Alrighty then. So, I've gotten off of my tuchas and started the Mass Effect review. No word of a lie. It is in progress. I swear. Next up will be another review coming...not sure if I'll give the treatment to Metal Gear Solid 4, Hunter The Recking: Wayward or if it will be something else entirely. Maybe I'll do Darkstar One? We'll see.
Then after that I will - I promise - get onto finishing No More Heroes so that I can review it.
I swear on Buster's ashes.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Gem Number Next
So I finally had time to sit down with Bladestorm: The Hundred Years war. I've had it since just after Christmas, but I haven't had the time due mostly in part to a) getting accustomed to my new job and b) buying it in the middle of Darkstar One (which I highly recommend, by the way).
Bladestorm: The Hundred Years War is an original IP in a similar vein as Dynasty Warriors. However, the similarities end at embellished history and melee combat. You play the role of a mercenary who participates in real and fictional battles during the Hundred Years War (which, if I remember right, was 113 or 114 years long). You'll meet real and fictional characters including The Black Prince (Prince Edward of England - not to be confused with Edward II, the son of Edward I, aka Longshanks) and St. Joan of Arc while kicking ass in the name of whatever currency is in fashion at the time.
Combat is very different in that you control ranged, melee and cavalry support units. However, you need to unlock different books which you'll find in battle or purchase to use these units. Further, units are upgradable. Or you can choose to go it alone, although that isn't recommended. Hell, you'll get beaten like a baby fur seal in the off-season.
Each unit and equipment type also has special attacks associated with them, so it's worthwhile exploring the different units. Plus, there's a balancing act between different equipment types and different units, and some of the unit special skills actually mitigate some of these deficiencies.
As far as I can tell, the game is a match of capturing control points, but there are "special requests" that you can complete. These are usually a matter of beating certain officers or a fetch job of some sort.
So far, I'm finding the difficulty is starting to curve upwards somewhat steeply, so there's either something I'm missing or I'm rushing a little too hard. Either way, the game is a lot deeper than the "professionals" laid it out to be.
I've also started to play through some of my PS2 games. I finished Hunter The Reckoning Wayward. So far, best game structure of the series, but the graphics and controls are utter garbage compared to the XBox games. This seems more to do with the deficiencies of the PS2 controller, but it could also be that the devs dicked the controls to push the game out sooner. That is a possibility.
I've also played the PS2 port of No One Lives Forever. So far, it's alright. The dialogue is right out of Black Adder and Monty Python, though, so it adds a great touch of British Humour.
In truth, I've played a little bit of all of my PS2 games; Final Fantasy X, Final Fantasy XII, NOLF, Taito Legends 2, Killzone, and HTR: Wayward. Final Fantasy X, from what I've played, is same crap different day - cool cutscenes, humdrum combat reminiscent of the extremely overrated Final Fantasy VII. Final Fantasy XII, however...that's looking to show some huge promise. Taito Legends 2 is an awesome compilation with a terrible menu interface that's about as user-friendly as a beartrap closed on your ankle and Killzone really is pretty mediocre. I can't believe Sony had the chutzpa to sell that dreck as a Halo-killer, especially since Halo was no longer the shooter to beat by that time. Halo 2 was, and it's hardly a game that requires much talent to beat, at least insofar as the singleplayer campaign was concerned.
Next up, I want to find the PS2 port of Deus Ex as I hear that it's quite competent.
After Bladestorm, I'm probably going to get to work on my PS3 backlog. I need to finish Little Big Planet and Resistance 1 and 2. After that, I'll take on Killzone. I know Killzone 2 is good; the first 5 minutes of that were infinitely better than the first 5 minutes of Killzone 1, and I'm not just referring to the visuals and horrid audio, but if one can, it's better to tackle a series in proper order. Couldn't be helped with Hunter: The Reckoning.
Bladestorm: The Hundred Years War is an original IP in a similar vein as Dynasty Warriors. However, the similarities end at embellished history and melee combat. You play the role of a mercenary who participates in real and fictional battles during the Hundred Years War (which, if I remember right, was 113 or 114 years long). You'll meet real and fictional characters including The Black Prince (Prince Edward of England - not to be confused with Edward II, the son of Edward I, aka Longshanks) and St. Joan of Arc while kicking ass in the name of whatever currency is in fashion at the time.
Combat is very different in that you control ranged, melee and cavalry support units. However, you need to unlock different books which you'll find in battle or purchase to use these units. Further, units are upgradable. Or you can choose to go it alone, although that isn't recommended. Hell, you'll get beaten like a baby fur seal in the off-season.
Each unit and equipment type also has special attacks associated with them, so it's worthwhile exploring the different units. Plus, there's a balancing act between different equipment types and different units, and some of the unit special skills actually mitigate some of these deficiencies.
As far as I can tell, the game is a match of capturing control points, but there are "special requests" that you can complete. These are usually a matter of beating certain officers or a fetch job of some sort.
So far, I'm finding the difficulty is starting to curve upwards somewhat steeply, so there's either something I'm missing or I'm rushing a little too hard. Either way, the game is a lot deeper than the "professionals" laid it out to be.
I've also started to play through some of my PS2 games. I finished Hunter The Reckoning Wayward. So far, best game structure of the series, but the graphics and controls are utter garbage compared to the XBox games. This seems more to do with the deficiencies of the PS2 controller, but it could also be that the devs dicked the controls to push the game out sooner. That is a possibility.
I've also played the PS2 port of No One Lives Forever. So far, it's alright. The dialogue is right out of Black Adder and Monty Python, though, so it adds a great touch of British Humour.
In truth, I've played a little bit of all of my PS2 games; Final Fantasy X, Final Fantasy XII, NOLF, Taito Legends 2, Killzone, and HTR: Wayward. Final Fantasy X, from what I've played, is same crap different day - cool cutscenes, humdrum combat reminiscent of the extremely overrated Final Fantasy VII. Final Fantasy XII, however...that's looking to show some huge promise. Taito Legends 2 is an awesome compilation with a terrible menu interface that's about as user-friendly as a beartrap closed on your ankle and Killzone really is pretty mediocre. I can't believe Sony had the chutzpa to sell that dreck as a Halo-killer, especially since Halo was no longer the shooter to beat by that time. Halo 2 was, and it's hardly a game that requires much talent to beat, at least insofar as the singleplayer campaign was concerned.
Next up, I want to find the PS2 port of Deus Ex as I hear that it's quite competent.
After Bladestorm, I'm probably going to get to work on my PS3 backlog. I need to finish Little Big Planet and Resistance 1 and 2. After that, I'll take on Killzone. I know Killzone 2 is good; the first 5 minutes of that were infinitely better than the first 5 minutes of Killzone 1, and I'm not just referring to the visuals and horrid audio, but if one can, it's better to tackle a series in proper order. Couldn't be helped with Hunter: The Reckoning.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Yeah. Right. About that.
Right, I just more or less ripped the design of Metal Gear Solid 4 a new one and haven't reviewed Mass Effect yet.
Okay, here's why: The rippage of MGS4 was a blitzkrieg on crappy story telling (and seemingly unfocused). This is because I can't give the game a fair review due to my biases against the style of storytelling...and the unnecessary amount of it. I do not care for soap operas. No, this is not a disclaimer; I may write an actual review of MGS 4. You can like it or not. But I think it's about time I lay my biases bare, because I will call out stupid components/mechanics of games when I see them.
And, just so you all know, I was finally able to grab a PS2 with FF X and XII. Not expecting to necessarily enjoy X a lot, but XII looks extremely promising (and is the first FF I've been looking forward to since VII...and that was quite a disappointment to me). I alos got Hunter The Reckoning: Wayward, so the trilogy is now complete. Plus a few other goodies, including NOLF. Don't know how the gameplay will turn out, but the dialogue's right out of Black Adder and Fawlty Towers, so at least the humour looks promising.
Being that I'm finding a little more time to do things in, I will hopefully have the ME review up in the coming weeks. Need to beat the game again...I've kind of forgotten most of it other than that the series rips off Alistair Reynolds' Revelation Space series (although the two sidestories have so far been better than the main trilogy).
Anyway, keep safe and see you all soon.
Okay, here's why: The rippage of MGS4 was a blitzkrieg on crappy story telling (and seemingly unfocused). This is because I can't give the game a fair review due to my biases against the style of storytelling...and the unnecessary amount of it. I do not care for soap operas. No, this is not a disclaimer; I may write an actual review of MGS 4. You can like it or not. But I think it's about time I lay my biases bare, because I will call out stupid components/mechanics of games when I see them.
And, just so you all know, I was finally able to grab a PS2 with FF X and XII. Not expecting to necessarily enjoy X a lot, but XII looks extremely promising (and is the first FF I've been looking forward to since VII...and that was quite a disappointment to me). I alos got Hunter The Reckoning: Wayward, so the trilogy is now complete. Plus a few other goodies, including NOLF. Don't know how the gameplay will turn out, but the dialogue's right out of Black Adder and Fawlty Towers, so at least the humour looks promising.
Being that I'm finding a little more time to do things in, I will hopefully have the ME review up in the coming weeks. Need to beat the game again...I've kind of forgotten most of it other than that the series rips off Alistair Reynolds' Revelation Space series (although the two sidestories have so far been better than the main trilogy).
Anyway, keep safe and see you all soon.
Metal Gear Solid 4 Under My Belt
Okay, now before I start, let me say this: MGS fanatics, walk away. Now. What I have to say will make you very upset.
I have played several of the Metal Gear games from the NES up until today. Beaten most of the ones that I've played except for the original MGS. It isn't that I don't care for the graphics so much as the gameplay is a little too overly convoluted and, like every game in the MGS series, far too much value on story. And Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots is no different.
Visually, it's stunning in many details, although I notice frequent framerate drops, and many of the stealth actions of the previous games are...dumbed down. Not to mention that the whole sneak-through-a-base thing is more or less paid lip service and the key-anditem-hunting game that actually helped make the series enjoyable is gone (mind you, I haven't played Snake Eater yet), and instead feels more like a fratboy actioner with firepower on demand.
However, the game is a lot of fun, when you're playing it. When you're not playing it, it's because you're watching a 20-30 minute cutscene depicting cool stuff that you aren't actually doing (well...for the mostpart...won't spoil the one cool thing you do actually get to do). Many of the boss fights are by the numbers - mostly because it's little different than any other MGS game.
Now, luckily, you can skip the cutscenes, but then you don't know what the hell is going on. And if you don't have time to screw around, you miss the whole point of Kojima's alleged masterpiece (and yet I've read Tom Clancy books more complex).
The shooting is rock solid, although I found the stealth left much to be desired. While the weapons on demand was a pretty cool feature, it felt unnecessary, especially when a lot of the guns essentially did the same thing and it was more or less a matter of picking your favourite model.
I think that the idea of aging Snake was pointless. I realise that it is supposed to add another dimension of depth, but it really didn't. The stamina bar and how it was used, however, did. It certainly helped increase the tension in a boss fight or two.
As far as level design goes, all of the stereotypical locales are there, plus a nod to past games. This really did not impress me, although it may be because I've read and experienced too many modern-day techno-thrillers. However, desert, jungle, tundra...it kinda sounds like a Ghost Recon game.
In short, as a storytelling vehicle, Metal Gear Solid 4 is a great fan service, but a slap in the face to the average gamer. It is artificially lengthened by way of semi-interactive cutscenes that rarely progress the story so much as try to make characters look cool and throw in what seem to be contrived emotional bonds (e.g. token romance side-storylines). This adds a level of superficiality that really denegrates the game as a game. I realise some people might view it as art...but if it is, it's little more than David with a dress and cockring. As offensive as that sounds, the whole point is that it's dressed up for the sake of dressing it up; underneath, it's still the Statue of David, and it doesn't need those things - especially when they're gaudy and unnecessary. i.e., the game underneath is excellent, you just have to remove the fluffy excrement piled on top by a misguided director. At least he was kind enough to give you the tools to get around them.
So, I sincerely hope that the next Metal Gear game incorporates story that you can read instead of needing to extrapolate it from deliberately paced cutscenes. It needs to be told more efficiently, or at the least, the resources need to be on hand in an efficient manner in the game. Because if I play MGS4 again, I'll be skipping those cutscenes; they're just too long for people with lives.
I have played several of the Metal Gear games from the NES up until today. Beaten most of the ones that I've played except for the original MGS. It isn't that I don't care for the graphics so much as the gameplay is a little too overly convoluted and, like every game in the MGS series, far too much value on story. And Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots is no different.
Visually, it's stunning in many details, although I notice frequent framerate drops, and many of the stealth actions of the previous games are...dumbed down. Not to mention that the whole sneak-through-a-base thing is more or less paid lip service and the key-anditem-hunting game that actually helped make the series enjoyable is gone (mind you, I haven't played Snake Eater yet), and instead feels more like a fratboy actioner with firepower on demand.
However, the game is a lot of fun, when you're playing it. When you're not playing it, it's because you're watching a 20-30 minute cutscene depicting cool stuff that you aren't actually doing (well...for the mostpart...won't spoil the one cool thing you do actually get to do). Many of the boss fights are by the numbers - mostly because it's little different than any other MGS game.
Now, luckily, you can skip the cutscenes, but then you don't know what the hell is going on. And if you don't have time to screw around, you miss the whole point of Kojima's alleged masterpiece (and yet I've read Tom Clancy books more complex).
The shooting is rock solid, although I found the stealth left much to be desired. While the weapons on demand was a pretty cool feature, it felt unnecessary, especially when a lot of the guns essentially did the same thing and it was more or less a matter of picking your favourite model.
I think that the idea of aging Snake was pointless. I realise that it is supposed to add another dimension of depth, but it really didn't. The stamina bar and how it was used, however, did. It certainly helped increase the tension in a boss fight or two.
As far as level design goes, all of the stereotypical locales are there, plus a nod to past games. This really did not impress me, although it may be because I've read and experienced too many modern-day techno-thrillers. However, desert, jungle, tundra...it kinda sounds like a Ghost Recon game.
In short, as a storytelling vehicle, Metal Gear Solid 4 is a great fan service, but a slap in the face to the average gamer. It is artificially lengthened by way of semi-interactive cutscenes that rarely progress the story so much as try to make characters look cool and throw in what seem to be contrived emotional bonds (e.g. token romance side-storylines). This adds a level of superficiality that really denegrates the game as a game. I realise some people might view it as art...but if it is, it's little more than David with a dress and cockring. As offensive as that sounds, the whole point is that it's dressed up for the sake of dressing it up; underneath, it's still the Statue of David, and it doesn't need those things - especially when they're gaudy and unnecessary. i.e., the game underneath is excellent, you just have to remove the fluffy excrement piled on top by a misguided director. At least he was kind enough to give you the tools to get around them.
So, I sincerely hope that the next Metal Gear game incorporates story that you can read instead of needing to extrapolate it from deliberately paced cutscenes. It needs to be told more efficiently, or at the least, the resources need to be on hand in an efficient manner in the game. Because if I play MGS4 again, I'll be skipping those cutscenes; they're just too long for people with lives.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Wow, It's Been A Long Time. And Oh...I Guess I Owe You Guys An Apology
Hey guys, it's been...what, almost three months, eh? Yeah, I kind of got a job working for a computer company called Canada Computers. I sold some stuff, helped customers through system builds, it was fun times. Now it's over. On the bright side, I have more time for Thrown Controllers again...so I guess I owe you all a review...I'll get around to Mass Effect, soon. I promise. I've already beaten it anyway.
So, that said, I guess it's time for an update. As you all know, I'm a huge fan of Fallout: New Vegas. So, I guess I should let you in on some opinions about the expansions.
Okay, so, the first one, Dead Money: Dead Money pissed a lot of people off, I can see. Probably because it was pretty GD hard. I actually rather enjoyed it because it was the only challenge I was pretty much getting without playing with the difficulty settings. The add-on was pretty good, but to be frank, the new waepons and whatnot were pretty mediocre.
Up next is Honest Hearts. What can I say about HH? Well, for starters, it's too short. It's maybe about 2 hours long, and if you finish it, it pretty much dries up the sidequests right then and there. Unlike DM, you can go back. Also, the weapons and items you get from HH are very, very awesome. A little too awesome, but great nonetheless.
Old World Blues is pretty much the best of the bunch. Not only because it's not two hours long, but it has an interesting story and most of the goodies are VERY awesome. HH awesome, but you'll actually need the firepower.
And finally, Lonesome Road. Lonesome Road is okay. It falls somewhere between DM and HH...more towards HH. There are some overly cheap encounters, and I really find that most of the equipment is inadequate for most of the later encounters.
Now, as an aside, I did also DL the Gunrunners' Arsenal Pack, and I have to say...It's an essential. It really is. Some of the stuff is just gear that Fallout players need to have, like the Bozar. I'm not saying it's amazing, just, you know, for continuity's sake (Fallout 2 fans know what I'm talking about).
The expansions themselves are also essential for people who care about loose ends; the expansions will do exactly that. Not sayin' which loose ends, but unlike Fallout 3, NV has far more loose ends to tie. If you have the game and the cash to burn, it can't do too much harm; it's another 20 or so hours of play. On the other hand, if you don't have the game, wait until the Game of the Year Ed. comes out; it's much better value.
So, what's new: Well, I caved and bought a PS3. I currently have Metal Gear Solid 4, Little Big Planet and the first two Resistance games.
I like MGS4 quite a bit. While still an inferior stealth title to Hitman: Blood Money and Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow, it is still an excellent game. There are things about it that I don't like, though - namely stepping away from the item collecting to get around the environment. I'm at Chapter 3, and I'm not seeing anything like this. I really enjoyed this as it gave me a tangible sense of progress, and it really made you use your memory faculties. I'm not saying it's immaculate (Metal Gear on the NES is proof of this - but it's also like 18 years before MGS), but it certainly increases the depth of the game and gives it an adventure feel. This style of play is sadly lacking. I also dislike the 20 minute+ cutscenes. Kojima, you are a hack. Period. Luckily, the game doesn't suck.
Little Big Planet is very charming, and one thing I really like about it is there always seems to be something new about it. It was designed this way, I realise that, but few games that are deliver so well. And my girlfriend, K, absolutely loves being able to dress up Sack-Boy.
I've played the Resistance games for all of ten minutes each, so I can't really give them a thorough evaluation. However, they don't immediately impress me. They feel like something caught between Halo and Call of Duty, so I think a closer inspection is required.
Now, recently, I've been playing Skyrim, and anyone tracking me on Facebook or Raptr (Rabbi_Voody for those interested) will see this in spades. My initial impressions are fairly negative as far as RPGs go. Skyrim has done away with a lot of the stats that make TES a lot like DnD, which I know is a major piss-off to many fans. Regardless, it's actually a very good game. And that's all I'm going to say because I'm not going to spoil anything for you - which is why I'll be giving the Resistance games a fair go.
And yes, I did wait for it in line on the Midnight Release. Won't be doing that ever again; November plus sickness (which turned out to be strepthroat) equals really damned bad.
I also got a taste of Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3, and I have to say...it's alright. I can't figure out how to lean, though (only played it briefly), which is pretty major in tactical FPS's. It's pace is insane. I like that. I was introduced to it by way of my friend Jason D, who's more into wargames and such. And also competitive sports games. I can definitely see him getting NHL 2K12. Hopefully it's a lot better than 2K9, which has one hell of a learning curve (of course it is; the later ones always are, claimeth EA).
And finally, for all of the Halo fans, I have played Halo: Anniversary Edition. Didn't finish it - actually only did the first chapter. I'm saving that for a co-op playthrough with my friend Jason S; he bought it for me specifically for that purpose. And possibly playing on Live, which I did to see if it was old Halo redone. It's not. It's just Halo Reach, which actually caused me serious disappointment, but at least Halo Reach plays closer to classic Halo insofar as multiplayer is concerned, what with the shields and health. Halo CE with no shields is very, very, very, very fun to play. It's almost as fast - if not exactly as fast - as classic Doom.
And that is my gaming life over the past couple months in a nutshell. More like a busted nut.
Well, take care. I hope to see you all again soon.
So, that said, I guess it's time for an update. As you all know, I'm a huge fan of Fallout: New Vegas. So, I guess I should let you in on some opinions about the expansions.
Okay, so, the first one, Dead Money: Dead Money pissed a lot of people off, I can see. Probably because it was pretty GD hard. I actually rather enjoyed it because it was the only challenge I was pretty much getting without playing with the difficulty settings. The add-on was pretty good, but to be frank, the new waepons and whatnot were pretty mediocre.
Up next is Honest Hearts. What can I say about HH? Well, for starters, it's too short. It's maybe about 2 hours long, and if you finish it, it pretty much dries up the sidequests right then and there. Unlike DM, you can go back. Also, the weapons and items you get from HH are very, very awesome. A little too awesome, but great nonetheless.
Old World Blues is pretty much the best of the bunch. Not only because it's not two hours long, but it has an interesting story and most of the goodies are VERY awesome. HH awesome, but you'll actually need the firepower.
And finally, Lonesome Road. Lonesome Road is okay. It falls somewhere between DM and HH...more towards HH. There are some overly cheap encounters, and I really find that most of the equipment is inadequate for most of the later encounters.
Now, as an aside, I did also DL the Gunrunners' Arsenal Pack, and I have to say...It's an essential. It really is. Some of the stuff is just gear that Fallout players need to have, like the Bozar. I'm not saying it's amazing, just, you know, for continuity's sake (Fallout 2 fans know what I'm talking about).
The expansions themselves are also essential for people who care about loose ends; the expansions will do exactly that. Not sayin' which loose ends, but unlike Fallout 3, NV has far more loose ends to tie. If you have the game and the cash to burn, it can't do too much harm; it's another 20 or so hours of play. On the other hand, if you don't have the game, wait until the Game of the Year Ed. comes out; it's much better value.
So, what's new: Well, I caved and bought a PS3. I currently have Metal Gear Solid 4, Little Big Planet and the first two Resistance games.
I like MGS4 quite a bit. While still an inferior stealth title to Hitman: Blood Money and Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow, it is still an excellent game. There are things about it that I don't like, though - namely stepping away from the item collecting to get around the environment. I'm at Chapter 3, and I'm not seeing anything like this. I really enjoyed this as it gave me a tangible sense of progress, and it really made you use your memory faculties. I'm not saying it's immaculate (Metal Gear on the NES is proof of this - but it's also like 18 years before MGS), but it certainly increases the depth of the game and gives it an adventure feel. This style of play is sadly lacking. I also dislike the 20 minute+ cutscenes. Kojima, you are a hack. Period. Luckily, the game doesn't suck.
Little Big Planet is very charming, and one thing I really like about it is there always seems to be something new about it. It was designed this way, I realise that, but few games that are deliver so well. And my girlfriend, K, absolutely loves being able to dress up Sack-Boy.
I've played the Resistance games for all of ten minutes each, so I can't really give them a thorough evaluation. However, they don't immediately impress me. They feel like something caught between Halo and Call of Duty, so I think a closer inspection is required.
Now, recently, I've been playing Skyrim, and anyone tracking me on Facebook or Raptr (Rabbi_Voody for those interested) will see this in spades. My initial impressions are fairly negative as far as RPGs go. Skyrim has done away with a lot of the stats that make TES a lot like DnD, which I know is a major piss-off to many fans. Regardless, it's actually a very good game. And that's all I'm going to say because I'm not going to spoil anything for you - which is why I'll be giving the Resistance games a fair go.
And yes, I did wait for it in line on the Midnight Release. Won't be doing that ever again; November plus sickness (which turned out to be strepthroat) equals really damned bad.
I also got a taste of Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3, and I have to say...it's alright. I can't figure out how to lean, though (only played it briefly), which is pretty major in tactical FPS's. It's pace is insane. I like that. I was introduced to it by way of my friend Jason D, who's more into wargames and such. And also competitive sports games. I can definitely see him getting NHL 2K12. Hopefully it's a lot better than 2K9, which has one hell of a learning curve (of course it is; the later ones always are, claimeth EA).
And finally, for all of the Halo fans, I have played Halo: Anniversary Edition. Didn't finish it - actually only did the first chapter. I'm saving that for a co-op playthrough with my friend Jason S; he bought it for me specifically for that purpose. And possibly playing on Live, which I did to see if it was old Halo redone. It's not. It's just Halo Reach, which actually caused me serious disappointment, but at least Halo Reach plays closer to classic Halo insofar as multiplayer is concerned, what with the shields and health. Halo CE with no shields is very, very, very, very fun to play. It's almost as fast - if not exactly as fast - as classic Doom.
And that is my gaming life over the past couple months in a nutshell. More like a busted nut.
Well, take care. I hope to see you all again soon.
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Adventures In FanExpoLand
Adventures In FanExpoLand
Hey guys, on Aug. 27th, K. and I went to the Toronto FanExpo. For those of you who don't know what that is, it's a huge cult convention that combines gaming, sci-fi, horror and anime. Celebrities come to give autographs, and there's an arseload of collectibles you can buy.
My initial reason for going was to get Lance Henrikson's signature on my copy of Red Faction 2 (ironic because I'm actually doing a review for Mass Effect, another game he provided voicework for)...but that didn't happen. The reason was because...well, I couldn't afford to blow $40 on an autograph. So...I'll wait until I can.
Anyway, being that I was there, I figured I could actually look at the gaming side of things. Ubisoft and Warner Interactive both had booths. Warner had posters up for The Lord of the Rings: War in the North and playable demos of Lego Harry Potter Years 5-7 and Batman: Arkham City. Both looked fairly interesting, but I was honestly disappointed that there wasn't a demo of War in the North, too.
Ubisoft was showing off a playable demo of the new Assassin's Creed title, Just Dance 3 and a new game geared at what looks like training someone how to play a guitar. Pretty neat, actually. Unfortunately, I did not see a demo of the new Ghost Recon game, despite there being many posters littered about. However, I was really surprised that there wasn't demo material for Far Cry 3. Quite dismayed, actually. Especially considering that there was recently a new gameplay video on XBL. Hopefully it won't be a sleeper like Far Cry 2, which was an absolutely fantastic game.
There was also a Nintendo booth with 3DS's in full swing, although I wasn't able to actually see what was being played because it was basically the back of cube van, and of course, it was packed.
And finally, we come to the grand finale: The EB Games/Gamestop “booth”, which took up ¼ of the entire convention space. There were demos of Uncharted 3, the Halo CE remake and a new Disney game for the 360.
The whole event was sponsored by G4, Rogers (one of the three major media providers in Canada) and Gamestop, which is why an unnecessarily large portion of the floor was occupied by them. I hope that their presence is much more subdued next year. Gaming doesn't begin and end with those shills. It's not like they actually make the games they sell.
So, I thought the gaming section was pretty lacking. There were no local independent developers and neither EA Canada nor Bioware were present. And the only game-seller that could be considered “Canadian Content” was Zellers...oh wait, no, they're owned by Target.
I was also hoping to run into the guys from Reviews on the Run – they're one of the few pro reviewers I trust – but that didn't happen either. Oh well.
All and all, kinda neat – there were some pretty awesome costumes and the people were very nice. I'd like to thank John Waters on behalf of my girlfriend for being such a mensch and I'd like to thank the staff for being so helpful...even when they sent us in the wrong direction.
That said...gamers, unless the Reviews on the Run guys are there next year and/or you're a huge fan of everything else...you might want to avoid it until they get their priorities straight.
I'm still going to go next year. I didn't have enough time to play around with the gaming exhibits, so I'll definitely be doing that next time. I just hope that it's more than just Gamestop and their pets of the month because gaming is a lot more than Warner, Ubisoft, Disney and The Big Three (MS, Sony, Nintendo).
Friday, August 26, 2011
Get Your Art Out of My Hobby
Date: 08/26/2011
By: Nate
Gaming has been announced as an art, yadda yadda yadda – or “big friggin' deal”. I already said my piece about it. While it seems that gaming has magically gone from being hobby to an art form over night, , I need to ask, “At which point did it actually stop being a hobby?”
I mention this as sort of a counterpoint to Duke Nukem Forever, which I've recently just played and grudgingly had to put down because I'm working on not one, but two long games. Yes, it's crass. Yes, it is extremely offensive. However, it is not a one-string banjo like many of the games that are raised on a pedestal these days.
To be honest, I found it strange that Duke Nukem Forever's gameplay was considered archaic. Halo has relied on relatively similar gameplay since 2001, and Duke Nukem 3D is a throwback to that, perhaps. But it's also a hell of a leap. Can you name me five shooters that are as interactive as Duke Nukem Forever? I can, and most of them are Build games (13 – 15 years old), and the others are the Deus Ex titles. If interactivity and varied gameplay with tight controls are an issue, then I think there's a much greater problem with the review scene than reviewers' memories.
Sure, intense interactivity may be a throwback, but it's certainly not archaic. Why? Because it immerses you into the environment by making you part of it. Unfortunately, that big button on screen does kind of take away from it by taking you out of the experience, but at least that experience is there.
The point is, the magazines need to check something called integrity. Lambasting something for being archaic – when it's not – is a great example. As a matter of fact, I would say that most “modern” shooters are archaic simply because they're even simpler than their 2D and 2.5D (e.g. Wolfenstein 3D and Doom, respectively) counterparts because they reduce gameplay to two components – completing an objective on a rail and slaughtering the bad guys.
Obviously, few titles use irreverence as a selling point. The last Serious Sam came out around the same time as Doom 3 – although Sam is much more innocent than The Duke.
However, going after the sense of humour because you're stuck on your morals (or political correctness – even worse) is also a cop-out; this is an M-rated game that, so far, is making Super Troopers look like a mature romantic comedy.
That said, we come to the point of satire as a humour vehicle, because, let's face it...Duke Nukem is a satire of “all that is man” - or hypermasculinity. Much like a Heavy Metal concert, Duke Nukem 3D is a piss-up of the core patriarchal values – debauchery, misogyny, bigotry, decadence and substance abuse. And Duke Nukem, like Judas Priest (the guys who started the hypermasculinity trend when singer, Rob Halford, sang onstage in his cruising attire) is just a caricature. And yet the Filthy Fifteen list did indeed exist (which also included Twisted Sister and Madonna).
So why the ambivalence? It's satire. It's a grand joke at the expense of something else. Satire is sometimes considered an artistic expression, and even moreso when delivered by way of humour. Someone isn't trying to put together a blacklist to protect their precious army shooters, are they? Either way, “Thou dost protesteth too much.”
Regardless, this creates a problem. These attitudes set a precedence, and an alarming one. You see, way back in the day, games like this would have been well received because they don't follow the norm, and they actually offer the gamer an experience beyond finding a key, hitting a switch and killing a room full of bad guys. Or, in today's shooters...just hitting a switch and killing a room full of bad guys.
Unfortunately, this attitude also shows politics in action, this time an attack on something being ridiculously politically incorrect for the sake of being just that. An important component of art is the freedom of expression, and while we are free to be critical of that expression...a little honesty goes a long way. Honesty rarely has any truck with politics. Unfortunately, it's also vice-versa. Unfortunately, there's something else that's being omitted...it's a game. Fictional characters and all.
Hell, I've read things far more crass and potentially incendiary than this (Virtual Freedom and Chocolate Jesus come to mind), and neither of these were panned when political correctness was still valued.
At the end of the day, we don't want politics in our reviews. We never did. We just want a clean, honest opinion as to whether or not a game is fun to play or not and why. We do not want mewling about how a game's sense of humour is odious because it violates social mores when you're clearly looking to pan it when you have nothing else to go on. I've actually played the game and I can honestly dispute all the crap that the alleged pros have spewed about the gameplay, as can anyone else who has actually played it. So it really only comes down to one thing: Pretense.
I can't stress this enough: It's a hobby. More importantly, it's a hobby with a culture, and that culture has its own feelings and opinions. Gaming started off as a hobby, and regardless of the monikers added to it, it will always be a hobby. It's now a recognised art form, but it's still a hobby. I'm not trying to denigrate it, quite the contrary. To be honest, while many hobbyists have their own pretenses, they're not nearly as douchy as the critics who claim to be an authority are.
Readers who actually pay for the dreck you people spew do not deserve this attitude. It doesn't make better games, it doesn't make publishers more ethical. What it does do is it alienates the majority of us who game because we do it as a hobby. Even worse, it alienates people who make those games. Most gamers aren't prancing art critics hell-bent on making sure the world follows their opinion (that would fall to the fanboys, an inane minority), and most devs work damned hard to put a quality title out.
If you want to bring some class to reviewing, how about changing your attitude to something more down to earth? Then maybe the rest of us can take you seriously - instead perceiving you as a grand satire of our own culture. We already get enough of that from soccer-moms, ignorant politicians and media-crazy lawyers.
Just give us honesty and integrity. Like Duke Nukem, they're old concepts that work great and, more importantly, still stand and deliver. I can't say the same for politics.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Metal Gear Review Is Up
Hey Guys and Gals,
The Metal Gear (NES) review is up. You can find it here. Enjoy. Bear in mind that I did play it on an FC Twin (an NES and SNES clone), but that does not cloud my review as I have played it on an original NES before.
So, what's next? Well, I still have to co-ordinate with Russell from The Real Life Gamer for another podcast. The goal will be to further expand on my AAA Games Length commentary (it's the post previous to this one, called "AAA Games Too Long My Ass").
Also, the Mass Effect (360) review is coming fairly soon. It is due at the end of the month as I recall.
I'm currently playing Darkstar One by Kalypso games on my 360. If you're yearning for something from the halcyon days of space sims, this one might be up your alley. It's fairly uncommon, so far that I can tell, but it's definitely worth a rent. I'll go deeper into it soon to see if it's worth the buy. Although...I only paid $10 for it...so...yeah.
I also found a wicked bargoon: Castlevania II: Simon's Quest for - I kid you not - $5. Granted, it was loose, but it goes for $30 or $40 loose on EBay, so I think I got a good deal, what say you?
Oh, and I'm getting rid of some games. Most are for the original XBox, but I'm also clearing out some of my SNES stuff that I no longer play. If you're interested, let me know.
That's all the news that's fit to print.
So, take care, hope you enjoyed your weekend and don't do anything I would.
The Metal Gear (NES) review is up. You can find it here. Enjoy. Bear in mind that I did play it on an FC Twin (an NES and SNES clone), but that does not cloud my review as I have played it on an original NES before.
So, what's next? Well, I still have to co-ordinate with Russell from The Real Life Gamer for another podcast. The goal will be to further expand on my AAA Games Length commentary (it's the post previous to this one, called "AAA Games Too Long My Ass").
Also, the Mass Effect (360) review is coming fairly soon. It is due at the end of the month as I recall.
I'm currently playing Darkstar One by Kalypso games on my 360. If you're yearning for something from the halcyon days of space sims, this one might be up your alley. It's fairly uncommon, so far that I can tell, but it's definitely worth a rent. I'll go deeper into it soon to see if it's worth the buy. Although...I only paid $10 for it...so...yeah.
I also found a wicked bargoon: Castlevania II: Simon's Quest for - I kid you not - $5. Granted, it was loose, but it goes for $30 or $40 loose on EBay, so I think I got a good deal, what say you?
Oh, and I'm getting rid of some games. Most are for the original XBox, but I'm also clearing out some of my SNES stuff that I no longer play. If you're interested, let me know.
That's all the news that's fit to print.
So, take care, hope you enjoyed your weekend and don't do anything I would.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
AAA Games Too Long My Ass
Date: 08/10/2011
By: Nate
Recently, a panel of five discussed the length of AAA games, and these people felt that AAA games were generally too long – at least where social and casual gaming are concerned. There was no talk of “hardcore” gaming, and being that most of the developers on this panel were independent casual game developers, I can understand this. What I can't understand is, with one of the developers behind Broken Sword on the panel, how can the view be so narrow?
Casual and social gaming is big, but Fallout New Vegas made $300 million in revenue – which I'm assuming means somewhere around $200 million in profit.
The panel consisted of these individuals:
Charles Cecil – Broken Sword
Adrian Hon – CEO of story developer Six To Start
Alexis Kennedy – CEO of Fail Better Games
Patrick O'Luanaigh – CEO of nDreams
David Varela – Writer
There's a touch of irony here, of course; people who make casual games are criticising hardcore games and saying how that doesn't fit into casual gaming. Really? No. Way.
Now, this discussion spurred quite a conversation, and I don't think many people had read the article in its entirety – admittedly, I'm in that boat, but I did read it again. And again. And again. Just to make sure that I had a grasp on its entirety.
That said, the discussion brings up a bone of contention that I'm having with AAA titles being passed off as a “hardcore” gaming experience. They're not. To be honest, I think most of the AAA grade stuff we're being sold is only made from A grade product.
I'll explain why. Length, depth and possibly girth. That's what she said.
But it's true. As far as AAA gaming goes, there are issues all over the place, but it doesn't mean that hardcore gaming should be abandoned, especially since it's what the gaming industry built its profits on. And a gaming magazine that has built their own empire on gaming of all stripes, is completely out of line by implying that hardcore gaming might be on its way out.
But there is an issue with the length of AAA games; yes, some are indeed too long, but most are too short. Games that are too long usually suffer from gameplay issues that make the experience go stale because they're used to artificially lengthen the game.
A great example is experience grinding in RPGs, where you need to be a certain level before you can progress, and to do that, you have to fight and kill a lot of things. As a consequence of that, you're stuck in one area doing just that. Maybe for several minutes, but come the end of the game, it can be for several hours. An overly convoluted story, like what is mentioned in the article I referred to, can also make a game too long, because you may get to a point where you start wondering why it all matters, but usually, it's a gameplay thing such as flawed mechanics or copied levels.
Games being too short, that's a different story. And when I say too short, I don't mean that 10 hours doesn't feel like enough. I'm talking about games that can be completed in an afternoon, which many blockbusters are. Sometimes, a game's shortness can actually breed replay. It was fun, it's over, I want some more. 007 Bloodstone was like that. But then you have the disappointments of Halo 2 and 3 and all of the Call of Duty games since Call of Duty 4, where the developers will promise longer campaigns when in fact, they're still 5 hours long, that's something else. Something shady.
AAA Games being too short is a combination of several design choices. One of them is a complete lack of exploration, and that's a given. Another is pressure from the publishers. Not so much to just get the game out of the gate as soon as possible, but to chop it up into sequels so that more can be sold. Or worse, chop it up so that DLC can be sold, so you're essentially buying back pieces of your game that the publisher didn't want you to initially have, like with what appeared to be the case with Dragon Age 2.
The problem is, this is the rule, not the exception, so gamers wind up getting shortchanged while EA, Activision and 2K wind up getting fat, lazy and greedy.
It's a pretty murky situation, and clearly some independent developers want to use a their own smear campaign to hammer the lid shut when this business wouldn't even exist if it weren't for the hardcore gamers. Unacceptable. Utterly, absolutely unacceptable.
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Nate's Top Ten Games In Need of a Reboot
Nate's Top Ten List of Franchises Needing a Reboot
I was challenged (well, it was more a suggestion than a challenge) by a certain rabbit to produce a list of ten games that I feel need a reboot. To be fair, I slagged his list pretty hardcore, so I think he deserves the opportunity to return the favour, eh? What do you guys think? I think he does.
So, here's the list:
10: Final Fantasy
Final Fantasy got it's debut on the NES 1989 and is basically tanking on modern consoles today. Of course, how can you compete with The Elders Scrolls, Mass Effect and the Fallout franchise reboot? Especially when you're an old dog that's trying to do old tricks, and all you seem to be able to do is take a dump on the lawn. That isn't to say that FF XIII was a bad game. While I haven't played it, I have heard that, unanimously, it's pretty good – but most people wouldn't play it again if they didn't have to. Ouch. This is because the series is clearly steering away from its best elements, and for no good reason.
And what's Square doing? Rereleasing an MMORPG (FFXI) to the PSP and Final Fantasy III (SNES) to the Virtual Console. Bravo. I solute you with fully-rolled eyes. Not that either of these games suck; I refuse to play a game which I have to pay to play after I've purchased it, and Final Fantasy III SNES is better than the most of the dreck that Square has ever released after the SNES. But it's also been rereleased twice already; once for the PSX and again for the Gameboy Advance (Final Fantasy VI Advance). Talk about beating a dead horse. But you know, if any of the newer FF games had the balls that 6 had in 1993 with its storytelling (you'll have to play it), that would be a start.
And the ability to equip characters with whatever you want, that would be great, too. Any character can learn any spell? Count me in. No rediculous minigames that don't actually advance the story? Awesome. No rediculous minigames that do advance the story? Even better. No J-Pop in the soundtrack? Rockin'. No J-Pop in the story? I'm drooling.Actually, the only thing Square still seems to do right is boss battles that require some strategy. But that's. About. It.
So, what to do? Simple: Look at your best elements, and find a way to put them into a game, and keep working on these. And omit your worst elements.
And for christ's sake, stop changing the development studios every single sequel. Stick with the one that produces the best title, because those guys clearly have an idea as to how an RPG works. The rest seem to care more about Final Fantasy movies.
Mmmkay?
Oh, and no more goddamned J-Pop.
9: CyberMage: Darklight Awakening
CyberMage is a game that a lot of people missed during the mid-90's because, frankly, it's requirements were too high for most people to play. However, anyone who had would remember how amazing the game is.
The story was conceived by D.W. Bradley, the same gentleman behind a little series called Wizardry. Never heard of it? Heathens.
Anyway, CyberMage could perhaps be seen as a precursor to games like Jedi Knight, which incorporate melee combat and special abilities as viable means of attack, and not just as a combat supplement.
CyberMage was more than that, too. It alluded to open-world first person shooting with an economy. You could use vehicles, too. The story was told in comic book cells with digitised (albeit mediocre) voice acting, and it didn't suck.
Unfortunately, the game did have clunky controls, but considering all that it offered, it could have been much worse. Not sure if it could have been better, though. The game was notoriously buggy, and yet it still came out as good as it did.
Its demo sucked (but only in comparison to the actual game; consider that), though, and it wasn't even part of the actual game, but it did come bundled with the game nonetheless.
8: System Shock
System Shock has already been rebooted, at least theoretically. That reboot is Bioshock. Unfortunately, Bioshock lacks the level of intelligence and interactivity that went into System Shock, so anyone who never played the game that “started it all” didn't really know what was missing, and just read what the reviews fed them. And besides, as scary as Ayn Rand was (or “Andrew Ryan”), her philosophy has nothing on SHODAN.
System Shock was one of Warren Specter's little projects (he was also involved with CyberMage, if I remember right) released by EA Origin studios in 1994, around the same time as Doom 2 and I believe the first Marathon game. However, it was far more innovative than either. System Shock was more or less a first-person action adventure game that featured a malicious AI with a god complex, and you had to figure out how to stop it. You did this using both brains and brute force. Not only did you have to fight your way through the space station that you were stuck on, but you had to fix a good deal of it along the way. Plus you had to enter cyberspace to hack your way through some of the defences that SHODAN set up.
Furthermore, the game's story was told in e-mails and voice-logs. Depending on the release version you had (floppy or enhanced CD-ROM) would depend on whether you were reading the e-mails or listening to them. Aside from digitised voice, the enhanced CD-ROM version also supported 640 x 480 resolution.
If you can find it, System Shock is an absolute treat. While it may be 17 years old, it has aged very well. Its sequel, System Shock 2 (which was developed by the same guys who made Bioshock), while also an excellent game, is actually quite inferior in comparison.
7: Rygar
Rygar has also been rebooted, but frankly, I find the reboot has little in common with the original game other than the yo-yo weapon. Not saying that it might as well be a current-gen Yo-Noid!, but I am saying that what I have played seems to have very little to do with the original NES game. Of course, other than a few backgrounds and creatures, the NES game had little to do with its mediocre arcade parent, too.
But really, the creatures are barely recognisable (actually, I think I've only fought the giant crustacean worms), the story really isn't in-line with the NES game and it just feels...lacking. Mind you, I did also only play the Wii version, but I honestly doubt the PS2 version was much better as the Wii version is a port of that. Luckily, it's available on teh Wii virtual console, so at least you can get "the real thing".
I'm just horribly unimpressed that such an amazing game wrought from a crappy arcade title could be turned into a mediocre current-gen remake by the same publisher that released Ninja Gaiden 2. Actually, come to think of it...I'm not surprised.
6: Jedi Knight
Jedi Knight was a rare gem. It brought together a lot of elements from other shooters (a few obscure) to create a truly awesome Star Wars gaming package,and it's sequel, was pretty damned good, too. Unfortunately, I have yet to play Jedi Academy, and it's pretty rare finding it for the old XBox.
In Jedi Knight, you play the role of Kyle Katarn (Jedi Knight is a sequel/spinoff from Dark Forces), the alleged mercenary who uncovered the Death Star plans.
In the first game, Kyle becomes a Jedi (obviously), so aside from all the neat whiz-bang Star Wars guns, you get to use a lightsaber and force powers. The powers available to you include healing, jumping, speed and, of course, choking. Oh, lightning, too.
At any rate, while the acting usually sucked, the stories of both games were quite good and the gameplay was fantastic. What really stood out, though, was the level design. Jedi Knight had some pretty massive levels that were rare to find after games went 3D. Jedi Knight also has an expansion called Mysteries of the Sith in which you play as another Jedi, Mara Jade. It includes some new weapons and force powers such as the ability to throw your lightsaber.
Jedi Knight 2 was released to the PC and Xbox, and was developed by Raven Software (Soldier of Fortune) using the Quake 3 engine and, if I remember right, it incorporated some of their internal middleware, Ghoul 2. Lightsaber combat was much improved, and use of Force Powers was less clunky, but some of the puzzle elements from the first game were more or less gone.
The final game in the series is called Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy, and unfortunately, I never got a chance to play it. My computer's too slow (actually, I just need a soundcard with audio acceleration)
5: The Terminator: 2029
The Terminator: 2029 is one of the best Terminator games ever made. Screw Future Shock and Skynet (the former an excellent game, the latter a good attempt), this game was completely different.
The game was presented in a first person perspective, but you could only make single moves through the mazes that would make up each mission, However, combat was in real time. Objectives ranged from defending something, destroying something, assist a retreat...and I think that's about it The game featured all of the Terminators from the films, and some new ones, too. The tanks were especially daunting, but not unkillable. Furthermore, the game follows the story of the first Terminator movie from the future. It doesn't follow Terminator 2, though, at least not so far as I remember. I don't recall John Connor having a CSM101 T-800 reprogrammed and sent back in time during the game's story. Nope.
The truth of it is, I'm rooting for Bethesda to get this license back. All of their Terminator games rule in comparison to the Hollywood-related dreck. Even if it was the farthest thing from innovation like Rampage (an actual Wolfenstein 3D clone) or Skynet, it was still a lot better than what we're getting. And it would kick some serious ass with co-operative online play.
4: Shadow Warrior
Released in 1997, Shadow Warrior is probably one of the most offensive shooters ever made. It takes the piss out of...well, everything, and it's actually self-deprecating, too. It's also the last game that 3D Realms would make using the Build engine.
You play Lo Wang, a ninja assassin who gets screwed over by his employer, Zilla. As a result of this, he goes on a revenge spree. A somewhat short revenge spree, but a pretty wild one. The game featured weapons with multiple fire modes, turrets and vehicles. However, it's also one of the few shooters that put huge focus on melee combat (I think the only other in the 1997/1998 release period was Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight). Because of all of the wacky stuff this game has, it deserves a sequel. And because it ended on a cliffhanger, it kinda needs one. C'Mon, admit it, you want some Wang.
3: Blood
Blood is the last great Build Engine game, developed by Monolith (the guys behind Shogo: Mobile Armor Division, Aliens Vs. Predator 2 and FEAR). Like Shadow Warrior, it featured a morally flexible main character. However, instead of a misogynistic ninja who cares more about his “sword” than decorum, you get an undead psychopath who is turning on the very deity that he worshipped.
Aside from Blood's extremely twisted sense of humour, the game ramped the action and gore up to 11 with akimbo weapons and a high level of difficulty. The game took place in the late 1920's, and the environments supported that time period, and despite the game using the Build Engine, it looked pretty good. While many of the creatures were facsimiles of something else you might have encountered in many other shooters, many of the weapons were quite ingenuitive, such as the spray-can flamethrower which also doubled as a firebomb.
Its sequel, Blood 2, used the same engine (LithTech) as Shogo: Mobile Armor Division (although much enhanced), but it was significantly shorter. While the violence wasn't quite as intense, it had a pretty interesting multiplayer setup that was kind of like a Team Fortress knockoff. Unlike Blood, Blood 2 took place in the future, and featured modern weapons. Much to its chagrin, the game was released after Half-Life and got the same ritual rim-jobbing that almost every other shooter released between Half-Life and Halo received.
2: Dynasty Warriors
Dynasty Warriors (well, Dynasty Warriors 2) revitalised the brawler genre by making each level a 3D open plain on which to wreak havoc with one of many characters based on real (or assumed) generals, strategists and nobles from the era of Three Kingdoms China (late 2nd to late 3rd century). Pretty neat.
There are a lot of games in this series – seven core games and multiple spin-offs, which has essentially killed the series. Gamespot clearly won't even review the 7th game because of the bias the series has generated.
This has a lot to do with the fact that the combat system is viewed as tired, although Dynasty Warriors 7 has provided an answer to this. Unfortunately, it's a mediocre one.
Dynasty Warriors needs to be shut down for a few years, analysed and then rebooted in a definitive form – something that's a cross between the core game and its spin-offs, and the combat system can't have any corners cut (like how ¼ of the officers are sword users and almost everyone else has their own weapon).
1: Syndicate
Syndicate is an action-strategy series developed by Bullfrog (Peter Molyneux's former EA studio) and released by EA Origin. The premise is that you are an executive working your way up the corporate ladder by means of world domination. From a dirigible, you control a squad of heavily armed and upgradeable cyborgs that you will use to accomplish this goal by fulfilling objectives such as assassination, abduction and annihilation of other corporations.
There are many weapons to use, but few are actually available; you'll have to research the rest. And research costs money, so it's imperative that you ensure that your tax revenues will cover the costs. If not, well, there's no harm in raising them.
For its time, Syndicate was revolutionary. Not only for its blood-soaked concept, but because of the amount of carnage that you could cause in real time. Unlike Bullfrog's god simulators, Syndicate doesn't have a moral compass of any sort, only discretion or lack thereof. Aside from walking around, you could also steal cars and every vehicle and decal was destructible. In the sequel, Syndicate Wars, you could destroy buildings, as well. Syndicate also has an expansion titled American Revolt, in which you have to restabilise the Americas.
Syndicate is one of the best games that I have ever played. It seamlessly draws together strategy, roleplaying, action and even economic simulation, and until Dungeon Keeper, being bad had never
been so good.
Syndicate was originally made for the Commodore Amiga, but was later ported to DOS PC. However, it didn't stop there. It was also ported to the Sega Genesis/Megadrive, Super Nintendo, Atari Jaguar and Panasonic 3DO. Syndicate Wars was originally made for DOS PC and interestingly enough was also ported to the Sony Playstation.
There is a rumour that the long-worked-on EA project called Redlime that is being undertaken by Starbreeze Studios (The Darkness, Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay) might in fact be a remake of this, but so far, only rumours have circulated.Here's hoping.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)