

Medal of Honor was released earlier this month to mixed reviews. It has sold 1.5 million copies.

Krótka piłka: reklamy jakich gier znaleźć można na ulicach Afganistanu? [Polygamia]

Writer Fraser Allison thinks a few games could be improved if they contained a little less shooting. We're reprinting the case here. Read on and see if you agree.

I love violent games.

I love shooting. I heart punching. I make "brrrm!" noises when I move tanks around, and cackle gleefully when I make those tanks demolish other tanks or buildings. Who cheers for war? I cheer for war.

If it's done well.

Luckily, violence is one of the easiest things to simulate in a videogame. People both inside and outside the culture of games wonder whether the popularity of realistic warfare simulators is a sign that today's youth are becoming brutalised (as though people haven't always been fascinated by war), but sit Jack Thompson, Michael Atkinson, Hillary Clinton and Joseph Lieberman down in a Basic Game Programming 101 class and I guarantee you they will all start by making a 2D shooter (if they think nobody is watching).

Sometimes, though, game developers seem to forget that combat still takes a bit of work to get right. Plenty of potentially good non-violent games have been hampered or outright ruined by the unnecessary addition of violent combat, often for no apparent reason except that it must seem like the safe option. When developers think of combat as an easy feature they can quickly add to their game at the end to round it out, like tutorials or music or writing (cough), they're risking more than the cost of implementing the shooting or brawling mechanics: the whole experience of their potentially awesome climby/jumpy/buildy game can be dragged down by the addition of half-baked fighting mechanics, which ultimately only distract the player from the game's central pleasures.

Great games know what they are, and don't try to do more. To illustrate my point, a thought exercise: what would Canabalt be like if it let you stop and shoot the deathbots? (Hint: the answer is not "totally sweet".)

I'd like to suggest that game developers think hard about the purpose of violence in their games, and don't just include it in the design out of habit. If it's going to be an important part of the core experience, great; if not, you may find you can save the cost and make a better game by simply leaving out the violence.

A few recent examples of games that could be improved by toning down the violence:

Crackdown 2

The original Crackdown is a great game. Jumping about, collecting orbs, lifting ever-heavier objects and tossing them around, blowing things up in ever-greater explosions; these are blissful in a way few other games have matched. The assassination missions are really just a cheap cement that holds the experience together and gives you a way to level up your character's skills. The missions never shine, because they have to be completed primarily by methodically shooting a lot of dudes in the face; however, as there's only one gang leader you have to kill in each mission, it's possible to apply your athletic, driving and explosives skills to find shortcuts into their inner sanctum – by climbing up a cliff face from the ocean, say, or ramming through a back door in your supercar – which gave the missions a pleasing puzzle-strategy element.

Crackdown 2, to its credit, doesn't spoil most of what is good about Crackdown, and it makes several improvements that have been unjustly ignored by those quick to call it a microwave reheat of the original. However, it botches the core mission structure by making it all about shooting. Although there are a wider variety of mission types, they all require you to kill a large number of marked enemies in a confined location, without leaving the immediate area. This completely removes your ability to approach these missions in the style you find most fun, and forces you to grind through each one as a common or garden man-shooter. The game passively prevents you from taking advantage of the best part of the game – jumping and climbing – for the duration of the missions.

This limitation was reflected in many of the game's reviews. Christian Donlan's review at Eurogamer was essentially a plea to stick with it through the combat missions, it will get better:

Only with the campaign behind you will you start to get a true sense of just how good this game can be… it's the game waiting for you after the end credits that provides the most fun.

For "campaign", read "structured combat".

Mirror's Edge

Mirror's Edge is a fantastically promising game, but it's not without flaws. It is, in fact, probably more flaw than game, even though it comes close to greatness. The basic design of continuous free-running through a starkly colour-coded obstacle course is inspired, and although the level design and finicky controls often fail to allow the player to maintain a smooth flow, the one element of the game that never supports the player's experience is the combat. Being chased by gun-wielding cops is a great motivator; having to stop and kickbox or shoot said cops is a frustrating, joyless, disorienting waste of your time. Perhaps if it was easier to take out a police officer mid-run, without breaking stride, it would all click into place and the flow of parkour would be enhanced, but as it is it only detracts from the game.

A sequel has been announced. [Note from Kotaku: We've heard it's been considered; not announced.] If DICE can fix up the parkour mechanics a bit and strip out direct combat entirely, Mirror's Edge 2 will be something to look forward to.

Grand Theft Auto IV

As in Crackdown, combat in the GTA series is solid enough for general hell-raising, but becomes tiresome in the way it's used for story missions. Random brawls with police, civilians and criminal gangs are thrilling, and require no more complexity from the gun combat than the game already has: depth in these situations is provided by the interaction of many gameplay systems at once, unbound and unpredictable. However, each of the scripted missions usually turns into a pitched, stationary shoot-out over the top of a car or some crates, which quickly drives home how shallow the gun mechanics and the enemy combat AI really are. These missions narrow the focus down to just the combat elements of GTA, which is like playing Concentration with only two cards. By itself, it doesn't have the depth to stay fun for as long as the game needs it to.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix / Half-Blood Prince

You may be surprised to learn that the two most recent Harry Potter movie tie-ins are perfectly decent games. They're not bad; I'd rate them above, say, the LEGO games in terms of variety and appeal, if not general polish. The games provide exactly what most buyers of a Harry Potter movie game would want: they give you the sense of hanging out at Hogwarts, accompanied by all the familiar characters, and let you play through the stories in a fairly engaging fashion.

There's exactly one thing the games do even better than the books or films: allow you to explore Hogwarts for yourself. The rooms and courtyards are all immediately recognisable from the films, and in playing through the game you learn how each place is positioned and connected to the others by the confounding rabbit warren mess of tunnels, hallways and moving staircases (the in-game architecture was drawn up from the same plans and models used in the films, so you could follow the paths the characters took from scene to scene… y'know, if you were into that kind of thing). You may scoff, but these games are the closest thing I've played to Warren Spector's famous "one city block" RPG concept.

Of course, because these are mainstream videogames, it was not enough for them to be simple adventures through a familiar world; they had to include the mandatory gunfights "wizard duels". The magic battle scenes are already the weakest parts of both the books and the films, which survive primarily on their strong characters; there's even less to recommend these scenes in the games. The Order of the Phoenix contains, I kid you not, a mopping minigame that manages to be more fun than the wizard duels.

(The next Harry Potter game is reportedly shaping up to be a Gears-of-War-esque cover-based sparkly-shooter. This is… interesting.)

Fallout 3

This one could be controversial. I'm convinced that Fallout 3 would be a better game if it just dialled the combat down a bit. The frequency of combat isn't really the root of the problem; it's that, to me, the time-stopping VATS system never feels like an engaging enough gameplay mechanic that I look forward to using it. It has a subtler and deeper problem than the rest of the games in this list: the combat is competently designed, but feels oddly meaningless in a game otherwise packed full of meaning.

The only battles that productively absorb my attention are those fought directly in service of a larger and more interesting goal, or against an enemy who has a name and a personality. The generic radscorpions, raiders and super mutants that attack the player on sight cease to be interesting opponents after the first couple of encounters; if I knew a bit more about the individuals I was fighting, the combat might not feel so aimless. ("If only you could talk to the monsters!")

Steve Gaynor wrote about the aimlessness of videogame violence in a recent blog post, which perfectly captures my problem with Fallout 3:

Violence in film, literature or on stage can either be meaningful or meaningless. When it is meaningful, it resonates with the audience; when it is meaningless, it is largely (and rightly) derided. Consider the death o Shakespeare's Hamlet following a duel, or of Sonny Corleone in The Godfather, or of Evelyn Mulwray at the end of Chinatown, versus, say, the nameless mooks mown down in Rambo II or Commando or Hard Boiled. The killing by the protagonist of those without identity devalues human life in the work, and thereby robs the violence of meaning (it being perpetrated upon human forms with no value.)

And so a metric for games comes to mind: violence performed by the player in a video game is only legitimate if the victim is a unique and specific individual.

(Emphasis in original.)

I'm not sure exactly what Gaynor means by "legitimate", but if he had said "meaningful" I would agree wholeheartedly. That's not to say all games must have well-developed enemy characters to be worthwhile; I'd be happy if the violence in Fallout 3 (or any of the other games in this list) was simply more interesting on a tactical level.

For another recent take on this issue, see Michael Thomsen's article The Case for More Violent Games, at IGN. He makes a similar point to Steve Gaynor: that violence in games is not necessarily bad, but should be more meaningful. Both are great articles, and I agree with both. Right now, I'd just like to present the implied alternative:

If you aren't going to make your game's violence well-designed or meaningful, consider not doing it at all.

Republished with permission.

Fraser Allison is currently writing a thesis at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology on how video game mechanics create meaning for players. He writes about this, and many other game issues, at redkingsdream.com.