Cursed Crusade on 360 and PS3. Ever heard of it? Probably not. Ever heard of Atlus? Maybe. They were guilty of such titles as Catherine, Divinity 2, Rock of Ages, Operation Darkness, and King of Fighters.
Now before you fan boys start to flip out, I own every single SMT game they made for the PS2 and PSP, so you know.... I got the chops.
At any rate, Atlus is known for their rather difficult and unforgiving RPG, JRPG, and RTS games. Divinity, KOF, and Rock of Ages were a few outliers. Then along comes Cursed Crusade.
Not kidding, the title of this blog is also the tag line for the game. The concept is pretty confusing, but basically, you're a templar of sorts, you join up with a spaniard, and you both have matching curses. It's a french game, made by french people, with french tendencies, in a french area, so you'll notice a few slight irregularities in the game. Mainly the odd accents, and the very small amount of gaming guts (menus, tutorials, class descriptions and the likes).
Why am I even discussing this game? How did I run across it? It came out a few weeks ago and was $60. Now we all know I love to play obscure games that no one else will touch. (Sherlock Holmes vs Jack The Ripper I'm looking at you), but $60 this fall was a bit rich for my blood. 2 weeks after it was released, it dropped in price to $40, then to $30 the following week. A clear sign that this was a game I needed to get my hands on. A bad game being released in this day and age is alway so strange I simply must be a part of it.
So what is it? Basically a co-op hack and slash. You have a bevy of weapon combinations you can use, two swords, two maces, one sword, one mace, great sword, sword and mace, you get it. You and the NPC or you and a pal run around and... well, hack and slash. To add a bit of flair to the gameplay, you have a curse where you turn into a demon and can use magical attacks. This all takes place during the templar crusades. Get it? Cursed cru... nevermind.
Why isn't a split-screen co-op flying off of the shelves? Well, probably because people don't know it is what it is. Or maybe because they decided to release this fall, amongst a dozen other AAA games. Or maybe it's because no one is expecting a decent co-op split screen to ever be released again?
I played the crap out of their other 360 slasher Divinity 2. Now I know I know, it wasn't originally an Atlus game, but any Oblivion/Gothic-esque game I can get my hands on (aside from Gothic 4) I'll play the crap out of.
Any big problems with the game? Sadly no. This is one of the few titles I wish would get some recognition, since it doesn't do anything terrible, and it doesn't do any one thing that great, it's just basic mayhem. Reminds me of most of the games released in the early 2000s, nothing that ground breaking, just good fun.
Buy, rent, or avoid? I'd say rent. Give it a whirl for a weekend, you'll enjoy the time you spend with it. Buy it if you have another gamer living amongst you, for $30 you both will easily be able to get 100% out of it, and still have the ability to replay.
Friday, November 11, 2011
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Furtive is just another word for sneaky.
Been playin Assassins' Creed: Brotherhood recently. I know I know, Batman, Battlefield, Uncharted, they're all waiting for me, but I'm annoyed that I never finished Assassins Creed before. I finished the first Batman when it came out. I finished Battlefield ages ago. I'm almost finished with Uncharted 2. Look, I got busy! Moral of the story, I've been playing older games over again. Except I'm stuck. Yep, stuck on AC:B. I understand that some of the missions have to be sneaky, and they don't want you to get caught, but it doesn't make any damn sense.
I'm a highly trained, seasoned, and equipped assassin. I've killed hundreds, hundreds more will fall, but get caught by one guard on a single mission, and the whole thing goes down. Now I can understand if it's something storyline specific, like you're tailing someone. But if I'm trying to just capture Da Vinci's weapons? I can't get caught then? I suppose I understand that they're trying to break up the monotony of the gameplay, but come on.... some people had to have gotten to those parts and gone "forget it, done with this game".
I'm not going to be one of them. I'll take a break, play something else, then go back to that game and see if I can figure it out. But I am also extremely stubborn, and I have also played through all of Rogue Warrior, so my tolerance for bad games knows no bounds.
There are already super-sneaky games out there, and most of them fail horribly. If everyone wanted to play a sneak-only game, they would be demanding Thief to finally be remade. They would be hailing Velvet Assassin as one of the greatest games ever. Splinter Cell would win game of the year consistently. But here's the thing, gamers get tired of the super sneaky. Well.... most gamers. Not all, and not you if they're your cup of tea. But let's face it, I probably talk to about 50 gamers every day, and not a one of them actually prefers the sneaky missions.
It's just messing with the flow of the game!!! Come on! "Yeah, killed that guy, oooo! killed 2 guys at once, then stole a bunch of gold! Awesome!.... oh... one guy 4 buildings over saw me, and I failed". It's not "oh you've been caught and we're going to send 30 guards to kill you. Because you'd be able to handle that, oh no, the game just uses the god ability and forces you to try it again.
This all raises an interesting point that the Assassin's Creed series actually isn't a sandbox game, and should quit acting like it. You're required to go from A to B to C, but you can make detours on the way, so it might seem like you're directing the action. If nothing else, just give me a reason to demand sneaking. That's it. A door would close or a person would be notified or something? Anything. Just quit using the scapegoat that it's what you're supposed to do.
On a side note, both Assassins Creed and Splinter Cell are made by Ubi Soft. Now I like the company, but they have some changes to start making. Splinter Cell allowed you to try to take everyone on if you were caught, but you had limited armor, so it made it a bit more clever. You can't use the same theory for Assassins Creed?
Revelations will be a great game, I'm a little surprised at the amount of editions they've come out with.
link and scroll down to "marketing"
Meanwhile, COD will be basically releasing a single edition. And outsell Assassins Creed by millions. Comical at best.
Let's not get off topic. Sneaky. All the way back to games like MGS I've had no interest in sneaking around. Sure getting a kill or two stealth-style is always fun, I guess. Ugh.... Manhunt. I don't need to say anything else.
Ok maybe I do. I'm not saying that game was good, I'm saying that what I feel like I have to accomplish each time I get a stealth kill. But not only that, Assassins Creed wants me to stealth all around, but not even kill anyone! Since bodies make it obvious! Just not something I feel like doing right now. What's even more hilarious is the idea of stealth 1st person. Deus Ex I'm looking at you. Yes I got caught, and often. Good thing I had a completely upgraded shotgun with a silencer. No need to run to that alarm panel. Also, Goldeneye. Siberia base, "don't let the cameras catch you!".....can I just shoot out the cameras?...."well......yes". Those, all of those made more sense then- OH! YOU'VE BEEN CAUGHT. THE PRINCESS IS IN ANOTHER CASTLE. NO FAIRES IN JARS. START THE F OVER.
Maybe it's just a pet peeve of mine, but what can kill a killer? Well, according to Assassin's Creed, being seen by some nobody on top of a guard tower. Not spears, swords, crossbows and poison, but a simple observation. Jane Goodall > Ezio.
I'm a highly trained, seasoned, and equipped assassin. I've killed hundreds, hundreds more will fall, but get caught by one guard on a single mission, and the whole thing goes down. Now I can understand if it's something storyline specific, like you're tailing someone. But if I'm trying to just capture Da Vinci's weapons? I can't get caught then? I suppose I understand that they're trying to break up the monotony of the gameplay, but come on.... some people had to have gotten to those parts and gone "forget it, done with this game".
I'm not going to be one of them. I'll take a break, play something else, then go back to that game and see if I can figure it out. But I am also extremely stubborn, and I have also played through all of Rogue Warrior, so my tolerance for bad games knows no bounds.
There are already super-sneaky games out there, and most of them fail horribly. If everyone wanted to play a sneak-only game, they would be demanding Thief to finally be remade. They would be hailing Velvet Assassin as one of the greatest games ever. Splinter Cell would win game of the year consistently. But here's the thing, gamers get tired of the super sneaky. Well.... most gamers. Not all, and not you if they're your cup of tea. But let's face it, I probably talk to about 50 gamers every day, and not a one of them actually prefers the sneaky missions.
It's just messing with the flow of the game!!! Come on! "Yeah, killed that guy, oooo! killed 2 guys at once, then stole a bunch of gold! Awesome!.... oh... one guy 4 buildings over saw me, and I failed". It's not "oh you've been caught and we're going to send 30 guards to kill you. Because you'd be able to handle that, oh no, the game just uses the god ability and forces you to try it again.
This all raises an interesting point that the Assassin's Creed series actually isn't a sandbox game, and should quit acting like it. You're required to go from A to B to C, but you can make detours on the way, so it might seem like you're directing the action. If nothing else, just give me a reason to demand sneaking. That's it. A door would close or a person would be notified or something? Anything. Just quit using the scapegoat that it's what you're supposed to do.
On a side note, both Assassins Creed and Splinter Cell are made by Ubi Soft. Now I like the company, but they have some changes to start making. Splinter Cell allowed you to try to take everyone on if you were caught, but you had limited armor, so it made it a bit more clever. You can't use the same theory for Assassins Creed?
Revelations will be a great game, I'm a little surprised at the amount of editions they've come out with.
link and scroll down to "marketing"
Meanwhile, COD will be basically releasing a single edition. And outsell Assassins Creed by millions. Comical at best.
Let's not get off topic. Sneaky. All the way back to games like MGS I've had no interest in sneaking around. Sure getting a kill or two stealth-style is always fun, I guess. Ugh.... Manhunt. I don't need to say anything else.
Ok maybe I do. I'm not saying that game was good, I'm saying that what I feel like I have to accomplish each time I get a stealth kill. But not only that, Assassins Creed wants me to stealth all around, but not even kill anyone! Since bodies make it obvious! Just not something I feel like doing right now. What's even more hilarious is the idea of stealth 1st person. Deus Ex I'm looking at you. Yes I got caught, and often. Good thing I had a completely upgraded shotgun with a silencer. No need to run to that alarm panel. Also, Goldeneye. Siberia base, "don't let the cameras catch you!".....can I just shoot out the cameras?...."well......yes". Those, all of those made more sense then- OH! YOU'VE BEEN CAUGHT. THE PRINCESS IS IN ANOTHER CASTLE. NO FAIRES IN JARS. START THE F OVER.
Maybe it's just a pet peeve of mine, but what can kill a killer? Well, according to Assassin's Creed, being seen by some nobody on top of a guard tower. Not spears, swords, crossbows and poison, but a simple observation. Jane Goodall > Ezio.
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Nana-nana-nana-nana- LEADER. Top games?
I mean.... BATMAN.
omgthereissomuchtodoandi'llneverfinsh.
Dear Rocksteady.... proud of you. As I watch the "Perfect Score" reviews coming in, I couldn't be happier with this damn game. I'm at the 10 hour mark, I literally started playing at 12:01, and I've enjoyed every bit of it.
Batman: Arkham City. I've always been a Batman fan. Batman sheets, Batman underwear, Batman toothbrush, and this was all after I hit my 20's. Hey-o!
Seriously though, the work and time they've put into it shows, there are about 15 side mission quests (but they're long, like storyline long) and then the main storyline. NOT TO MENTION the Riddler challenges, the challenge maps, the expansions, it's just... a lot of game for one price.
A review wouldn't exactly do it justice, just read the reviews. It's up there with GTA4, Red Dead, Oblivion, and Gears 1. Where it belongs.
Buy the damn game. One of the best games to come out this year, the best Batman game so far, and an extremely enjoyable experience.
However. Here's my problem. A little education for the masses that I'll coat-tail onto Exploder Blades blog. You see.... gaming companies usually release big games (or AAA titles as the industry calls it) in the fall, right around October/November. Why? Well, their big sales will be right before the tax season, people are back to work and school from the summer vacations and they entertainment and they have more money rolling in, and of course.... Holidays. Mostly Holidays.
Come out with your big game in November, when people are holiday shopping, and you know it'll sell. If you really peel an eye towards the games coming out this fall, you'll see that they're all (with a few exceptions) targeted to different audiences. Shooters, RPGs, wrasslin games, comic book games, and sandboxes. A few overlap (AC:R & Saints Row 3, BF3 & COD3), but they're all guaranteed sellers. Gaming companies know that summer sales suck. Always have. Had Gears or Rage come out in June or July would it have gone over as well? Nope. It's the way the business is designed. Fear, Shadows of the Damned, Hunted... those were the early summer games, and their sales showed it. Only desperate gaming weirdos bought those games..... wait.
Sports games are different, since they have to match the sports season, so that's cool. But time and time again, games come out in the fall, big ones. Fall then early march/april. How it's been for years, probably has something to do with the farming or something.
Point is. Batman is a great game. Skyrim will be a great game. Assassin's Creed and BF3 will be great games. COD:MW3 will sell lots. If Batman is any indication of how this fall will go, I'm in no rush to finish any of these games, since they'll all be very well made, and deserving of great awards.
Now back to Batman, I'm almost done with the Titan container missions, at least my half and...
omgthereissomuchtodoandi'llneverfinsh.
Dear Rocksteady.... proud of you. As I watch the "Perfect Score" reviews coming in, I couldn't be happier with this damn game. I'm at the 10 hour mark, I literally started playing at 12:01, and I've enjoyed every bit of it.
Batman: Arkham City. I've always been a Batman fan. Batman sheets, Batman underwear, Batman toothbrush, and this was all after I hit my 20's. Hey-o!
Seriously though, the work and time they've put into it shows, there are about 15 side mission quests (but they're long, like storyline long) and then the main storyline. NOT TO MENTION the Riddler challenges, the challenge maps, the expansions, it's just... a lot of game for one price.
A review wouldn't exactly do it justice, just read the reviews. It's up there with GTA4, Red Dead, Oblivion, and Gears 1. Where it belongs.
Buy the damn game. One of the best games to come out this year, the best Batman game so far, and an extremely enjoyable experience.
However. Here's my problem. A little education for the masses that I'll coat-tail onto Exploder Blades blog. You see.... gaming companies usually release big games (or AAA titles as the industry calls it) in the fall, right around October/November. Why? Well, their big sales will be right before the tax season, people are back to work and school from the summer vacations and they entertainment and they have more money rolling in, and of course.... Holidays. Mostly Holidays.
Come out with your big game in November, when people are holiday shopping, and you know it'll sell. If you really peel an eye towards the games coming out this fall, you'll see that they're all (with a few exceptions) targeted to different audiences. Shooters, RPGs, wrasslin games, comic book games, and sandboxes. A few overlap (AC:R & Saints Row 3, BF3 & COD3), but they're all guaranteed sellers. Gaming companies know that summer sales suck. Always have. Had Gears or Rage come out in June or July would it have gone over as well? Nope. It's the way the business is designed. Fear, Shadows of the Damned, Hunted... those were the early summer games, and their sales showed it. Only desperate gaming weirdos bought those games..... wait.
Sports games are different, since they have to match the sports season, so that's cool. But time and time again, games come out in the fall, big ones. Fall then early march/april. How it's been for years, probably has something to do with the farming or something.
Point is. Batman is a great game. Skyrim will be a great game. Assassin's Creed and BF3 will be great games. COD:MW3 will sell lots. If Batman is any indication of how this fall will go, I'm in no rush to finish any of these games, since they'll all be very well made, and deserving of great awards.
Now back to Batman, I'm almost done with the Titan container missions, at least my half and...
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
This October's Rant bought to you by....
Blah Blah blah, school, wedding anniversary, new job (career?), I have been busy so I missed updating September. Well, on to games!
I got a lot to say so it’s another one of those smorgasbords of thoughts month’s.
1. So I picked up a relatively rare game for the DS called Infinite Space. I have a love-hate relationship with this game so far. It’s about space travel and combat, and you do get to build your own starships in it, almost from scratch. Little things like placing officers in specific roles to give the ship bonuses to measuring the fatigue of your crew to watching your fleet of sips traverse through space make this title intriguing indeed. You know what doesn’t make it intriguing? The bare bones, phoned in plot. Seriously, for a supposedly 40 hour RPG (I am only 6 hours in and so bored with it) this story better bring it’s A game in the second half. Boy goes on adventure through space, recruits friends along the way, blah blah cookie cutter RPG story.
Also, the combat is a real let down. When you create and build a fleet from the ground up, you expect to have a plethora of combat options to make the game more interesting. Nope. The combat boils down to a timed game of rock-paper-scissors, or as Infinite Space calls it, Barrage attack, Normal attack, and Dodge. Barrage’s do heavy damage, but if Dodged, they are easily avoided. Normal attacks do…well…normal damage, but if the enemy Barrage’s you, you’re screwed. And Dodge works well against Barrage, but does nothing against normal. Oh, and you can move in on a linear battlefield to get into or out of weapons range. There, I just explained Infinite Space’s entire combat system in five sentences. That was seriously all there is to it. When a game lets you build your own starship fleet, exclusively for use in space, then it stands to reason why a simplistic combat system might not be what I signed up for. One day I will complete it, but lately I have had to work up the fortitude to sit down and play it.
2. I have been on an old-school game kick. I beat Metroid, then Metroid II, now Legend of Zelda is on the docket along with Zelda II: Links Adventure. Ahhh the benefits of buying a 3DS on launch day. So Metroid…
On this month last year Nintendo and Team Ninja decided to collectively insult every Metroid fan in the world by releasing Metroid: Other M. It is still the worst one in the series…wait shut up, YES, it is worse than Metroid II. I liked Metroid II: Return of Samus and I think its mechanic of killing every Metroid on SR388 is not only the most important plot element for the entire series. That, and the game is damn fun. Other M did do what no other Metroid game did before it; it gave Samus a voice, and a terrible one at that. It also gave her a personality, and a terrible one at that. You know, let’s skip talking about Other M, I really didn’t like that game…
But the first Metroid game, there is a classic right there. It’s you, as Samus, alone on a fortress planet and you must kill Mother Brain. This game is challenging, but fair. Graphically inferior, yet still way ahead of its time. Small tip for everyone that hasn’t beaten the gae yet: Ice Beam. Once you find it, keep it. Fu** the Wave Beam. The Ice Beam actually makes Ridley the easiest boss in the game.
Metroid II: Return of Samus, as I mention, is a small masterpiece. It doesn’t make you want to jump for joy at any particular element, and the music is the worst thing ever, but the game is still solid. Samus has a large character model, gains some mainstay weapons and items in this game such as the Spazer and Plasma beams, Space jump, shoulder-padded Varia suit, Spring Ball and the rarely visited Spider Ball all make their first appearance in this game.
OTHER M SPOLIER
If you were ever wondering why Samus jumps into the Queen Metroid’s mouth near the end of Other M play this game and use that tactic to kill the Queen Metroid in this one. Works wonders
Spoiler Over
3. Star Fox 64 3D! Yay!!!! Wait…it only supports LOCAL wi-fi play with multiple 3DS’? Back to Gamestop you go, Yayyy!!! Come on now, Nintendo, you can’t keep pulling that crap. It’s 2011. Everyone has an Xbox Live account because online play has proven to be “cool” and “convenient” and “smart”. Hope on the bandwagon already. While we are on the topic…
4. Monster Hunter 4 for the 3DS…looks pretty good. The slide on analog pad for the 3Ds…is kinda gimmicky, but if it does retail for $20 I suppose I could live with it. Now, hows about a US release date, eh?
5. Battlefield 3? Skyward Sword? Arkam City? Skyrim?! And AC:Revelations?!!! ALL IN THE SPAM OF TWO MONTHS!!! Where the fu** was all these games during the summer! Now I feel like I have to take out a bank loan just to…OMG SW: Old Republic gets a release date and it’s in December!
-Dear Game Companies: It is not a good idea to oversaturate the market like that, because believe it or not, I am only going to buy two games on this list. Yes, I wants them all, but the demographic this games are being marketed to have primary responsibilities and time constraints, what with our jobs and such. Like the whole thing with two companies releasing Battlefield 3 and Modern Warefare 3 in the same two week period. As gamers that like multiplayer games, we will chose. One of you will lose. Battlefield 3 could have come out in March like Medal of Honor did or vice versa, but noooo. You guys wanna fight it out with your most important asset, your sales figures and customer base. Activision, IMHO, I think you may be surprised…
That’s all I got for this month. Tune in next month when I wax philosophical on how much fun I am having playing Skyward Sword and Battlefield (yes, those were the two).
I got a lot to say so it’s another one of those smorgasbords of thoughts month’s.
1. So I picked up a relatively rare game for the DS called Infinite Space. I have a love-hate relationship with this game so far. It’s about space travel and combat, and you do get to build your own starships in it, almost from scratch. Little things like placing officers in specific roles to give the ship bonuses to measuring the fatigue of your crew to watching your fleet of sips traverse through space make this title intriguing indeed. You know what doesn’t make it intriguing? The bare bones, phoned in plot. Seriously, for a supposedly 40 hour RPG (I am only 6 hours in and so bored with it) this story better bring it’s A game in the second half. Boy goes on adventure through space, recruits friends along the way, blah blah cookie cutter RPG story.
Also, the combat is a real let down. When you create and build a fleet from the ground up, you expect to have a plethora of combat options to make the game more interesting. Nope. The combat boils down to a timed game of rock-paper-scissors, or as Infinite Space calls it, Barrage attack, Normal attack, and Dodge. Barrage’s do heavy damage, but if Dodged, they are easily avoided. Normal attacks do…well…normal damage, but if the enemy Barrage’s you, you’re screwed. And Dodge works well against Barrage, but does nothing against normal. Oh, and you can move in on a linear battlefield to get into or out of weapons range. There, I just explained Infinite Space’s entire combat system in five sentences. That was seriously all there is to it. When a game lets you build your own starship fleet, exclusively for use in space, then it stands to reason why a simplistic combat system might not be what I signed up for. One day I will complete it, but lately I have had to work up the fortitude to sit down and play it.
2. I have been on an old-school game kick. I beat Metroid, then Metroid II, now Legend of Zelda is on the docket along with Zelda II: Links Adventure. Ahhh the benefits of buying a 3DS on launch day. So Metroid…
On this month last year Nintendo and Team Ninja decided to collectively insult every Metroid fan in the world by releasing Metroid: Other M. It is still the worst one in the series…wait shut up, YES, it is worse than Metroid II. I liked Metroid II: Return of Samus and I think its mechanic of killing every Metroid on SR388 is not only the most important plot element for the entire series. That, and the game is damn fun. Other M did do what no other Metroid game did before it; it gave Samus a voice, and a terrible one at that. It also gave her a personality, and a terrible one at that. You know, let’s skip talking about Other M, I really didn’t like that game…
But the first Metroid game, there is a classic right there. It’s you, as Samus, alone on a fortress planet and you must kill Mother Brain. This game is challenging, but fair. Graphically inferior, yet still way ahead of its time. Small tip for everyone that hasn’t beaten the gae yet: Ice Beam. Once you find it, keep it. Fu** the Wave Beam. The Ice Beam actually makes Ridley the easiest boss in the game.
Metroid II: Return of Samus, as I mention, is a small masterpiece. It doesn’t make you want to jump for joy at any particular element, and the music is the worst thing ever, but the game is still solid. Samus has a large character model, gains some mainstay weapons and items in this game such as the Spazer and Plasma beams, Space jump, shoulder-padded Varia suit, Spring Ball and the rarely visited Spider Ball all make their first appearance in this game.
OTHER M SPOLIER
If you were ever wondering why Samus jumps into the Queen Metroid’s mouth near the end of Other M play this game and use that tactic to kill the Queen Metroid in this one. Works wonders
Spoiler Over
3. Star Fox 64 3D! Yay!!!! Wait…it only supports LOCAL wi-fi play with multiple 3DS’? Back to Gamestop you go, Yayyy!!! Come on now, Nintendo, you can’t keep pulling that crap. It’s 2011. Everyone has an Xbox Live account because online play has proven to be “cool” and “convenient” and “smart”. Hope on the bandwagon already. While we are on the topic…
4. Monster Hunter 4 for the 3DS…looks pretty good. The slide on analog pad for the 3Ds…is kinda gimmicky, but if it does retail for $20 I suppose I could live with it. Now, hows about a US release date, eh?
5. Battlefield 3? Skyward Sword? Arkam City? Skyrim?! And AC:Revelations?!!! ALL IN THE SPAM OF TWO MONTHS!!! Where the fu** was all these games during the summer! Now I feel like I have to take out a bank loan just to…OMG SW: Old Republic gets a release date and it’s in December!
-Dear Game Companies: It is not a good idea to oversaturate the market like that, because believe it or not, I am only going to buy two games on this list. Yes, I wants them all, but the demographic this games are being marketed to have primary responsibilities and time constraints, what with our jobs and such. Like the whole thing with two companies releasing Battlefield 3 and Modern Warefare 3 in the same two week period. As gamers that like multiplayer games, we will chose. One of you will lose. Battlefield 3 could have come out in March like Medal of Honor did or vice versa, but noooo. You guys wanna fight it out with your most important asset, your sales figures and customer base. Activision, IMHO, I think you may be surprised…
That’s all I got for this month. Tune in next month when I wax philosophical on how much fun I am having playing Skyward Sword and Battlefield (yes, those were the two).
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Despite all my... gaming? I'm still just a Wastelander in a desert.
Rage. I like you. You like me. We have a pretty decent relationship. I occasionally stop by, hang out for a while, enjoy my time with you, and I go do other things. It's nice, it's safe. It's just.... you're starting to ask a lot out of me. When we first started to spend time together we'd explore the world, trade some stuff, and maybe run a few errands. But now... I dunno, things are different. I get back from a long day of work, I have to drive from one side of the city to the other, put hours into a place I don't even really enjoy being, drive all the way back home (and traffic is just a nightmare) and you greet me with even more errands to do tomorrow. It's not that I don't appreciate feeling needed, it's just sometimes too much to handle.
Seriously though, this is my thought as I'm playing Rage. It's a great game and all, just asking a ton out of me. Had it come out this last spring, I'd be a Rage expert, but I mean, there's Batman coming up, Battlefield, Skyrim, it's just a lot to take in.
The game, however, it simply delicious. Gorgeous graphics, some of the best I've seen on the 360, and what continues to be top-notch on the PS3 as well. It chugs along nicely on either system, and has everything I ever wanted. Would I call it a perfect game? Not by a long shot. But what it's missing are just elements from other games that have just spoiled me. Now if I'm playing a wasteland FPS and there isn't a radio, I simply hate the in-game music, soo.... thanks for that Fallout. Considering that the Ink Spots sales increased nearly half a century after their existence was due in no small part to Fallout 3, it makes me wonder why Rage decided to skimp on the music. Also, did you ever notice that Cage the Elephants song was featured in Borderlands, but only in the opening? What's with that?
Fallout, Borderlands, Rage? They all so similar? Well............yeah. Take Borderlands mechanics, mix it with the atmosphere of Fallout, but the looks of Borderlands.... and the controls of Borderlands, and... ok. I was once told that a bad reviewer mentions other games in their reviews, but the comparisons to Borderlands will be so very obvious. Rocket launching cars, upgradeable weapons, sharp-edged wielding maniacs. Fine, it's Borderlands 2.0.
Of course they say that imitation is the highest form of flattery, and if that's the case, they've nailed it. Rage is what I wanted Borderlands to be. I just never felt like I was getting anywhere in Borderlands, and I never wanted to play with other people, so take those parts out, and give it a somewhat believable storyline, and you get Rage.
I'll keep this one short, there are a ton of quests, it's gorgeous, the vehicle combat/racing isn't terrible it's actually occasionally fun, and it's made by people who know how to make shooters. Should you play it? Of course, you just might not keep it forever, but the time you spend with it just might re-ignite your love for solid single player FPS games. It did for me.
Seriously though, this is my thought as I'm playing Rage. It's a great game and all, just asking a ton out of me. Had it come out this last spring, I'd be a Rage expert, but I mean, there's Batman coming up, Battlefield, Skyrim, it's just a lot to take in.
The game, however, it simply delicious. Gorgeous graphics, some of the best I've seen on the 360, and what continues to be top-notch on the PS3 as well. It chugs along nicely on either system, and has everything I ever wanted. Would I call it a perfect game? Not by a long shot. But what it's missing are just elements from other games that have just spoiled me. Now if I'm playing a wasteland FPS and there isn't a radio, I simply hate the in-game music, soo.... thanks for that Fallout. Considering that the Ink Spots sales increased nearly half a century after their existence was due in no small part to Fallout 3, it makes me wonder why Rage decided to skimp on the music. Also, did you ever notice that Cage the Elephants song was featured in Borderlands, but only in the opening? What's with that?
Fallout, Borderlands, Rage? They all so similar? Well............yeah. Take Borderlands mechanics, mix it with the atmosphere of Fallout, but the looks of Borderlands.... and the controls of Borderlands, and... ok. I was once told that a bad reviewer mentions other games in their reviews, but the comparisons to Borderlands will be so very obvious. Rocket launching cars, upgradeable weapons, sharp-edged wielding maniacs. Fine, it's Borderlands 2.0.
Of course they say that imitation is the highest form of flattery, and if that's the case, they've nailed it. Rage is what I wanted Borderlands to be. I just never felt like I was getting anywhere in Borderlands, and I never wanted to play with other people, so take those parts out, and give it a somewhat believable storyline, and you get Rage.
I'll keep this one short, there are a ton of quests, it's gorgeous, the vehicle combat/racing isn't terrible it's actually occasionally fun, and it's made by people who know how to make shooters. Should you play it? Of course, you just might not keep it forever, but the time you spend with it just might re-ignite your love for solid single player FPS games. It did for me.
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Saving system to save souls. Sandwiches too.
Dark Souls, you confuse me. You pride yourself on being an extremely difficult game. Requiring the player to "learn from their mistakes". I get that, I trodded my way through Demon Soul all those years ago, and was frustrated each time. The game itself is gorgeous, think of a third person Oblivion with darker, more artistic graphics and vastly different and complex character/inventory system. It's like playing a live action AD&D with just a few small constraints.
But for crying out loud... that saving system? Perfect example: The game starts you off with a basic tutorial, then a small boss battle where you have to sort of backtrack to find the way to defeat the boss. Standard Dark Soul fare. Only problem is, I have no idea where the save spots are! So I die, and I quit playing (which is obviously something they don't want you to do) I come back, and I'm directly at the starting, but at a save.... weird.
Another time, I wanted to see what would happen if I jumped off of a cliff, the game saved right before I jumped... so... wait, are you actively saving, well that can't be the case, since I put in about 45 minutes into a character just to find out it didn't save once. (RIP BAALLLLLZZAAAK).
After asking around to the other people I know who play the game, they've all told me that it saves when you go to the bonfires. Ok, makes sense, until I load up a game and I'm no where near a bonfire.
At any rate, it got me thinking about the importance of save points in a game.
In some games like Fear Effect, you were required to find a save point, then select your phone from your inventory, select save then you select the memory card, then you saved your file. Ok, that's fine.... except this was all happening during the game, and you didn't exactly have the ability to pause, so if an enemy or NPC were to stroll across you while you conducted your little save ballet... you were screwed.
My only complaint with Oblivion, and the entire Elder Scrolls series isn't so much a complaint as it is a frustration that has saved my bacon a few times. You have unlimited saves. Save as often as you'd like (except in mid-air). I ended my 100% completion Oblivion playthrough on the Xbox with about 250+ game saves. On the PC it was even worse. My complaint is that if you wanted to go back a few files, you could, but saving and playing multiple characters was practically impossible if you used auto-save. I guess that's more of a design choice than anything else, but it was fun making each character and leveling them completely different, not having to wait until you're completely done auto-saving a single playthrough.
Dark Souls allows for multiple characters to be saved, which is great, I just wish I could pause and select save. Well, for that matter, I wish I could select pause.
Which brings me to my second gripe. The lack of a pause menu. I know this is a design choice, and it's very edgy and cool, but come on... I can't pause my game? Not even for a moment? To get lunch? Personally, I think this is a dumb choice. Reason you can't pause things like WoW and other MMOs are because other people are involved and well... that'd be impossible. But not being able to pause a single player game just forces the player to find a hiding spot and hope no one finds him. OR stop playing. Well... the second option just isn't possible since... you know.... weird auto-saves.
Remember how bad Metal Gear Solid made you feel when you saved too much? LOOK PSYCHO MANTIS, I SOMETIMES HAVE OTHER THINGS TO DO WITH MY LIFE I CAN'T JUST SIT DOWN AND PLAY STRAIGHT THROUGH.
Opposite end of the spectrum though, when I first got my PS1, I didn't have a memory card, so I had to leave it running and turn the TV off if I wanted to do something else, and I still managed to finish Resident Evil 2. So what's the difference? Xbox 360s and PS3s can overheat after a few hours of playing, even if they don't overheat it isn't good for them. Let me take breaks from the game Dark Souls, even if I don't get a pause menu. Or maybe just explain the saving system.
Batman in 2 weeks!!!
But for crying out loud... that saving system? Perfect example: The game starts you off with a basic tutorial, then a small boss battle where you have to sort of backtrack to find the way to defeat the boss. Standard Dark Soul fare. Only problem is, I have no idea where the save spots are! So I die, and I quit playing (which is obviously something they don't want you to do) I come back, and I'm directly at the starting, but at a save.... weird.
Another time, I wanted to see what would happen if I jumped off of a cliff, the game saved right before I jumped... so... wait, are you actively saving, well that can't be the case, since I put in about 45 minutes into a character just to find out it didn't save once. (RIP BAALLLLLZZAAAK).
After asking around to the other people I know who play the game, they've all told me that it saves when you go to the bonfires. Ok, makes sense, until I load up a game and I'm no where near a bonfire.
At any rate, it got me thinking about the importance of save points in a game.
In some games like Fear Effect, you were required to find a save point, then select your phone from your inventory, select save then you select the memory card, then you saved your file. Ok, that's fine.... except this was all happening during the game, and you didn't exactly have the ability to pause, so if an enemy or NPC were to stroll across you while you conducted your little save ballet... you were screwed.
My only complaint with Oblivion, and the entire Elder Scrolls series isn't so much a complaint as it is a frustration that has saved my bacon a few times. You have unlimited saves. Save as often as you'd like (except in mid-air). I ended my 100% completion Oblivion playthrough on the Xbox with about 250+ game saves. On the PC it was even worse. My complaint is that if you wanted to go back a few files, you could, but saving and playing multiple characters was practically impossible if you used auto-save. I guess that's more of a design choice than anything else, but it was fun making each character and leveling them completely different, not having to wait until you're completely done auto-saving a single playthrough.
Dark Souls allows for multiple characters to be saved, which is great, I just wish I could pause and select save. Well, for that matter, I wish I could select pause.
Which brings me to my second gripe. The lack of a pause menu. I know this is a design choice, and it's very edgy and cool, but come on... I can't pause my game? Not even for a moment? To get lunch? Personally, I think this is a dumb choice. Reason you can't pause things like WoW and other MMOs are because other people are involved and well... that'd be impossible. But not being able to pause a single player game just forces the player to find a hiding spot and hope no one finds him. OR stop playing. Well... the second option just isn't possible since... you know.... weird auto-saves.
Remember how bad Metal Gear Solid made you feel when you saved too much? LOOK PSYCHO MANTIS, I SOMETIMES HAVE OTHER THINGS TO DO WITH MY LIFE I CAN'T JUST SIT DOWN AND PLAY STRAIGHT THROUGH.
Opposite end of the spectrum though, when I first got my PS1, I didn't have a memory card, so I had to leave it running and turn the TV off if I wanted to do something else, and I still managed to finish Resident Evil 2. So what's the difference? Xbox 360s and PS3s can overheat after a few hours of playing, even if they don't overheat it isn't good for them. Let me take breaks from the game Dark Souls, even if I don't get a pause menu. Or maybe just explain the saving system.
Batman in 2 weeks!!!
Sunday, August 28, 2011
Call of Jars.
Working at a video game store allows me to be around all of the hot new titles. Which is great. However, there's a severe lapse in ability for the store employees to actually play the newest titles without buying them. Hell, even at the video rental stores they're allowed to play the newest games without buying them. Now, I'm all for playing the newest games if they're good, but what about if they ain't? In walks Call of Juarez.
First of all, most of the people who come into my store have a bit of an accent, so pronouncing Juarez is difficult. It ends up being jars. La noire ends up being la Nore, and deus ex is duce x. So why subtitle your game something people will instantly be confused with? Anyway, thank god for red box, I was able to try out this disaster and bring it back as soon as I could, which is exactly what I did.
For starters, this was yet another game that randomly gave me some ferocious motion sickness. Lemme preface this all with, I ride roller coasters, I've flown planes, been on tons of boats, and been playing video games for years, and it hasn't been until recently that it's gotten to the point where I've had to stop. I've also found it to be with crappy games. Connection? Maybe. At any rate this game, as well as duke nukem, both forced me to have to literally take a break after about an hour or so.
The game clearly wants you to play online, as each time you start a new level, it suggests that you search for matches online. As fun as that sounds... I still don't do much online playing. COD and Battlefield are different, since you can jump in and jump out as you'd like, but mission based games like COJ and Marvel Alliance need a more dedicated crowd, not some random search online. If I want to leave, I don't want to completely screw over the other player. Maybe it's just a personal preference, but I enjoy seeing the multiplay separate from the single play.
The game itself doesn't really know if it's coming or going. You have your option of choosing from one of three characters, each one with a different storyline, but not different mission areas, so basically..... I mean really.... you're playing the game 3 times over. Cheap move, but I guess it would matter in multiplay. The controls are clunky as always, the guns are hilariously underpowered. A gangster in a tanktop and and shorts, I shoot him three times right in the head (how do I know? the game tracks headshots and accuracy), 3 times in the head, and he keeps right on shooting. So you're willing to track headshots, but you won't give it the power it deserves? I've played games before where headshots count, and frankly... I don't mind the intensity. If my guy gets his brains splattered because of a wrong move, and it happens from a single shot... well, I won't do that again. If I take the time to line-up a perfect headshot, I should be awarded for my patience, I'm just saying.
Buy rent or avoid? I'd say rent, it's a decent easy chunk of achievements, and it's a non-mainstream shooter that's got some potential (mostly in the graphics and the view distance, you'll only understand it if you see it).
I mean, it beats Duke Nukem.
First of all, most of the people who come into my store have a bit of an accent, so pronouncing Juarez is difficult. It ends up being jars. La noire ends up being la Nore, and deus ex is duce x. So why subtitle your game something people will instantly be confused with? Anyway, thank god for red box, I was able to try out this disaster and bring it back as soon as I could, which is exactly what I did.
For starters, this was yet another game that randomly gave me some ferocious motion sickness. Lemme preface this all with, I ride roller coasters, I've flown planes, been on tons of boats, and been playing video games for years, and it hasn't been until recently that it's gotten to the point where I've had to stop. I've also found it to be with crappy games. Connection? Maybe. At any rate this game, as well as duke nukem, both forced me to have to literally take a break after about an hour or so.
The game clearly wants you to play online, as each time you start a new level, it suggests that you search for matches online. As fun as that sounds... I still don't do much online playing. COD and Battlefield are different, since you can jump in and jump out as you'd like, but mission based games like COJ and Marvel Alliance need a more dedicated crowd, not some random search online. If I want to leave, I don't want to completely screw over the other player. Maybe it's just a personal preference, but I enjoy seeing the multiplay separate from the single play.
The game itself doesn't really know if it's coming or going. You have your option of choosing from one of three characters, each one with a different storyline, but not different mission areas, so basically..... I mean really.... you're playing the game 3 times over. Cheap move, but I guess it would matter in multiplay. The controls are clunky as always, the guns are hilariously underpowered. A gangster in a tanktop and and shorts, I shoot him three times right in the head (how do I know? the game tracks headshots and accuracy), 3 times in the head, and he keeps right on shooting. So you're willing to track headshots, but you won't give it the power it deserves? I've played games before where headshots count, and frankly... I don't mind the intensity. If my guy gets his brains splattered because of a wrong move, and it happens from a single shot... well, I won't do that again. If I take the time to line-up a perfect headshot, I should be awarded for my patience, I'm just saying.
Buy rent or avoid? I'd say rent, it's a decent easy chunk of achievements, and it's a non-mainstream shooter that's got some potential (mostly in the graphics and the view distance, you'll only understand it if you see it).
I mean, it beats Duke Nukem.
GameFly: My Thoughts on it
Almost didn’t make it for this month. Well, I’m here now so…
I want to talk a little bit about GameFly for a bit because I have been using it for 5-6 months and feel I can give a somewhat accurate account of it. So, the service operates similarly from Netflix’s delivery service. Make a queue with games instead of movies, wait for them to come in the mail, play as long as you like, pay a monthly fee that varies dependant on how many games you want, and that’s it. I am sure plenty of people out there have used/still use the service, so this will be a retread to many people. For those that haven’t made the leap, the question is, is GameFly worth it?
To me, kinda. Yes overall, but I wouldn’t blame anyone that cancelled it after two months or more.
You see, much like NetFlix, GameFly promises speedy delivery of your games. Difference is, NetFlix deliveries on those promises. GameFly, well, it depends on your definition of speedy. NetFlix movies are all spent via USPS First Class and they have distribution centers in almost every state. GameFly, uses what’s essentially second class, or postage stamp speed, and they only have four distribution centers. So, what NetFlix does in 1 business day (2 days in normal time, 3 on weekends), GameFly does in 5 business days (or pretty much a week).
Something else GameFly is guilty of is actually sending a game on your queue to you in the order that it was placed there. Much like Netflix, they send what ever is in your Queue as fast as it becomes available. GameFly, is short, doesn’t care. Sure, they will follow your queue as best that is possible and dependent on what’s available at their distribution centers, but they will also give “what’s available at the time” or “nothing at all”.
Story time: One time I had a queue full of some high-profile (according to MetaCritic and their sales history) games, and I waited about three weeks to get Batman: Arkam Asylum. GameFly’s excuse when I emailed then about it?
“You list has many games in it that are in high demand and we have just experienced a large influx of new customer whose demands we are also trying to meet. We can only ship out games as soon as they become available in your area.”
So since I live in Florida, my distribution center is in Tampa. They decided that the closest game in my Queue was Batman: AA, and they mailed it from Pittsburgh because I complained. They actually could have done this from the beginning, and I wouldn’t have cared since it came two days later.
That just GameFly not really caring and trying to give me “nothing at all”. An example of them “not caring” would be me putting Prince Of Persia for the Gamecube in my queue at spot #12, and then that being THE VERY NEXT GAME they ship me, ahead of Borderlands, Portal 2, Child of Eden, LA Noire, etc. That is not even good service. Just because it’s in my queue, doesn’t mean I wanted to play it then and there. It wasn’t even like the other games weren’t available or in low levels, they just wanted to limp to me the only game that wasn’t considered high profile.
Ok, that’s enough complaining. Nothing in this life is perfect, especially rental services. GameFly, overall, it’s a good service. Though it does take a bout a whole week to receive my games, none of them are scratched and it’s usually a very consistent week with email updates. I myself, subscribe to the 2 games out a month plan, that way I have a steady flow of games to plow through. Don’t worry, if I want a game bad enough I will buy it, but most are worth playing through just to investigate their design and what they contribute to the industry or my own curiosity…that and they are fun. Also, with the two games a month scenario, I save WAY more money than if I just bought them and traded them in.
It’s kinda my thing nowadays to save money, but still maintain my vices. Since gaming is a very big vice for me, this works well. I say try it, cause if you hate it, you can just cancel and walk away.
I want to talk a little bit about GameFly for a bit because I have been using it for 5-6 months and feel I can give a somewhat accurate account of it. So, the service operates similarly from Netflix’s delivery service. Make a queue with games instead of movies, wait for them to come in the mail, play as long as you like, pay a monthly fee that varies dependant on how many games you want, and that’s it. I am sure plenty of people out there have used/still use the service, so this will be a retread to many people. For those that haven’t made the leap, the question is, is GameFly worth it?
To me, kinda. Yes overall, but I wouldn’t blame anyone that cancelled it after two months or more.
You see, much like NetFlix, GameFly promises speedy delivery of your games. Difference is, NetFlix deliveries on those promises. GameFly, well, it depends on your definition of speedy. NetFlix movies are all spent via USPS First Class and they have distribution centers in almost every state. GameFly, uses what’s essentially second class, or postage stamp speed, and they only have four distribution centers. So, what NetFlix does in 1 business day (2 days in normal time, 3 on weekends), GameFly does in 5 business days (or pretty much a week).
Something else GameFly is guilty of is actually sending a game on your queue to you in the order that it was placed there. Much like Netflix, they send what ever is in your Queue as fast as it becomes available. GameFly, is short, doesn’t care. Sure, they will follow your queue as best that is possible and dependent on what’s available at their distribution centers, but they will also give “what’s available at the time” or “nothing at all”.
Story time: One time I had a queue full of some high-profile (according to MetaCritic and their sales history) games, and I waited about three weeks to get Batman: Arkam Asylum. GameFly’s excuse when I emailed then about it?
“You list has many games in it that are in high demand and we have just experienced a large influx of new customer whose demands we are also trying to meet. We can only ship out games as soon as they become available in your area.”
So since I live in Florida, my distribution center is in Tampa. They decided that the closest game in my Queue was Batman: AA, and they mailed it from Pittsburgh because I complained. They actually could have done this from the beginning, and I wouldn’t have cared since it came two days later.
That just GameFly not really caring and trying to give me “nothing at all”. An example of them “not caring” would be me putting Prince Of Persia for the Gamecube in my queue at spot #12, and then that being THE VERY NEXT GAME they ship me, ahead of Borderlands, Portal 2, Child of Eden, LA Noire, etc. That is not even good service. Just because it’s in my queue, doesn’t mean I wanted to play it then and there. It wasn’t even like the other games weren’t available or in low levels, they just wanted to limp to me the only game that wasn’t considered high profile.
Ok, that’s enough complaining. Nothing in this life is perfect, especially rental services. GameFly, overall, it’s a good service. Though it does take a bout a whole week to receive my games, none of them are scratched and it’s usually a very consistent week with email updates. I myself, subscribe to the 2 games out a month plan, that way I have a steady flow of games to plow through. Don’t worry, if I want a game bad enough I will buy it, but most are worth playing through just to investigate their design and what they contribute to the industry or my own curiosity…that and they are fun. Also, with the two games a month scenario, I save WAY more money than if I just bought them and traded them in.
It’s kinda my thing nowadays to save money, but still maintain my vices. Since gaming is a very big vice for me, this works well. I say try it, cause if you hate it, you can just cancel and walk away.
Friday, August 12, 2011
King Kong and the 1k EARNED
At work, you know, the gaming store, my co-worker and I were discussing Xbox achievements and how some of them seem just impossible to gain. "Play 1000 matches and win more than half", "Complete over 20 passes in a single game", "Play through the main story 3 times". Most of the achievements seem like they're forcing gamers to play through multiple times to get everything. I've complained about this before. We then got onto the topic of games that are an easy 1k in achievements. Games you simply play once and get them all. Avatar: The Last Airbender, Terminator: Salvation, and of course.... King Kong.
No sooner had we mentioned that fabled game, in which you receive 1k achievements for simply playing the game, than we opened up a shipment to find multiple copies of the game. So we both decided to check out the game, and see if in 4 days we could complete it, and in turn get the 1k.
Needless to say, we both finished the game, both around 4 days, but nothing without our strife.
The game is mediocre at best, it's a fairly simple FPS with the occasional Kong scene which turns into 3rd person. Now this isn't a review of the game, but rather a review of what has to happen to EARN those achievement points.
The full game is about 8 hours, but you'll feel every moment of it dragging along, and the lack of a solid gaming structure it holds. For my co-worker it meant playing for about 3 hours only to find out theres no such thing as an auto-save, but rather an episodic system, in which you still have to save. So sure you got the achievements for those episodes, but to get the achievement for completing the game, you had to play through those 3 hours again.
Win. For myself it was the random clipping. I'd be playing as Kong, climbing up a cliff when suddenly Kong would fall through the mountain and suddenly die. Start-over a good 30 minutes in the past. This happened just about every hour, right on cue. Had the game been built on a solid engine it would have been a breeze, instead it was a multiple hour hassle.
But I shouldn't complain, I got my 1k achievements out of it. The funny part is, once I finished the game, and got all of the points, it suggested that I play through again to unlock additional art samples and renderings of the game. No sir.
I'll keep this short, but basically, if you're looking to boost up that gamer score (and honestly, who isn't? i saw a guy the other day with 80k), King Kong is worth it. You'll be tearing your hair out for a few days, but once it's done, it's still a feeling of accomplishment to say "I've done everything possible in that game", even if it meant just playing through once. Oh yeah, there are no difficulty settings.
No sooner had we mentioned that fabled game, in which you receive 1k achievements for simply playing the game, than we opened up a shipment to find multiple copies of the game. So we both decided to check out the game, and see if in 4 days we could complete it, and in turn get the 1k.
Needless to say, we both finished the game, both around 4 days, but nothing without our strife.
The game is mediocre at best, it's a fairly simple FPS with the occasional Kong scene which turns into 3rd person. Now this isn't a review of the game, but rather a review of what has to happen to EARN those achievement points.
The full game is about 8 hours, but you'll feel every moment of it dragging along, and the lack of a solid gaming structure it holds. For my co-worker it meant playing for about 3 hours only to find out theres no such thing as an auto-save, but rather an episodic system, in which you still have to save. So sure you got the achievements for those episodes, but to get the achievement for completing the game, you had to play through those 3 hours again.
Win. For myself it was the random clipping. I'd be playing as Kong, climbing up a cliff when suddenly Kong would fall through the mountain and suddenly die. Start-over a good 30 minutes in the past. This happened just about every hour, right on cue. Had the game been built on a solid engine it would have been a breeze, instead it was a multiple hour hassle.
But I shouldn't complain, I got my 1k achievements out of it. The funny part is, once I finished the game, and got all of the points, it suggested that I play through again to unlock additional art samples and renderings of the game. No sir.
I'll keep this short, but basically, if you're looking to boost up that gamer score (and honestly, who isn't? i saw a guy the other day with 80k), King Kong is worth it. You'll be tearing your hair out for a few days, but once it's done, it's still a feeling of accomplishment to say "I've done everything possible in that game", even if it meant just playing through once. Oh yeah, there are no difficulty settings.
Monday, July 18, 2011
So...is this the game you wanna play Netflix?
Whelp, Netflix…you have really screwed the pooch this time. Before I begin, let me start with facts and figures.
-Netflix in 2008 charged $8.99 to customer for a one DVD and unlimited streaming plan
-Netflix in 2010 charged $9.99 for the same thing.
-In 2011, Netflix offered a streaming only plan for $7.99 for an unlimited streaming only plan.
-Now, come September 2011, Netflix will charge $15.98 for the one DVD and unlimited streaming plan. The combo $9.99 plan will cease to exist. They are now going to be separated into $7.99 for a single DVD and $7.99 for unlimited streaming.
For preface on my past thoughts of Netflix, read this post I did a while ago. My thoughts currently, well…
When Netflix lifted their streaming restrictions in 2008, it became pretty much the most ubiquitous name over night in movie rental and content streaming. Once it was supported on hardware such as Blu-Rays players and the Xbox 360, it became a household name. Supposedly it has 23 million subscribers. If you base this on the law of averages and let’s pretend every has at least the $9.99 plan of one DVD and unlimited streaming (it honestly being the best deal), then that means Netflix makes about $230 million…a month. That’s a little under 2.76 BILLION DOLLARS ANUALLY, for what’s essentially a latchkey service. Add content to servers with movie studio approval for streaming and keep a somewhat supple supply of DVDs in a warehouse in one or two major cities per state. Oh, and stay on the USPS good side.
Now, I’m no idiot, I am sure there is more to it than that, and I know that those billions of dollars aren’t pure profit. I am sure when it comes to dealing with movies, there is a ton of overhead. Let me ask you this though, is there really so much overhead that Netflix has decided that it is a good idea to price hike their most popular and basic plan by 60%? What kind of sick battle plan is this? Wax out the competition and then jack up the price? This screams of a potential monopoly.
So, if Netflix decided to add more movies and shows to their streaming site, this wouldn’t be an issue. On the contrary, the benefit of the DVD and streaming plan is to supplement the somewhat small selection in the streaming library. So, let’s say Netflix is having trouble with the movie industry and getting content is costing too much. Ok, someone in their financial department must have said “Why don’t we just charge our customers more money so we can get more money to buy more content?” I am sure somebody said “Brilliant!” (I would actually hope not and that they gave this serious thought…). So, they announce the big bad plan hike. Well, turns out they might lose, according to CNET, thousands upon thousands of customers. Even if you don’t, let’s say some people are actually happy with streaming only and pay $7.99. That means the company just lost $2 in sale, permanently.
How in the world is this a good business practice? Cellphone companies have price hikes and plan changes every 2-3 years, and you know what placates their customer's? It's called "grandfathering your plan". In case you don't know what that means, it's this simple concept where the customer's under a current rate plan (say, the current DVD+ streaming $9.99 plan) get to keep that plan so long as they remain customers and NEVER EVER change their plan. The moment the want to change their plan in anyway, it invites them into having to switch to the current rates. All new customers and returning ones would be subjected to the new rates that you propose. THERE! DONE! This would keep your current, loyal clientele base from leaving in droves and would secure more money from new customers your service will inevitably attract. Telling every single customer, old, new and potential, that your service is getting more expensive with giving a really good reason is asking for some serious, company damaging lash-back.
From the other side of the coin, I could go on and on about how maybe the movie industry is really to blame and maybe Netflix isn't doing as well financially as first impressions would have me perceive, but at the end of the day, I am the consumer. These financial matters with the content dealers should not be a punishment towards me. Maybe Netflix should come out, snarky as hell, and say "We have to raise the price because Sony and Starz, etc are being jerks and demanding more money". If nothing else, what more damage could that possibly do. It would be actually refreshing to see a company say that the reason something is more expensive no is because the supplier is demanding more money.
You know, this wouldn't even be a problem if the streaming plan was even CLOSE to their DVD selection. As such, I have the ability to decide if this is still a good deal or not. As an Amazon Prime member, semi-consistent RedBox customer, and (for some reason) Dish Network service customer, I actually do have some semi attractive options open. but come September…it will be decision time.
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Shadows of the Damned
This game is not for you.
Having said that, do you know who Suda51 is? No. Well.. there are other games out there. This game will just make no sense to you. However, for those who are still interested, we'll make it simple.
Suda51 made Killer7 and No More Heroes 1 and 2, among other things. So take his sense of humor, his character design and overall concept. Take the music from Silent Hill, that sad lonely terrifying tone with the occasional upbeat terrifying tone the games known for. Add the combat system from Resident Evil 4. (not 5, only in parts) and you get general idea. Dress it up in a mexican/demon/dia de los muertos atmosphere and you have Shadows.
Is it a good game? Sure, but like most of the late spring/early summer games being released, there just isn't much to it. I find the game hilarious, disgusting, and stylized as it gets, but I also have a terribly dark sense of humor.
You are a demon hunter. No, not you, the video game character. Your girlfriend has been stolen and taken to the land of the dead. You go to get her back. You have a witty sidekick who also acts as your weapon. Your gun shoots demon teeth which are collected off of fallen demons. You can enter the darkness of this evil world to solve puzzles, but be careful, the darkness can also kill you. There are huge boss battles, collectibles and upgrades and a huge cast of characters.
Honestly that's probably 5 paragraphs more than the actual Shadows press-release. Again, it's a good game, just simple and enjoyable.
Part of me is actually really glad that the summer games are simple. inFAMOUS 2, Dungeon Siege, Shadows, Fear. Nothing huge or time consuming, just simple things that are enjoyable to play when you have some free-time.
I still have a stack of deeper games to finish up, so it's nice to be able to jump into a simple act-based game. Controls are simple, aim and shoot. You can turn on a dime, roll to dodge, and side-step. Seriously, it's Resident Evil 4 controls and basically a RE4 engine, but you'll get no complaints about it from me. Any playthough? Not really, it's a good story to finish once, but once that's done, it's time to let it go.
Shadows and Fear will be traded towards Skyrim. Speaking of games that will consume my life.
Another week-long adventure, but that's just fine with me on a hot summer day.
Having said that, do you know who Suda51 is? No. Well.. there are other games out there. This game will just make no sense to you. However, for those who are still interested, we'll make it simple.
Suda51 made Killer7 and No More Heroes 1 and 2, among other things. So take his sense of humor, his character design and overall concept. Take the music from Silent Hill, that sad lonely terrifying tone with the occasional upbeat terrifying tone the games known for. Add the combat system from Resident Evil 4. (not 5, only in parts) and you get general idea. Dress it up in a mexican/demon/dia de los muertos atmosphere and you have Shadows.
Is it a good game? Sure, but like most of the late spring/early summer games being released, there just isn't much to it. I find the game hilarious, disgusting, and stylized as it gets, but I also have a terribly dark sense of humor.
You are a demon hunter. No, not you, the video game character. Your girlfriend has been stolen and taken to the land of the dead. You go to get her back. You have a witty sidekick who also acts as your weapon. Your gun shoots demon teeth which are collected off of fallen demons. You can enter the darkness of this evil world to solve puzzles, but be careful, the darkness can also kill you. There are huge boss battles, collectibles and upgrades and a huge cast of characters.
Honestly that's probably 5 paragraphs more than the actual Shadows press-release. Again, it's a good game, just simple and enjoyable.
Part of me is actually really glad that the summer games are simple. inFAMOUS 2, Dungeon Siege, Shadows, Fear. Nothing huge or time consuming, just simple things that are enjoyable to play when you have some free-time.
I still have a stack of deeper games to finish up, so it's nice to be able to jump into a simple act-based game. Controls are simple, aim and shoot. You can turn on a dime, roll to dodge, and side-step. Seriously, it's Resident Evil 4 controls and basically a RE4 engine, but you'll get no complaints about it from me. Any playthough? Not really, it's a good story to finish once, but once that's done, it's time to let it go.
Shadows and Fear will be traded towards Skyrim. Speaking of games that will consume my life.
Another week-long adventure, but that's just fine with me on a hot summer day.
F3AR E
So so many games. I'm sorry I've left you. I'm back. All is well.
Fear 3! The little game that.... well tried.
Let's do some backstory, yeah? Fear the first was a game that came out on the PC, in a dying age of PC shooters. It did alright, got some recognition for some sassy elements. You could sorta slow time, the storyline was dark, but it all seemed very run of the mill. Scary sure, but not super terrifying. You were a super solider, you were fighting evil. Sound familiar? Of course it does, you're probably playing one of those games right now. Then they ported it over to the consoles, and it got the same resounding "meh" from everyone. A decent shooter, but that's about it. Know how they call some movies "Sunday Afternoon"or "Rainy Afternoon" movies? They have those for games, they're called average. Duke Nukem Forever, Shadows of the Damned, Perfect Dark, games that don't require much of you expect to be a responsive meat-popsicle. Easy to play and not much depth, but sometimes that just hits the spot.
The Fear series scratches that same itch. Nothing big, just a decent 8 hour single player. You hear me Fear??? A DECENT SINGLE PLAYER.
You see, someone once said that Fear 2 had a really awesome multiplay, and Fear took them serious. So they added and hyped their multiplay into Fear 3. Brilliantly they added a solid co-op system, but you have to play basically like you're online and wanting to be captain of the leaderboard. Look Fear, it's nothing against you, but like I'm always griping, unless you're Battlefield or COD just leave multiplay alone. It's not that they are the best multi shooters ever, it's that they know what they are doing, have the server support, and don't try to make both a good single and multi shooter.
So Fear went on super sale and ended up being $40. So did a lot of games, but that makes Fear more of a realistic pick. I happened to get a pre-owned copy so I managed to go home with it for about $25 not a bad price for an average game.
So wassamatta with it you ask? Well nothing really. It's a straightforward shooter, there are some Bulletstorm-esque challenges to accomplish, some fancy bullet-time elements and a ""scary"" storyline. It's scary like Paranormal Activity was. If you were terrified of it, you'll be terrified of Fear. If you though Paranormal Activity was lame...well.... hope you enjoy shooters.
An average shooter. You'll finish up in 8 hours or so. You can play through as two different people if you'd like, so that'll get you 16 hours-ish. Any glaring problems? Eh. Nothing unmanageable except.... well.... the bullettime mode is set to the Y/Triangle button. Which is normally used for weapon switching. Can you re-map it? Nope. So instead of switching weapons I often used bullettime. No big deal, the thing recharges over time anyway. If I play another shooter, I just need to remember that the only game that used the shoulder button to switch weapons was Fear. Shoulder buttons for most shooters are the grenades. That could be lulzy I suppose.
Moral of the story? Don't expect much from Fear 3. The achievements are mostly online multiplay or require you to play through multiple times. (Kill 2500 things a certain way? ummm.)
Perfect for GameFly, decent for a rental, buy if it's used or you already have the other 3. (FEAR, FEAR Files, and FEAR 2). It's just an average shooter with no problems or benefits. Give it a whirl if you're looking for a summer week event?
Fear 3! The little game that.... well tried.
Let's do some backstory, yeah? Fear the first was a game that came out on the PC, in a dying age of PC shooters. It did alright, got some recognition for some sassy elements. You could sorta slow time, the storyline was dark, but it all seemed very run of the mill. Scary sure, but not super terrifying. You were a super solider, you were fighting evil. Sound familiar? Of course it does, you're probably playing one of those games right now. Then they ported it over to the consoles, and it got the same resounding "meh" from everyone. A decent shooter, but that's about it. Know how they call some movies "Sunday Afternoon"or "Rainy Afternoon" movies? They have those for games, they're called average. Duke Nukem Forever, Shadows of the Damned, Perfect Dark, games that don't require much of you expect to be a responsive meat-popsicle. Easy to play and not much depth, but sometimes that just hits the spot.
The Fear series scratches that same itch. Nothing big, just a decent 8 hour single player. You hear me Fear??? A DECENT SINGLE PLAYER.
You see, someone once said that Fear 2 had a really awesome multiplay, and Fear took them serious. So they added and hyped their multiplay into Fear 3. Brilliantly they added a solid co-op system, but you have to play basically like you're online and wanting to be captain of the leaderboard. Look Fear, it's nothing against you, but like I'm always griping, unless you're Battlefield or COD just leave multiplay alone. It's not that they are the best multi shooters ever, it's that they know what they are doing, have the server support, and don't try to make both a good single and multi shooter.
So Fear went on super sale and ended up being $40. So did a lot of games, but that makes Fear more of a realistic pick. I happened to get a pre-owned copy so I managed to go home with it for about $25 not a bad price for an average game.
So wassamatta with it you ask? Well nothing really. It's a straightforward shooter, there are some Bulletstorm-esque challenges to accomplish, some fancy bullet-time elements and a ""scary"" storyline. It's scary like Paranormal Activity was. If you were terrified of it, you'll be terrified of Fear. If you though Paranormal Activity was lame...well.... hope you enjoy shooters.
An average shooter. You'll finish up in 8 hours or so. You can play through as two different people if you'd like, so that'll get you 16 hours-ish. Any glaring problems? Eh. Nothing unmanageable except.... well.... the bullettime mode is set to the Y/Triangle button. Which is normally used for weapon switching. Can you re-map it? Nope. So instead of switching weapons I often used bullettime. No big deal, the thing recharges over time anyway. If I play another shooter, I just need to remember that the only game that used the shoulder button to switch weapons was Fear. Shoulder buttons for most shooters are the grenades. That could be lulzy I suppose.
Moral of the story? Don't expect much from Fear 3. The achievements are mostly online multiplay or require you to play through multiple times. (Kill 2500 things a certain way? ummm.)
Perfect for GameFly, decent for a rental, buy if it's used or you already have the other 3. (FEAR, FEAR Files, and FEAR 2). It's just an average shooter with no problems or benefits. Give it a whirl if you're looking for a summer week event?
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Game Journalism: Scores for Dollars
OK, I haven’t had time write up a proper blog, and technically I don’t have time now, but dammit this has been bugging me for months.
So, gaming magazines. It used to be getting the latest Electronic Gaming Monthly (EGM) was something to look forward to. Every month, when it came in the mail, it took all I had to not exclaiming like a little schoolgirl on Christmas. EGM used to be (please notice the “used to be”) a gaming magazine with journalists like no other. They were brutally honest about video games, not just giving a bad game a low score, but explaining in meticulous detail about WHY a game deserved such a low score. There definition of a low score wasn’t a “5” or a “6”, either, as is the norm nowadays (more on that in a bit). EGM wasn’t too proud to give games “0.0” or “1” and explain in technical detail why (“the bump mapping is terrible, the clipping is off, the hit detection is horrid). This was a gaming magazine companies fear/loved to give advance copies to, because if it sucked, they would rip it to shreds AND make calls backs in repeated issues as to how bad it was. For instance, in Turok Evolution, the main antagonist is an 1800’s military officer designed like General Custer. He is the end boss named Tobias Bruckner, and he rides a T-Rex with rocket launchers and shotguns strapped to its back.
Please take a solid minute to imagine this.
Can’t? Then here, look below. It’s that funny.
EGM made an entire award called the “Tobias Bruckner Award”, given to games with incredibly bad design choices. GENIUS! EGM has even had industry changing jokes that became reality. Their April Fools jokes involved things like “Unlocking Sonic in Smash Bros. Melee” or “Unlock Ryu and Ken’s trainer Gouken in Street Fighter II”. Years later, these jokes became reality, because gamers truly wanted these jokes to be real. No other gaming magazine has had this kind of impact in the community. Then, as if by some kind of reverse karma, all the beautiful honesty in journalism that the game industry needed stopped, and something terrible happened. EGM closed its doors. That’s right, as if by some malevolent curse, the economy hit their publisher Ziff Davis Media and EGM was on the chopping block. February 2008…. a sad month indeed.
Now EGM is back…..and everything is changed. The 20-30 plus pages dedicated to reviews? GONE! The snarky reviews of games that don’ live up to their expectations? GONE! How about multiple reviewers for a nice control as to how multiple people thought of the game? GONE! Fantastic, industry changing April’s Fool’s Jokes? Nothing yet so, GONE! This month, they reviewed eight games. Eight. To EGM’s credit though, they still have an extensive regular departments section in their magazine with interviews, previewed titles, and the ilk.
Is it reliable anymore for game reviews? Shamefully, no. No game, but no game, got below a 6.5 this month. That should mean that everything they played was either great or at least above passable. What about in the last two months? Well Dissidia 012:FF got a 5.0. Why? No, seriously, WHY? According to Metacritic, this game sits pretty with a 78. EGM’s reasoning was “The game is all fan service and it’s a bit of a complex fighting system”. (Sigh). When someone says that a fighting game is complex and it placates to the audience that wants to play it, I really have a hard time understanding the issue. What, would it have been better if it were a mainstream fighting game that just HAPPENED to have Final Fantasy characters? Better yet, should it have been more of a Smash Bros. clone, because an original fighting engine is too scary and hard to learn? I seriously have no patience for ignorance of this magnitude. Of course it’s a fan game! Only the die-hard fans are playing Final Fantasy games anymore anyways, since Square doesn’t know what the hell a good combat system has looked like since FFX (and yes, I realize that last comment is up for debate, but I stand behind it). So of course the fighting system has a learning curve. This is the same magazine that praised Pokémon Black/White with a 9.5, which is the same game that came out 13 years ago except now the box art is different, and yet they thrash a game because “it really only appeases to it’s fans with it’s aethstetic levels of older FF games and semi-complex fighting system.” Seriously, a reviewer who says a game was bad because it does exactly what its core audience wants is just insulting, not only to the audience, but to even potential fans of the series.
Rage subsiding.
How about Game Informer? Is Game Informer a better magazine to throw down for $15 a year? Pfft. They can’t even get their Game of the Month award right. This month, L.A. Noire got game of the month with an 8.75, but The Witcher 2 scored higher with a 9.25, probably because they thought it was a better game. So, they divided the categories and put The Witcher 2 in a PC slot, giving it PC game of the month. My problem with that is it was THE ONLY PC GAME THEY FU**ING REVIEWED! That not withstanding, Infamous 2 and Dirt 3 scored just as high (8.75), and The Legend of Zelda for the 3DS scored even higher (9.25), so why give GotM to L.A. Noire? I will tell you why, and this is what I have been leading to.
Gaming magazines scores are based on the highest bidder.
I’m sorry, but you are a damn fool if you believe otherwise. Unless the gaming community as a whole hates it, or unless it has more negative word of mouth than the Hot Coffee mod, than the game will score unnecessarily high. L.A. Noire could have been a buggy and broken mess, but it had a ton a press and Rockstar probably greased some palms, so it was destined to get at least a 7.0 on a 10-point scale. Fair enough, but now this game doesn’t get an honest review. But HEY! At least it got game of the month even though according to Game Informer’s grading scale Zelda should have kicked it’s ass. Oh wait? Did you decide to give L.A. Noire GotM because it’s “fresh, and new” and totally isn’t Grand Theft Auto with detectives? To this, I say bull. If Zelda scored higher, give it the award. It should be a testament to how good one game can be if, 13 years later, it’s repackaged with some minor changes here and there and it can still be a more fun game to play than L.A. Noire.
My only reason for being so flippantly caustic about this is because I freaking hate what has become of gaming magazines as a whole. It used to be that a 10 point scale was reliable, in that a “0” meant avoid at all cost and hope the developer goes belly-up for not really trying, a “5” meant the game was playable, but only rentable, and a “10” meant add it to your collection today. Now, a “5” is the new “0” and a “10” goes to either an earnestly good game or whoever paid the most to the magazine/publisher. We are now at the point in game journalism were a five point scale (1 -5) is now more trustworthy because 7 has become the new mediocre score.
Now, I’m not an idiot (so far as I have been told) and I know game reviews are a matter of pure subjective opinion as opposed to fact. This is the end point for EGM though, their reviews were full of such technical analysis and supporting justification it almost seemed like fact. That didn’t just say a game was good because of the “graphics were good”, but instead go into the lighting detail or the polygon detail and/or the attention to texturing.
Is it unfair of me to have such an acidic tone, accusing the game journalism industry of trying to warp us out of our money towards games that truly may not deserve it? Probably. Having never worked in the game industry myself, my comments would be considered of a layman, taking only my knowledge of over 20 years as a gamer and 3 years in game design and development schools.
Allow me to close and venture you this thought. What’s the difference between a game player and a modern day game journalist? Answer: An associate’s degree in journalism and/or creative writing. That’s not a purposefully scathing remark, either. Next time you fold open a gaming magazine, and you want a review for a game, ask you self a couple questions before you take that review for its face value:
-Have any of the journalists ever helped CREATE a video game or worked in the game industry?
-Is it a requirement for this magazine to have technical understanding of video games before you start writing reviews for them?
-Magazines companies need money, and does this company need to do what it takes to make sure they stay on the PR good side (padding reviews, giving false awards) to score more dough?
-Finally, when all that is considered, what honestly makes a professional game reviewer more reliable than anyone on this or really any other blog?
The final one has an answer: I have nothing to gain by saying how I feel about games and media on this site, whether it is good or bad. I say again, nothing.
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Music while I game.
Whatever happened to the ability to play Last.FM while playing a game on Xbox? It used to exist! Sure you can still play music from a flashdrive or music installed on your system while you game, but getting to that point is nothing short of a hassle.
I got 100% of Oblivion completed, and probably only listened to about 1/8th of the game. I also managed to watch the first 3 seasons of Deadliest Catch while playing Oblivion. How you ask? Well, I had Oblivion on one screen, and Deadliest Catch coming through the headphones from my computer. Made time fly. I got to the errands and collection quests of Oblivion and knew I didn't need to hear anything, so I listened to something else.
Even today I listen to podcasts while playing games that lack strong audio like Borderlands and Brink. Both are fine games, but the in-game music, and occasional dialogue cues often make me wonder why I'm even listening to anything in-game. It's partially killing two birds with one stone (I have thousands of podcasts still to listen to) and it makes the errands and boring travel in the game seem less.... boring. Nothing against any of the games, and most of them have excellent audio... they're just missing something.
Fallout 3 spoiled me. Three-Dog and his interruptions to the radio to announce things that my character was or was not influencing were brilliant. Assassin's Creed did the same thing, sort of. You could hear people talk about my recent exploits and adventures. Maybe it's come from years of playing games in a silent apartment or room, but hearing just the music is sometimes unsettling.
If this were 15 years ago, I'd probably be going insane. Games back then rarely had in-game voiced dialogue, and even if it did it was usually just during cut-scenes.
More to the point though, games like Fallout and Oblivion have excellent in-game music. Games like L.A. Noire have amazing in-game dialogue and meaningless conversations. It's sad to see games like Borderlands where it completely lacks any strong musical cues. Gearbox knows in-game music. Black Mesa had awesome musical cues. But this isn't to bash Borderlands, they're just the first example I could think of where the lack of any sort of audio seemed prominent.
I get their artistic choice to have little music. They're trying to create a desolate and deserted atmosphere. I can totally dig that. Your first few hours in the vast stretches make you think you're the only one around. Problem is ,Borderlands, after a while you're forcing me to run errands. I don't mind it, I know it'll pay off in the end. I just would like to hear some music while I work. So instead I silence the in-game audio and listen to podcasts, or Pandora or what have you.
The Xbox still has the feature to play music off of a flash-drive, but I'm surprised to see they haven't really changed/improved it since that. Of course if I had a Zune I could link my music. But how many people do you know have Zunes? I know of 3. GameStop used to sell them. If I had a Windows PC I could stream my music to my Xbox. But if I had a Windows PC I would be complaining about a lot more than lack of in-game music. (Zing).
Dungeon Siege is coming out soon. Dungeon crawling at it's best. The demos out too. You'll see what I mean. From years of playing D2, Baldurs Gate, and Torchlight I know how boring it can get without some interesting musical cues. I might just have to make a dungeon crawling playlist. I made one for UT2K4. Of course UT2K4 had an in-game music player that would search your computer for all of your music. Now that was a music player you could hang your hat on.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to listen to/yell at this weeks "This American Life" while I search for more badges and film reels in 1940's LA.
I got 100% of Oblivion completed, and probably only listened to about 1/8th of the game. I also managed to watch the first 3 seasons of Deadliest Catch while playing Oblivion. How you ask? Well, I had Oblivion on one screen, and Deadliest Catch coming through the headphones from my computer. Made time fly. I got to the errands and collection quests of Oblivion and knew I didn't need to hear anything, so I listened to something else.
Even today I listen to podcasts while playing games that lack strong audio like Borderlands and Brink. Both are fine games, but the in-game music, and occasional dialogue cues often make me wonder why I'm even listening to anything in-game. It's partially killing two birds with one stone (I have thousands of podcasts still to listen to) and it makes the errands and boring travel in the game seem less.... boring. Nothing against any of the games, and most of them have excellent audio... they're just missing something.
Fallout 3 spoiled me. Three-Dog and his interruptions to the radio to announce things that my character was or was not influencing were brilliant. Assassin's Creed did the same thing, sort of. You could hear people talk about my recent exploits and adventures. Maybe it's come from years of playing games in a silent apartment or room, but hearing just the music is sometimes unsettling.
If this were 15 years ago, I'd probably be going insane. Games back then rarely had in-game voiced dialogue, and even if it did it was usually just during cut-scenes.
More to the point though, games like Fallout and Oblivion have excellent in-game music. Games like L.A. Noire have amazing in-game dialogue and meaningless conversations. It's sad to see games like Borderlands where it completely lacks any strong musical cues. Gearbox knows in-game music. Black Mesa had awesome musical cues. But this isn't to bash Borderlands, they're just the first example I could think of where the lack of any sort of audio seemed prominent.
I get their artistic choice to have little music. They're trying to create a desolate and deserted atmosphere. I can totally dig that. Your first few hours in the vast stretches make you think you're the only one around. Problem is ,Borderlands, after a while you're forcing me to run errands. I don't mind it, I know it'll pay off in the end. I just would like to hear some music while I work. So instead I silence the in-game audio and listen to podcasts, or Pandora or what have you.
The Xbox still has the feature to play music off of a flash-drive, but I'm surprised to see they haven't really changed/improved it since that. Of course if I had a Zune I could link my music. But how many people do you know have Zunes? I know of 3. GameStop used to sell them. If I had a Windows PC I could stream my music to my Xbox. But if I had a Windows PC I would be complaining about a lot more than lack of in-game music. (Zing).
Dungeon Siege is coming out soon. Dungeon crawling at it's best. The demos out too. You'll see what I mean. From years of playing D2, Baldurs Gate, and Torchlight I know how boring it can get without some interesting musical cues. I might just have to make a dungeon crawling playlist. I made one for UT2K4. Of course UT2K4 had an in-game music player that would search your computer for all of your music. Now that was a music player you could hang your hat on.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to listen to/yell at this weeks "This American Life" while I search for more badges and film reels in 1940's LA.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Hold X for Hilarity.
I still strongly dislike COD:Black Ops.
Probably always will. Sadly you won't be able to change my mind about it. It's not the game itself, it's the following.
Twilight isn't a horrible book by literature standards (there are hundreds of worse books, trust me), but it's the following that bothers people. Nickleback isn't a horrible band, it's just their fans that are of questionable nature.
My problem with COD, and I've said it before, is the following it's created. COD players are less gamer and more.... hobbyist? If you don't believe me, simply look at their playercards, ratios, and time spent playing. It's a hobby.
However, this blog isn't to bash COD, but rather to tell you of my more recent experiences with it, and the laughter it created. I love Brink, and I love Team Fortress, but it's hard to get COD players to try any other multiplay game without a little encouragement. Had some friends over, so I made both of them an even deal. There's a way in COD to use a player who isn't too concerned about their score as a whipping boy of sorts. I would play the whipping boy, and in turn bumping up their scores, if they tried Brink.
Now mind you, I was approaching going back into the Black Ops multiplay, or simply Duty as the cool kids call it, not too concerned about my score, so I wanted to see how I'd enjoy the game.
If they have a kill ratio for each match, they should have a killed ratio for each match, I'd win. I probably died 10 times each team deathmatch match. Impressive to say the least. Each death was more hilarious than the next. Attempting melee kills from yards away, pistol whipping a dead body only to be headshotted (??) by someone right behind me. The entire time I'm simply boosting my friends score and laughing hysterically at the killcam.
Then it happened.
I was voted and kicked out because I died too many times. I was asked to leave because I wasn't any good. So I looked at the playercard of the guy who initiated the vote. He has a custom emblem, custom gamertag for his clan on Duty, and about 20 days of gameplay time. Days. That's some 500 hours into the game. I've never put 500 hours into a game. These guys take it way too serious.
So in turn, my friends decided to get back into the game, I log into a different gamertag (yes I have 3, don't you judge), and we all decided to gang up on this guy. Suddenly his mic sign comes on, and begins to talk. The kid couldn't have been more than 12 or 13, screaming at us all sorts of words I don't think I even knew or could spell at that age. Hilarious.
It was decided that we should leave the poor bastard alone, and try some of the rarely played game modes. Finally I was able to play something else other than the solider, I got to play a medic, and surprisingly, I got a ton of XP from it. I might not be an excellent shooter, but put me in a DD role, or a support role where I'm away from the main fracas and I tend to hold my own.
I think I instantly bashed Duty because of how serious it was taken, I still think it's way too serious. But there's something about having a bunch of people you're friends with on a headset, all on a team, and just running around not worried about the score, but rather about having fun.
At the end of it all, I think I gained 3 levels and did horribly as far as scores were concerned, but I had fun. Which, like I always say, is the point. I knew when to quit when I started to get frustrated. That's more than a lot of people online could say. They tried Brink, and for the most part liked it.
Will I play Duty again? Maybe. It's fun when you aren't concerned about winning, but that enjoyment can be short lived when people pick you out to hunt down. Still, it has it's place in the gaming world.
Probably always will. Sadly you won't be able to change my mind about it. It's not the game itself, it's the following.
Twilight isn't a horrible book by literature standards (there are hundreds of worse books, trust me), but it's the following that bothers people. Nickleback isn't a horrible band, it's just their fans that are of questionable nature.
My problem with COD, and I've said it before, is the following it's created. COD players are less gamer and more.... hobbyist? If you don't believe me, simply look at their playercards, ratios, and time spent playing. It's a hobby.
However, this blog isn't to bash COD, but rather to tell you of my more recent experiences with it, and the laughter it created. I love Brink, and I love Team Fortress, but it's hard to get COD players to try any other multiplay game without a little encouragement. Had some friends over, so I made both of them an even deal. There's a way in COD to use a player who isn't too concerned about their score as a whipping boy of sorts. I would play the whipping boy, and in turn bumping up their scores, if they tried Brink.
Now mind you, I was approaching going back into the Black Ops multiplay, or simply Duty as the cool kids call it, not too concerned about my score, so I wanted to see how I'd enjoy the game.
If they have a kill ratio for each match, they should have a killed ratio for each match, I'd win. I probably died 10 times each team deathmatch match. Impressive to say the least. Each death was more hilarious than the next. Attempting melee kills from yards away, pistol whipping a dead body only to be headshotted (??) by someone right behind me. The entire time I'm simply boosting my friends score and laughing hysterically at the killcam.
Then it happened.
I was voted and kicked out because I died too many times. I was asked to leave because I wasn't any good. So I looked at the playercard of the guy who initiated the vote. He has a custom emblem, custom gamertag for his clan on Duty, and about 20 days of gameplay time. Days. That's some 500 hours into the game. I've never put 500 hours into a game. These guys take it way too serious.
So in turn, my friends decided to get back into the game, I log into a different gamertag (yes I have 3, don't you judge), and we all decided to gang up on this guy. Suddenly his mic sign comes on, and begins to talk. The kid couldn't have been more than 12 or 13, screaming at us all sorts of words I don't think I even knew or could spell at that age. Hilarious.
It was decided that we should leave the poor bastard alone, and try some of the rarely played game modes. Finally I was able to play something else other than the solider, I got to play a medic, and surprisingly, I got a ton of XP from it. I might not be an excellent shooter, but put me in a DD role, or a support role where I'm away from the main fracas and I tend to hold my own.
I think I instantly bashed Duty because of how serious it was taken, I still think it's way too serious. But there's something about having a bunch of people you're friends with on a headset, all on a team, and just running around not worried about the score, but rather about having fun.
At the end of it all, I think I gained 3 levels and did horribly as far as scores were concerned, but I had fun. Which, like I always say, is the point. I knew when to quit when I started to get frustrated. That's more than a lot of people online could say. They tried Brink, and for the most part liked it.
Will I play Duty again? Maybe. It's fun when you aren't concerned about winning, but that enjoyment can be short lived when people pick you out to hunt down. Still, it has it's place in the gaming world.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Do you want to get the strategy guide with that?
Honestly, I hate the question. I hate asking it, and I hate the way it makes me feel when I do have to ask it. Simply put, the kind of people who want to use the guide know they want it, and either pre-order it, or take the steps to making sure they get in early to get one with the game. I'm not asking in an attempt to promote sales, I'm simply letting you know that they are available if you'd like one.
So L.A. Noire came out, and all other games have ceased to be played (in my case). It's that good. But when I was picking up my copy, there wasn't a doubt in my mind that I'd also be getting the guide with it. Not just because you stand to save a good $4 when you get the game and guide together (too much work, not enough theatre obviously), but because LA is also about collectibles and side-quests.
A regular who often gets the guides came in on Tuesday, and asked "Do I really need the guide for this game". Well, in the case of LA, you should. In the guide they package-
- All main storyline questions and answers and evidence lists.
- Side mission guides
- Collectibles maps
- An online PDF you can download for free for all future DLC
Not a bad deal. Except he was asking more philosophically. "Do I need the guide for this game?, Is it something I'll use and benefit from, or will it just remain on my shelf for good?"
Tough call. I know for myself, I've used the guide every step of the way. I'll explain when and if I review LA, but suffice it to say, it's made advancing in the game easier in a way different from most games on the market.
A strong opposition to the guide is "I'll simply go onto the internet and find the answer". Sure, but at the same time, the book would be right there, easier than the internet if you could believe it. Furthermore, looking on the internet isn't always easy. You can usually find an answer like "where is the red key" pretty quickly, but for more specific or more vague questions, the guide can let you go back a few steps if needed. Sure, there are online guides, but these are usually written by gamers after the game comes out, so it's their testament to how they played the game, not necessarily correct.
"Is it cheating?" Well. I suppose it is. Although cheat codes have since left us years ago, and back then guides were seen as help more than anything. I'd say it's just as much cheating as setting the game to easy. It really matters as to the game itself if it's cheating or not.
"I'd rather figure it out for myself, otherwise it ruins the fun". Eh. This was true years ago when you only had one or two games to play, and that game was the only game you'd have for months, and 100% completion was a necessity less than a desire. Get your moneys worth. There have been quite a few games in my day I've simply stopped playing because I got stuck and wasn't sure what the problem was, a strange glitch, poor foresight or just dumb luck. Whatever the case, the game stopped me. Games are meant to be enjoyed, so being stuck and frustrated is much different than being stuck and puzzled. Frustrated gamers are less likely to continue to play if it seems there's no easy path.
Portal 2 and Uncharted are a perfect example. You know in both games there will always be an answer. Portal 2 you usually just need a hint if you get stuck, or take some time away and go back to it and you're almost certain to figure it out. Uncharted is the same way, but in Uncharted's case, if you do manage to get stuck, the game realizes it and shows you where to go, only after a long time in a single spot. Both are puzzle games, and both know they can become frustrating, so it's never too difficult.
Fighting games have guides that are usually required for any hardcore gamer, it'll show the combo setups, the special moves, and the basic controls of every character. Even though it's also usually in a menu of the game, they simply prefer to have the book. No harm there.
Most shooters have guides, but the multiplay aspects are the obvious benefit. Know the map, win the battle. Racing and sports games have guides mostly for stats, and rpgs have guides for drops and mob ratings. The games that almost always have a guide, and almost always benefit from those guides are the action/adventure and puzzle games. Your Uncharted, MGS, Assassin's Creed, Portal, LA Noires.
If I'm stuck, I want to try to figure it out. If I start to get frustrated I know I need to be told the answer sooner rather than later when it comes to video games. I'm also a completist whore. So I have to get everything possible in some games. Every bobblehead and badge I possibly can, the guide helps me with that. In this fast-paced day and age, it shouldn't be a surprise when people need strategy guides. I personally use them sparingly if I can help it, unless I know I'm going to play through the game a second time (like L.A. Noire), or if I want to become better at the game (like Borderlands).
As far as those of you who say it's cheating or makes the game easier. Well... lot's of things in gaming today are made to make the game easier. In my mind, I'd rather the game be fun regardless of if I'm cheating or how difficult it is. Games are meant to be fun. Sure beating Goldeneye on 007 mode was a great success, but doing it with dual paintball gun moonraker lasers with bighead mode on and the enemy accuracy at 0% is fun too. That's the point, ain't it?
So L.A. Noire came out, and all other games have ceased to be played (in my case). It's that good. But when I was picking up my copy, there wasn't a doubt in my mind that I'd also be getting the guide with it. Not just because you stand to save a good $4 when you get the game and guide together (too much work, not enough theatre obviously), but because LA is also about collectibles and side-quests.
A regular who often gets the guides came in on Tuesday, and asked "Do I really need the guide for this game". Well, in the case of LA, you should. In the guide they package-
- All main storyline questions and answers and evidence lists.
- Side mission guides
- Collectibles maps
- An online PDF you can download for free for all future DLC
Not a bad deal. Except he was asking more philosophically. "Do I need the guide for this game?, Is it something I'll use and benefit from, or will it just remain on my shelf for good?"
Tough call. I know for myself, I've used the guide every step of the way. I'll explain when and if I review LA, but suffice it to say, it's made advancing in the game easier in a way different from most games on the market.
A strong opposition to the guide is "I'll simply go onto the internet and find the answer". Sure, but at the same time, the book would be right there, easier than the internet if you could believe it. Furthermore, looking on the internet isn't always easy. You can usually find an answer like "where is the red key" pretty quickly, but for more specific or more vague questions, the guide can let you go back a few steps if needed. Sure, there are online guides, but these are usually written by gamers after the game comes out, so it's their testament to how they played the game, not necessarily correct.
"Is it cheating?" Well. I suppose it is. Although cheat codes have since left us years ago, and back then guides were seen as help more than anything. I'd say it's just as much cheating as setting the game to easy. It really matters as to the game itself if it's cheating or not.
"I'd rather figure it out for myself, otherwise it ruins the fun". Eh. This was true years ago when you only had one or two games to play, and that game was the only game you'd have for months, and 100% completion was a necessity less than a desire. Get your moneys worth. There have been quite a few games in my day I've simply stopped playing because I got stuck and wasn't sure what the problem was, a strange glitch, poor foresight or just dumb luck. Whatever the case, the game stopped me. Games are meant to be enjoyed, so being stuck and frustrated is much different than being stuck and puzzled. Frustrated gamers are less likely to continue to play if it seems there's no easy path.
Portal 2 and Uncharted are a perfect example. You know in both games there will always be an answer. Portal 2 you usually just need a hint if you get stuck, or take some time away and go back to it and you're almost certain to figure it out. Uncharted is the same way, but in Uncharted's case, if you do manage to get stuck, the game realizes it and shows you where to go, only after a long time in a single spot. Both are puzzle games, and both know they can become frustrating, so it's never too difficult.
Fighting games have guides that are usually required for any hardcore gamer, it'll show the combo setups, the special moves, and the basic controls of every character. Even though it's also usually in a menu of the game, they simply prefer to have the book. No harm there.
Most shooters have guides, but the multiplay aspects are the obvious benefit. Know the map, win the battle. Racing and sports games have guides mostly for stats, and rpgs have guides for drops and mob ratings. The games that almost always have a guide, and almost always benefit from those guides are the action/adventure and puzzle games. Your Uncharted, MGS, Assassin's Creed, Portal, LA Noires.
If I'm stuck, I want to try to figure it out. If I start to get frustrated I know I need to be told the answer sooner rather than later when it comes to video games. I'm also a completist whore. So I have to get everything possible in some games. Every bobblehead and badge I possibly can, the guide helps me with that. In this fast-paced day and age, it shouldn't be a surprise when people need strategy guides. I personally use them sparingly if I can help it, unless I know I'm going to play through the game a second time (like L.A. Noire), or if I want to become better at the game (like Borderlands).
As far as those of you who say it's cheating or makes the game easier. Well... lot's of things in gaming today are made to make the game easier. In my mind, I'd rather the game be fun regardless of if I'm cheating or how difficult it is. Games are meant to be fun. Sure beating Goldeneye on 007 mode was a great success, but doing it with dual paintball gun moonraker lasers with bighead mode on and the enemy accuracy at 0% is fun too. That's the point, ain't it?
Friday, May 13, 2011
Brink and you miss a sprint.
I don't think Sebastain Coe had the game Brink in mind when he said his quote. I also don't think he'd do a cheesy Asian accent while saying it either.
What does a first person shooter have to do with an Olympic gold medal runner?
Oddly enough tons.
BRINK.
I'd been excited about this game for some time now, and when they announced that it would be arriving a week ahead of schedule, that could only mean one thing- Bethesda had a treat for us.
And sure enough they did. Now let me preface this with "Brink is not for most people". It's a combination of the less popular shooters. Sorry, it's true. I personally love the games that inspired Brink, however the sales prove I'm one of the few people.
Take one part Unreal Tournament, one part Mirror's Edge, and mix that with equal parts of Team Fortress. Add a dash of the modern COD xp ranking/upgrade system and you have Brink.
Basic story- There's an island, there are security forces on it, there is a rebellious group on it. The security wants everyone to stay on the island, the rebels want to search for better lands.
Honestly they could have scaled back on the story a bit, and it wouldn't have changed much. It's nice that there are in-game cut scenes. Killzone had the same elements. Honestly I think I just enjoy it because it lets the entire match take a break for a few seconds. That's my segway into how fast paced the action is, did you like it? Good.
The action is fast-paced. Moving on.
Jokes. Here's the deal. Your team is fighting another team. You both have a list of objectives. One might have to defend a door, and the other destroy the door. If the door is destroyed you might have to escort something through it, unless you let the door be destroyed, then you might have to start building up a secondary barricade. As the match progresses you find yourself either backpedaling to save your bacon as the defense gets cut more lean, or adding more fat to the fire and boaring your way through the defense. Pig jokes aside, this concept isn't new necessarily. Team Fortress and Unreal Tournament both had these, just not in the same scale that Brink pulls it off.
who am I, and what am I doing here? Well, you can pick from 4 classes. Solider, Medic, Operative, Engineer, and have 3 size modifiers (light, med, and heavy).
So if you're annoyed they left out the heavy and medic combo from TF2, simply get a heavy solider, and a light medic and ta-da.
The different sizes are a nice change to the standard plan. You can be a successful light fast-moving operative, but change your character to a heavy operative and the game takes a more sneaky swing.
Soliders use guns, and can pass out ammo to their friends. The medics heal and can revive, the engineers set up turrets, and the operatives dress up like enemy agents. A well-known and well-enjoyed format. Snipers and Pyros wouldn't fare well in the environments, so they aren't too missed.
Now for the twist. You can climb, sprint, slide, and jump to your hearts content. Why's this useful? Let's say you respawn on the other side of the map? You have dozens of ways to take. Sprint over a walkway, only to jump down two levels and slide down a staircase, or do the opposite. Whatever. The new controls allow you to escape danger quickly, or pull off a "last second save" to your objective once you start using the parkour elements of the game to your ability.
The characters? They look weird right? Quadrillions of combinations. Seriously. With each level you complete you unlock more and more apparel and swag for your guy. I've played about 10 hours so far, and have yet to see anyone who even looks remotely like me. It's a nice change to the cookie-cutter looks of the COD/MOD/BBC games out there. Your character (which you play as in the single player, the challenge modes and the online mode) becomes a personal thing. You select your favorite weapon load-outs, you select your special skills, and you choose how he looks. It's a small detail, but makes for a more dedicated play. You can instantly recognize the teammates you work well with, and the ones who are good for a health boost or some extra ammo.
One of the best reviews I've heard about this game so far "It's like if someone was willing to re-create Team Fortress, and that someone was Bethesda, and they just wanted you to have fun".
Excellent game. I'll be playing it for quite a long time. Might not be for all, but if you're looking for some online fighting that isn't deathmatch based, or if you want to get into online gaming but aren't the best at KTD ratios, come on over to Brink.
What does a first person shooter have to do with an Olympic gold medal runner?
Oddly enough tons.
BRINK.
I'd been excited about this game for some time now, and when they announced that it would be arriving a week ahead of schedule, that could only mean one thing- Bethesda had a treat for us.
And sure enough they did. Now let me preface this with "Brink is not for most people". It's a combination of the less popular shooters. Sorry, it's true. I personally love the games that inspired Brink, however the sales prove I'm one of the few people.
Take one part Unreal Tournament, one part Mirror's Edge, and mix that with equal parts of Team Fortress. Add a dash of the modern COD xp ranking/upgrade system and you have Brink.
Basic story- There's an island, there are security forces on it, there is a rebellious group on it. The security wants everyone to stay on the island, the rebels want to search for better lands.
Honestly they could have scaled back on the story a bit, and it wouldn't have changed much. It's nice that there are in-game cut scenes. Killzone had the same elements. Honestly I think I just enjoy it because it lets the entire match take a break for a few seconds. That's my segway into how fast paced the action is, did you like it? Good.
The action is fast-paced. Moving on.
Jokes. Here's the deal. Your team is fighting another team. You both have a list of objectives. One might have to defend a door, and the other destroy the door. If the door is destroyed you might have to escort something through it, unless you let the door be destroyed, then you might have to start building up a secondary barricade. As the match progresses you find yourself either backpedaling to save your bacon as the defense gets cut more lean, or adding more fat to the fire and boaring your way through the defense. Pig jokes aside, this concept isn't new necessarily. Team Fortress and Unreal Tournament both had these, just not in the same scale that Brink pulls it off.
who am I, and what am I doing here? Well, you can pick from 4 classes. Solider, Medic, Operative, Engineer, and have 3 size modifiers (light, med, and heavy).
So if you're annoyed they left out the heavy and medic combo from TF2, simply get a heavy solider, and a light medic and ta-da.
The different sizes are a nice change to the standard plan. You can be a successful light fast-moving operative, but change your character to a heavy operative and the game takes a more sneaky swing.
Soliders use guns, and can pass out ammo to their friends. The medics heal and can revive, the engineers set up turrets, and the operatives dress up like enemy agents. A well-known and well-enjoyed format. Snipers and Pyros wouldn't fare well in the environments, so they aren't too missed.
Now for the twist. You can climb, sprint, slide, and jump to your hearts content. Why's this useful? Let's say you respawn on the other side of the map? You have dozens of ways to take. Sprint over a walkway, only to jump down two levels and slide down a staircase, or do the opposite. Whatever. The new controls allow you to escape danger quickly, or pull off a "last second save" to your objective once you start using the parkour elements of the game to your ability.
The characters? They look weird right? Quadrillions of combinations. Seriously. With each level you complete you unlock more and more apparel and swag for your guy. I've played about 10 hours so far, and have yet to see anyone who even looks remotely like me. It's a nice change to the cookie-cutter looks of the COD/MOD/BBC games out there. Your character (which you play as in the single player, the challenge modes and the online mode) becomes a personal thing. You select your favorite weapon load-outs, you select your special skills, and you choose how he looks. It's a small detail, but makes for a more dedicated play. You can instantly recognize the teammates you work well with, and the ones who are good for a health boost or some extra ammo.
One of the best reviews I've heard about this game so far "It's like if someone was willing to re-create Team Fortress, and that someone was Bethesda, and they just wanted you to have fun".
Excellent game. I'll be playing it for quite a long time. Might not be for all, but if you're looking for some online fighting that isn't deathmatch based, or if you want to get into online gaming but aren't the best at KTD ratios, come on over to Brink.
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Shoot, reload, Shoot, reload
Rapid Fire Time!
I have a lot of blog ideas that have been on my mind, so I’m just going to hit you with several at once, since none of them are especially important long enough to be full blogs.
1. A large amount of tech journalists are claiming that the 3DS will be a failure because the older PSP is currently outselling it and some people hate the concept of a 3D screen. Here, literally Game Design 101 (as in, this was a topic in my first Game Design class): Consoles don’t win console wars, games do. The 3DO, though powerful as can be, failed because of a lack of games and developer support. The Dreamcast was years ahead of it’s time with features we take for granted today: Online play, DLC, freaking’ voice chat in game! But, alas, Sega fu**ed over their third party developers by almost secretly releasing the Dreamcast only two years after the Sega Saturn, making third party developers sick of Sega’s constantly changing console BS and moving on to other places, like Sony and their PS2. As I said a couple months ago, the regular DS has been outselling the PSP year after year by almost double because it has a good library. This is taking into account that the PSP is twice as powerful as the DS.
Point made simple, the 3DS is a good console, but it was rushed to market (for what reason, I still don’t know) and it is a half-baked system. As of me writing this, the 3DS is still missing the following: An internet browser, Virtual Console support, and DSiWare support. Also, the launch line-up was, umm, lackluster. Street Fighter IV and Ghost Recon may be the only games right now worth playing on it. Nintendo should have released this console on the same day the Ocarina of Time remake was done, or packaged in Pilot Wings Resort as a free game, like Wii Sports, and then this console would have sold like gangbusters. Give it until this fall, and the 3DS will be in a lot more hands once decent games for it come out.
2. Speaking of consoles, the Kinect seems to me as a waste of time and money, right now. This thing was released on November 4th, and as of May only 25 games exist for this add-on, and 17 of them are sports, dance/fitness related. So far, it seems like that is all we have to look forward to from this item, Dance games and workout simulators. At my local Gamestop, I counted 10 used Kinects just hanging from the sales wall, waiting to be bought. My only guess why there wasn’t more is because the wall didn’t have any more space on it, but I am sure there was more in the back. Listen, I am all for game innovation, but motion control gaming is becoming a slight fad, like 3D TVs. The best games I have played in the last 4 months (Dragon Age 2, Dead Space 2, Dissidia 2) have all used standard controllers. The worst thing is the Microsoft has yet to announce any new games for this system. It’s like they are personally giving up on it. I realize it was the fastest selling console ever, but I wonder how many people kept the damn thing or were still using it after two months. Dear Microsoft: support games, not peripherals.
3. The Playstation Move is a failure in my view. First off, the cost of entry is expensive as hell.It costs $210 for a two-player set with one game, barring that one already has a $300 PS3 in their home. You know what you can get for $210? A New Wii, two-players worth of controls, and an extra game. Hey, and the Wii has a MUCH larger library of games with motion-control specific games, where as most of the Move games are Motion control OPTIONAL. This means their perfectly fine games without motion controls (MAG, Killzone 3, Sly Cooper Collection), but Sony wants you to feel justified for spending an inordinate amount of money on this add-on. Fair enough, since the entire collection of Move-specific games are Wii copies anyways. Dear Sony: Support games, not over-priced peripherals. Hell, just get the PSN system to NOT FAIL at every step of he way.
4. I love American Football (been a Steeler’s fan since I was 8), but nothing pisses me off more than a sports strike. I used to love the NHL, but when they struck for what seemed like years, I lost ALL interest. I haven’t watched an NHL game in going on a decade and I have no regrets. I may just do the same if the NFL teams don’t play this year. You know what the league minimum of the NFL is? $300,000! Since a football season is up to, and including the start of training day, about 7 months, that means that even a rookie player makes about $42,000 A MONTH for one season. The average American makes that a YEAR, according to the 2006 GDP. Here’s something else to boggle the calculator, the average NFL player makes 1.2-1.5 million dollars a season. Michael Vick, before he became an animal abusing douchebag, made 25 million a season, making him one of the highest paid athletes in the world. So, I think we can all agree, that when the players want to strike because they “aren’t getting paid enough to play two more games”, it screams ludicrous greed to me.
Don’t get me wrong; I think players deserve to be compensated for their time, but a strike? Gimme a break! At what pay ratio is it no longer the “love of the game” and it becomes “I am already making money hand-over-fist for throwing and catching a ball or blocking/tackling pretty well, I deserve thousands more!” It’s ridiculous to me. Sports athletes are overpaid, they know it, I know it, the whole damn world knows it, and yet we allow these strikes to happen.
SPOILERS OF THE HARRY POTTER SERIES
5. My wife forced me to watch every Harry Potter movie made thus far so I can take her to the premiere of Deathly Hallows, Part Two and appreciate it. After watching every single one in secession, I have only one thought: I still don’t care. What the hell is the big deal with these movies/books? Yes, I am all for character development and I can appreciate it, but why is it every one of these 2 ½ hour movies dedicates 2 of those hours JUST TOWARDS CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. All of the “good” parts of Harry Potter can be described in five words: first and last fifteen minutes. The rest in-between is tween middle-high school drama about “who likes who” and how unfair is this teacher!” and “even though he has killed people,is Voldermort real?” Am I the only one that saw Dumbledore being killed from, like, the first book on? These books follow the bare-bones basic archetypal models established years ago be Carl Jung almost to a fault. As a matter of fact, almost every archetype and every step of Jung’s “The Hero’s journey” is followed here, and maybe that’s why the books did so well, because they are formulaic and in plain enough English even kids can understand them. It’s not that I don’t think the movies are terrible, I just think they are woefully predictable. Heck, I enjoyed the first Deathly Hallows, for whatever that is worth. I actually want to see the second. As for reading the books, no thank you, sir.
SPOILERS END HERE
And so does my ammo count.
I have a lot of blog ideas that have been on my mind, so I’m just going to hit you with several at once, since none of them are especially important long enough to be full blogs.
1. A large amount of tech journalists are claiming that the 3DS will be a failure because the older PSP is currently outselling it and some people hate the concept of a 3D screen. Here, literally Game Design 101 (as in, this was a topic in my first Game Design class): Consoles don’t win console wars, games do. The 3DO, though powerful as can be, failed because of a lack of games and developer support. The Dreamcast was years ahead of it’s time with features we take for granted today: Online play, DLC, freaking’ voice chat in game! But, alas, Sega fu**ed over their third party developers by almost secretly releasing the Dreamcast only two years after the Sega Saturn, making third party developers sick of Sega’s constantly changing console BS and moving on to other places, like Sony and their PS2. As I said a couple months ago, the regular DS has been outselling the PSP year after year by almost double because it has a good library. This is taking into account that the PSP is twice as powerful as the DS.
Point made simple, the 3DS is a good console, but it was rushed to market (for what reason, I still don’t know) and it is a half-baked system. As of me writing this, the 3DS is still missing the following: An internet browser, Virtual Console support, and DSiWare support. Also, the launch line-up was, umm, lackluster. Street Fighter IV and Ghost Recon may be the only games right now worth playing on it. Nintendo should have released this console on the same day the Ocarina of Time remake was done, or packaged in Pilot Wings Resort as a free game, like Wii Sports, and then this console would have sold like gangbusters. Give it until this fall, and the 3DS will be in a lot more hands once decent games for it come out.
2. Speaking of consoles, the Kinect seems to me as a waste of time and money, right now. This thing was released on November 4th, and as of May only 25 games exist for this add-on, and 17 of them are sports, dance/fitness related. So far, it seems like that is all we have to look forward to from this item, Dance games and workout simulators. At my local Gamestop, I counted 10 used Kinects just hanging from the sales wall, waiting to be bought. My only guess why there wasn’t more is because the wall didn’t have any more space on it, but I am sure there was more in the back. Listen, I am all for game innovation, but motion control gaming is becoming a slight fad, like 3D TVs. The best games I have played in the last 4 months (Dragon Age 2, Dead Space 2, Dissidia 2) have all used standard controllers. The worst thing is the Microsoft has yet to announce any new games for this system. It’s like they are personally giving up on it. I realize it was the fastest selling console ever, but I wonder how many people kept the damn thing or were still using it after two months. Dear Microsoft: support games, not peripherals.
3. The Playstation Move is a failure in my view. First off, the cost of entry is expensive as hell.It costs $210 for a two-player set with one game, barring that one already has a $300 PS3 in their home. You know what you can get for $210? A New Wii, two-players worth of controls, and an extra game. Hey, and the Wii has a MUCH larger library of games with motion-control specific games, where as most of the Move games are Motion control OPTIONAL. This means their perfectly fine games without motion controls (MAG, Killzone 3, Sly Cooper Collection), but Sony wants you to feel justified for spending an inordinate amount of money on this add-on. Fair enough, since the entire collection of Move-specific games are Wii copies anyways. Dear Sony: Support games, not over-priced peripherals. Hell, just get the PSN system to NOT FAIL at every step of he way.
4. I love American Football (been a Steeler’s fan since I was 8), but nothing pisses me off more than a sports strike. I used to love the NHL, but when they struck for what seemed like years, I lost ALL interest. I haven’t watched an NHL game in going on a decade and I have no regrets. I may just do the same if the NFL teams don’t play this year. You know what the league minimum of the NFL is? $300,000! Since a football season is up to, and including the start of training day, about 7 months, that means that even a rookie player makes about $42,000 A MONTH for one season. The average American makes that a YEAR, according to the 2006 GDP. Here’s something else to boggle the calculator, the average NFL player makes 1.2-1.5 million dollars a season. Michael Vick, before he became an animal abusing douchebag, made 25 million a season, making him one of the highest paid athletes in the world. So, I think we can all agree, that when the players want to strike because they “aren’t getting paid enough to play two more games”, it screams ludicrous greed to me.
Don’t get me wrong; I think players deserve to be compensated for their time, but a strike? Gimme a break! At what pay ratio is it no longer the “love of the game” and it becomes “I am already making money hand-over-fist for throwing and catching a ball or blocking/tackling pretty well, I deserve thousands more!” It’s ridiculous to me. Sports athletes are overpaid, they know it, I know it, the whole damn world knows it, and yet we allow these strikes to happen.
SPOILERS OF THE HARRY POTTER SERIES
5. My wife forced me to watch every Harry Potter movie made thus far so I can take her to the premiere of Deathly Hallows, Part Two and appreciate it. After watching every single one in secession, I have only one thought: I still don’t care. What the hell is the big deal with these movies/books? Yes, I am all for character development and I can appreciate it, but why is it every one of these 2 ½ hour movies dedicates 2 of those hours JUST TOWARDS CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. All of the “good” parts of Harry Potter can be described in five words: first and last fifteen minutes. The rest in-between is tween middle-high school drama about “who likes who” and how unfair is this teacher!” and “even though he has killed people,is Voldermort real?” Am I the only one that saw Dumbledore being killed from, like, the first book on? These books follow the bare-bones basic archetypal models established years ago be Carl Jung almost to a fault. As a matter of fact, almost every archetype and every step of Jung’s “The Hero’s journey” is followed here, and maybe that’s why the books did so well, because they are formulaic and in plain enough English even kids can understand them. It’s not that I don’t think the movies are terrible, I just think they are woefully predictable. Heck, I enjoyed the first Deathly Hallows, for whatever that is worth. I actually want to see the second. As for reading the books, no thank you, sir.
SPOILERS END HERE
And so does my ammo count.
Friday, May 6, 2011
Nook Color is pretty nice for exactly what I want from it.
So you probably know about the Barnes and Noble Nook Color. It's an E-reader with an LCD screen instead of e-ink. You may be saying to yourself, "that just sounds like a small tablet," and you'd be pretty correct! It's OS is (as of this April) 2.2 Android "Froyo" that has what is essentially a skin layered over it that makes it more distinctly an E-reader. The latest update to 2.2 also included the addition of a Nook Apps store, as well as the addition of Flash support for the browser. All around, it's a functional tablet that is specifically catered for people who are going to use it to read.
I'm finding that I'm enjoying reading on it, but I do have a few gripes. When reading a book on the NC, you have many formatting options with regard to text size, background color, line spacing and so on. I'm finding that I prefer the publishers default settings on these things, and so I try to keep it set on those. However, occasionally the settings will actually reset back to the customizable option, which throws off my page number where I left off. Thankfully, there is a bookmarking function, because otherwise I'd keep losing my page. This reset typically occurs when I turn the device FULLY off, as it spends most of it's time in a sort of sleep mode, this doesn't cause the problem to happen. I get the feeling that turning it FULLY off is something B&N doesn't intend for you to do very often, as the sleep mode is essentially off/hibernating, but still it's annoying.
I found this out because I learned that in order to get photos that I download to be available to use as a wallpaper image, I need to power it down completely, which is also a big hassle. I don't know why it's so buggy like this, it seems like a simple error to fix.
The Nook Apps store isn't my favorite. Mostly because B&N is doing their own app store just because they don't want anyone to think of the NC as a tablet. They want to keep it an E-reader, and so the apps that they have chosen to release to their store are specifically picked to make sure that they don't overshadow the "main function" of the NC. This seems strange to me that they don't embrace the full Android market, just because they want to keep the NC as a reader. Not to mention that Angry Birds (one of the only games in the 140 or so Nook Apps they've released) costs 3 bucks whereas it's free in the standard Android Market. The three dollars couldn't possibly be the cost of porting the game to the NC's specific 2.2 skin, right?
All that griping said, I still really love the damn thing! Reading is very pleasant on it. Not to mention that because it is a back-lit LCD, I don't need to have a lamp on to read in the dark! This is perfect for laying in bed whilst my lady is asleep. And now that the browser has flash, it's very functional for reading blogs and news that have embedded videos (not to mention all the porn sites that it's just opened up for viewing.) And because of the size of the screen, the soft keyboard is REALLY COMFORTABLE to type on when holding the NC in the upright position. Your two thumbs can go to town just like on a full keyboard Blackberry. I also shelled out the 3 bucks for Angry Birds, just to see how good it runs, and it's nice and smooth. No jitters, no stutters. The Pulse news app is really nice too, very easy to read, and that one is free!
The thing is great. Go play with a demo model in the store and you'll see what I mean. And if you don't like it, still get one, as you can just root it and boot Android 3.0 Honeycomb on it!
I'm finding that I'm enjoying reading on it, but I do have a few gripes. When reading a book on the NC, you have many formatting options with regard to text size, background color, line spacing and so on. I'm finding that I prefer the publishers default settings on these things, and so I try to keep it set on those. However, occasionally the settings will actually reset back to the customizable option, which throws off my page number where I left off. Thankfully, there is a bookmarking function, because otherwise I'd keep losing my page. This reset typically occurs when I turn the device FULLY off, as it spends most of it's time in a sort of sleep mode, this doesn't cause the problem to happen. I get the feeling that turning it FULLY off is something B&N doesn't intend for you to do very often, as the sleep mode is essentially off/hibernating, but still it's annoying.
I found this out because I learned that in order to get photos that I download to be available to use as a wallpaper image, I need to power it down completely, which is also a big hassle. I don't know why it's so buggy like this, it seems like a simple error to fix.
The Nook Apps store isn't my favorite. Mostly because B&N is doing their own app store just because they don't want anyone to think of the NC as a tablet. They want to keep it an E-reader, and so the apps that they have chosen to release to their store are specifically picked to make sure that they don't overshadow the "main function" of the NC. This seems strange to me that they don't embrace the full Android market, just because they want to keep the NC as a reader. Not to mention that Angry Birds (one of the only games in the 140 or so Nook Apps they've released) costs 3 bucks whereas it's free in the standard Android Market. The three dollars couldn't possibly be the cost of porting the game to the NC's specific 2.2 skin, right?
All that griping said, I still really love the damn thing! Reading is very pleasant on it. Not to mention that because it is a back-lit LCD, I don't need to have a lamp on to read in the dark! This is perfect for laying in bed whilst my lady is asleep. And now that the browser has flash, it's very functional for reading blogs and news that have embedded videos (not to mention all the porn sites that it's just opened up for viewing.) And because of the size of the screen, the soft keyboard is REALLY COMFORTABLE to type on when holding the NC in the upright position. Your two thumbs can go to town just like on a full keyboard Blackberry. I also shelled out the 3 bucks for Angry Birds, just to see how good it runs, and it's nice and smooth. No jitters, no stutters. The Pulse news app is really nice too, very easy to read, and that one is free!
The thing is great. Go play with a demo model in the store and you'll see what I mean. And if you don't like it, still get one, as you can just root it and boot Android 3.0 Honeycomb on it!
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Transformers, not as great as you may remember
My apologies for my hiatus last month. You see, last month my class was Game Design and Development Analysis, which was an examination of videos and media in a very dissected manner. In short, my entire class consists of writing games reviews for a month straight. For once, I had a class that made writing game reviews or any reviews a form of graded torture. Ok, it wasn’t that bad, but it definitely restricted my free time of playing the games let alone speaking of them.
So, onward and upward, my first thoughts to be posted in a while is that American animation have become stagnated. Don’t get me wrong I love and watch The Simpsons on a regular and almost sadistic basis; the reason is because I find it hilarious and all shows lately seem to be a copy of it. South Park deserves honorable mention for keeping the ideas fresh while maintain their rooted animation style and Archer, well, the dialogue in Archer is the glue that holds the show together, and Jon H. Benjamin is awesome for this role. But when it comes to pure hand-drawn, fluid animation, well, the last thing I have seen that was any sort of good was the Secret of Kells, and the story for that felt only ok for me.
I believe I have made it no secret that I love Anime. Yes, pure Japanese Animation, preferably with subtitles and the original Japanese voice actor’s voices. Not bad anime, either, that good stuff. I realize when I say anime, the first thought that comes to many American’s minds are Dragon Ball Z, Pokemon, and Bleach (shudder). That seems likely, since those are those are the most prevalent ones on TV. The stuff I am talking about though is Neon Genesis Evangelion, FullMetal Alchemist: Brotherhood, Cowboy Bebop, Outlaw Star, Gundam Wing, and to a lesser extent even Trigun. You know what these series have? Hand-drawn animation with fluid action scenes and most of all, deep, emotionally involving storylines and mythic stories that force that continuously capture my imagination.
Today though, kids, we are talking about Two specific animated shows: Transformers and Robotech. Ok, that’s kind of a lie, not Robotech but Macross, if one was to be proper. Let me explain…
The Robotech series is an amalgam of 3 separate anime series, because for some reason the standard anime length of 26 episodes was not enough for syndication in the USA. So, we have Macross, Calvary Southern Cross, and Genesis Climber MOSPEADA all shoehorned into one saga. On paper, I’m sure this made a ton of sense, but in practice, it was dumb as hell, as far I thought. The only one worth watching is the first 36 episodes, known as Macross. Ok, on to Transformers.
Transformers is a Saturday Morning Sci-fi cartoon about two robot races in a civil war with each other over, I dunno, dominance? Transformers seems more relative a series to the US public, so my explanation will end at, they are robots on earth, in disguise, and can transform into vehicles, animals, or dinosaurs, depending on circumstances. They fight the Decepticons, who are essentially the same thing except evil. Classic good vs. evil story with transforming robots, which was based on a toy line that did the same.
And you know what, Macross is light –years better, and somehow gets lees attention. Macross is the story f humans finding some kind of otherworldly huge space battleship that crash lands on an island. No aliens are present, so the humans reverse engineer the technology to re-fit the battleship. The also create Valkyrie jets, which are based off of the real F-14 Tomcats, and they can also transform. They all transforms in giant gun wielding mecha, or a halfway between the design called Gerwalk/Guardian modes. So, the original aliens that where chasing this giant battleship warp in and begin attacking Earth. Series= Start.
What makes Macross better? The mecha designs for one. Look at these pictures of Optimus Prime pre and post transformation:
And now look at the transformation scheme of a Valkyrie from Fighter to Gerwalk to Battroid mode:
Look at the transformation of the Valkeyrie! The thrusters become the machs “legs”. The cockpit of the fighter eventually becomes covered by a large armor plating for the pilot. Even the gun pod has a definite place where it came from, the under carriage of the fighter. What about Optimus? How about that trailer behind him? Gone. You see, in the series of Transformer’s, even n the recent movies, Optimus’ trailer disappeared into thin air. It sometimes even appeared when he transformed right back on him. That is what I am getting at here. Please, even if you have profound nostalgia of watching the show, I implore to go watch Generation One (1984-1991) of Transformers. Seriously, it plays regularly on a Disney channel called Hub. My wife and I watch it sometimes and you know what? We laugh our asses off! The show’s premise revolves around jokes only a ten year old could laugh at, and the mythology involved with the show was a constant back and forth of Autbots and Decipticons barking and shooting at each other, with very little effect to one another. Macross? Go watch Macross on Netflix (remember, the first 36 episodes of Robotech). Do yourself a favor; don’t get attached to any characters either.
OK: Spoiler warning here: Since the series is pushing 30 years old, I am going to make some parallels here. Three-fourths through Macross, Earth is destroyed. And I don’t mean that in some sort of metaphorically way. I mean every 90% of the entire human race and most of the flora and fauna was completely and utterly destroyed. Even when the SDF-1 Macross (the name of that there battleship) destroys the entire alien race orbiting Earth, the return to Earth as the most somber thing. I have ever seen in a cartoon.
What did Transformer’s have that Macross didn’t have? Umm….more characters and model designs. Don’t get me wrong, I liked Transformers growing up and cold think of nothing better. But seriously, my problem is Transformers get so much more attention because it was based off a popular toy line. Macross had toys, but they were nowhere near as popular in this country as opposed to Japan.
I want a proper Macross Movie I am tired of this:
What in the hell is that even? I asked my wife, who had a teacher in one of her compter animation classes that assisted in making the first Transformer's movie (plug: Full Sail doesn't f**k around when it comes to staffing). You know how that thing up there becomes a robot to a jet? In short, it technically DOESN'T!!! Watch the new version of Starscream transform, then do it in slow motion. Some of a Transformers' mass is purposefully hidden because the mecha design is so complex that it technically doesn't make sense. The story is just not there, even by the cartoon's standards. The story of both movies revolve around Shia LeBouf life and how he coups with giant robots living in his world. That's crap. The cartoons where about civil war between two completely dissenting groups and Earth just happens to be a new battlefield.
So yes, I want a Macross movie, because Macross has a very simple story laid out. F-14 Tomcats Jets (or retcon them to F-22 Raptors, like the Starscream, I don't care) that turn into mecha fighting an alien force bent on destroying Earth, for no better reason than they are afraid of the effect of human culture on their military super machine. BOOM! Make that crap! The movie writes itself!
So, if anyone from Hollywood is looking to make a retreaded Saturday morning cartoon movie in live action, as seems to be the trend so far, then somebody get on that yesterday. Here are the facts of Saturday Morning Cartoon remakes I stand behind:
-I don't want a Thundercats movie. Thundercats sucked. It always did.
-I don't want a Master's of the Universe Movie. I mean, really, do you really want a damn Heman movie? We got one of those in the 80's. It wasn't good then, it's wouldn't be better now.
-We already got a G.I. Joe movie. It wasn't the worst thing in the world, but I am so glad i didn't pay for movie tickets to see it.
-We already have FOUR Teenage mutant Ninja Turtles movies. That'll be quite enough, thank you.
Now yes, I know Transformers was anime, it being animated in Japan, but every thing else about it (writing, production) was US made, which might explain the overall episode to episode story being bad. But Macross, genius....
Please writers and directors, stop looking in this countries past for material and looks toward the East for much more powerful stuff. Macross predates Transformers by even two years, and for my money, I would rather say the trailers alone for this movie would attract more people to it than Dark of the Moon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)