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!!!
Sunday, October 9, 2011
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?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)