Skate 2 and RE 5.

On Sunday I bought Skate 2. I never played the first one, and I've never played any Tony Hawk, so I don't have any hang-ups as far as the controls are concerned. I'm finding that the right analog stick works great for pulling off tricks, and I'm having a lot more fun than I ever thought I would with a skateboarding game. I don't usually play any sports games besides the occasional racing game, but I watched someone play the first Skate over the weekend and I thought I'd give it a try. I actually noticed something once I started playing -- Pure took a lot from the control scheme used in Skate. It's pretty much the same setup for doing tricks in both games. Right stick, plus a trigger and a face button do all the different moves available. I'm not complaining, since I had a lot of fun with Pure, and the controls felt spot-on. The same goes for Skate 2 so far, and hopefully I can find the time to finish it before the mini-onslaught of games coming out starting next month.


The other thing I've been playing the past two nights is the RE 5 demo. The short of it is that the game is pretty much what I expected. I played through RE 4 four times, so I like to consider myself an expert on its nuances. RE 5, at least from the demo, seems to have improved on several aspects of its predecessor -- namely you have a bit more mobility(more on that in a moment), the inventory screen is much more elegant now, and the addition of co-op(with another person or with just the AI) looks like its going to work really well. As far as movement is concerned, I recognize the game is a bit behind the times. It's sometimes frustrating to have to stop aiming and run away just to get a better shot at someone, instead of simply moving while shooting. I understand this, but at the same time the restrictions imposed on you make it more challenging and tense when you have a lot going on. However, if you find yourself cornered in a small space, it can be really tricky to reposition. The elegance of the inventory system, ironically, looks to be borrowed from Dead Space. That's pretty fucking funny to me, but cribbing from a game that cribbed from yours is something a lot of other developers should do. Too bad they didn't do the same with movement. Anyways, instead of pausing the game to look at it, your slots pop up over the screen while the action continues. You can map different items to the d-pad so you don't always have to scroll through a bunch of crap while a zombie is munching on your face, which is nice. Other than that, it's basically RE 4, but it looks damn good and it has online co-op. Like I said, pretty much what I expected, and also basically what I wanted out of it.


Read more...

Oldies but Goodies - Breakdown (Xbox)

If you consider yourself a fan of, or even an expert in the FPS genre, then you've probably played Breakdown. If not, allow me to take you back a few years into the last generation of consoles, when Namco released this little gem on the original Xbox. The thing that makes Breakdown worth looking back on is the pioneering combat it featured -- namely, the hand-to-hand fighting. I may be wrong, but I can't think of anything that had it before this game, and while it probably shows its age in some areas, it should still be praised for trying something new with the genre and leading the way for future games to use and improve on the formula.

I don't remember what the fuck is going on here. Some shit blew up or something.

I haven't played it since it came out around 2003, so I don't really remember the story very well. You play as a guy with latent super powers who wakes up to a sort of jail break, and throughout the game your powers come to you one by one. I know, it doesn't sound very original, but it was so well done that you don't really give a shit. There were guns, of course, but what you really wanted to do was uppercut people in their faces, and the game allowed for plenty of that. Your foes were some kind of super mutant creatures with some of the same abilities you possessed. Again, I forget exactly who or what they were, but they were big bald dudes that kind of resemble Dr. Manhattan, except they were gray instead of blue. Imagine a room full of Dr. Manhattans running towards to trying to stomp your face in, and you have an idea of what it's like to play Breakdown.

Jon loved Laurie and cloning himself. He also dabbled in raping faces.

The first person fighting was suprisingly well done -- you could block attacks with your forearms, and there were a handful of combos to pull off with the right combination of moves. The triggers were your left and right punches, and using them in tandem executed the combos. And when you started getting your super powers, you could do crazy shit like send the evil Manhattanites flying through the air to their doom. There were other powers, but the theme here tonight seems to be my fleeting memory, and as such, I can't remember what they were. The thing I remember most was the feeling of utter baddassery as I beat my way through increasingly tougher and tougher enemies, who were all well-versed in the art of fisticuffs. The final boss was an epic duel of my two leading men, Jack Johnson and Tom O'Leary, versus whatever he called his totally inferior, weak-sauce ham hocs.

You get to give him the business, but not here. The bastard has it coming, though.

If you're ever at your local game shop, check around in the bargain bins, because I can't imagine this game going for anything over 10 bucks at this point. The fighting alone is totally worth the price, and on top of that you get a pretty cool (I think) sci-fi story. Also, you then have the privilege of saying you've played a game that paved the way for things like Riddick and Mirror's Edge. Not bad, sir. Not bad at all. Read more...

Pure - Much Racing to be Had!!

When I think of racing, I think of tip-of-your-seat action. Realistic physics and the such. Pure is one of the types that personifies the genre. It does for dirt bikes what no other game has done since the last dirt bike game. If you slide into mud, the track looks and feels different next time you whimsically whiz by the same spot on terrain. That's something of notice, because a lot of racing games don't do the same thing that Pure does with dirt ground. It changes the way you strategy is lined up, especially if you're second from first place or downward from that. It really diffuses itself from the rest of the oft-malignant dirty racing genre with this feature. I make a lot of it, but it really is that transformationative.


Besides from the aforementionable, the actual racing is superlative as well. Here's the hook, line and sink her: when you do jumps, you get to do tricks in the air. If you hold a certain button, you do a certain trick. If you hold another certain button, you do the likeness of that one as well. The more buttons you hold down, the trickier the trick gets, and believe me it gets very tricky because I tried to do many tricks in a row while holding down lots of buttons for the trick and I ended up with an injury somewhere in the muscle area. But it was worth almost getting the trick to work. Another racing add-on that was added on is the boost mechanic. If you don't do any tricks for what seems like an eternal day, your boost meter eventually fills up to its maximum limit. Then, you get the transmutable option of boosting past the other contestants. You still have to steer, though, so don't let go of the left button stick like I did until last night. It's a nice bonus feature that's integrity is a part of the controls and feel of play.





I almost forgot, another thing to be able to do is make your own racing vehicle and customize it how you want to do it. You can either start with a vehicle that's already made or do it yourself. If you do it yourself, you will find the attitude that you can adjust every part of the vehicle to your ultimate satisfaction. Bumpers, tires, steering bars and whatever else makes up a vehicle is on display for your leisure perusal. When you unlock new gears for it, you can then put it on it whenever you want. More boost, better for handle, or anything else that unlocks when you beat a race either in time or in more tricks, as there are different modes that have you winning fashionably different.


In all said and done, Pure is a fun ride that tightens the grips on the handlebar and blows yourself, backwards until it's done with you. The differentiating environments unlock after some play through, and they will leave you coming back for more. Recommended for those who want a more challenging stand off with yourself, and also for whoever is deciding to buy the game, which you should. Read more...

Grand Theft Auto IV: Cake or Death Edition

The GTA series has been pretty much on auto pilot since GTA III. Make a few upgrades to graphics and physics as new hardware allows and roll out the next one. Which is fine because it’s one of those games that you just want more of. It doesn’t need to be overhauled or redesigned every iteration. All you have to do is come up with a new main character and basic story frame that doesn’t interfere to support some challenging missions. There's no real excuse for any garbage then. It's as formulaic as an episode of the A-Team. The problem is that a lot of the new innovations do interfere with the game play, and I can’t remember back to the previous GTA games but there’s some really basic changes that should have been added in.

Let’s start with Niko’s character. The main character is a war veteran who’s been worn down by the violence and just wants a shot at the American dream to live a normal life. That’s all well and fine. In the early part of the story, Niko talks a lot about wanting to live a peaceful life while running some really boring taxi missions. Then his cousin, Roman, is getting pushed around by a local mobster. He’s sleeping around with Roman’s girl and talking down to Niko. Niko gets pissed at him and shortly thereafter he’s dropping bodies while still droning on about his inner angst. His biggest sticking point for the rest of the game? Pay him well, good help doesn’t come cheap. I actually like the development for his character early on, but you can’t set him up as some kind of reborn pacifist when he’d kill his own mother for $500. My favorite set of missions were the killings Niko performs for Brucie. Basically Brucie says he needs somebody taken care of for some vague reason and you go kill them for the obviously steroid-addicted maniac. Later Niko finds out they were just people who cut Brucie off or dented his car or something minute like that and Niko throws a hissy fit. Here’s a thought: If you don’t like killing people for no real reason, you should probably stop being a hit man.

Next up is the network of friends and girlfriends for Niko. On the surface it’s a really great game play feature. You can call them or they can call you and you go hang out or eat or whatever. You get some cool mini games and interesting dialogue between Niko and maybe a dozen or so other characters. Also, when you get your friendship maxed with one of the important characters, they can give you bonuses. Brucie can give you a helicopter lift, Jacob can drive to you and sell you weapons out of his trunk, etc. As your network of friends gets larger and larger however, you begin to get bogged down. Between the lot of them you’re lucky if you can get from one mission to the next without being called by at least a half dozen. You can’t say no to hanging out with them, or they become angry with you. But you can’t just not answer your phone either. Same result. Ignore them too many times and you’ll lose your perks. The management and time required turn this feature from a series of nice subplots to a cumbersome upkeep system.

Cars and missions. It’s a game called Grand Theft Auto. I’d like to have fun stealing cars. I’d also like to have fun driving those cars on missions. Far too many missions in this game require you to ditch whatever ride you brought and use some other P.O.S. Sometimes this makes sense, like when you have to block off the tunnel and ambush a motorcade. But when it’s all said and done, I’d like to go back to my car and go home. Unfortunately anything a little out of your range despawns, which creates other problems I’ll get to later. This means taking your car out for a mission ends up with you losing it more often than not, and since you have no way of knowing what’s going to happen on a mission, why would you ever bring your own vehicle? But then why would you even bother to save a vehicle if you can’t really use it on a mission? Unless all you wanted to do was zoom around from one end of the city to another as a butt buddy for your friends to earn their perks.

Another problem with vehicles is that if you’re driving a certain vehicle, you tend to see a lot more of that vehicle spawning on the streets. So you may go for several hours before you find your first Turismo, but after that if you’re driving it around, you may see one every 30 seconds. Seems a bit broken.

Also, the vehicles you’re often forced into handle much, much worse. All of that is usually bearable, I just chalk that up to making the game play challenging. But the bikes handle like complete ass in the game. I don’t like driving them, I shouldn’t have to, but I do. The most irritating mission for this was the final mission. You go in guns blazing, come out the back and the bad dudes are getting away on a motor boat. So you have to jump on a bike. Not too long after, a car pulls in front of you with a guy driving and another hanging out the window shooting at you. I cleared them out and hopped in the car and caught up to the boat. Then I failed the mission. Why? Because I got too far away from the bike. You know, because it matters what vehicle I was driving when I murder someone.

Sandbox. I can do whatever I want in the ‘world.’ Problem is, there’s no lasting impact for any of my actions. Murder 50 cops in the police station? No problem, just get out of the radar range for 30 seconds or so and it all goes back to normal. Have to leave your car behind for some reason? It won’t be there when you get back. Go back to the police station where you killed 50 cops? No one cares. There’s 50 more ready to bleed coffee and donuts. Mass murdering people is kind of amusing for the shock value of it at first. Like “Hey, I can kill a lot of people! This is awesome!” 5-10 minutes later, and you’ve been doing exactly the same thing for 5-10 minutes. It runs out of steam quickly. I’d personally like some deeper ways to interact with the environment, or some lasting consequences of your decisions.

Linear game play in a sandbox world. If you know how something is going to play out, you aren’t rewarded for your creativity in planning ahead. You can stack all the garbage trucks you want in the alley behind the stripper joint, but when the mobster books it into his car in the back alley, all the garbage trucks have apparently been reclaimed by their dispossessed garbage men. Or how about when you’re really wailing on a car from behind with your SMG, but it won’t take damage because it’s scripted to drive to a certain point? If I can deal with the awkward drive-by shooting mechanics well enough, I should be able to take vehicles out early, or if I'm creative I should be able to finish missions in multiple ways.

And it should ‘save’ cars to you, so that if you ditch a car which you just pulled out of one of your spots and it’s relatively unscathed, you should find it back at that parking spot then next time you visit it. Or something similar to that. I get tired of walking out of a save point and seeing 2 pimp cars sitting in front of me and saying “Well, I don’t want to lose one for this mission, let me grab that minivan.” In the end that leaves you feeling more like Petty Theft Auto.

There are a few pluses, though. The shooting on foot has been improved with the lock on system. You don't have to worry about that whole eating fast food/working out thing anymore. And the core game play is still really well done. I'll be looking forward to V with the hopes that a lot of these design choices will be changed for the better. Read more...

Writing about games takes almost as much time as playing them.

With me having to write for two separate blogs, I haven't been actually playing much of anything over the past few weeks. I've dabbled in Tales of Vesperia and a couple of community games, but that's about it. Before I started the blog, however, I was working my way through a few titles. I'll be picking them back up slowly as the new car smell of writing for this shit wears off. Those games are:


Yakuza 2
Far Cry 2
Prince of Persia
Valkyria Chronicles
Beyond Good & Evil


When I make any significant progress in any of those, I'll write about it. But for now, it's off to hoping my new laptop doesn't spontaneously turn itself off again while I'm ripping a dvd(so I can make trailers/clips...it's my legal copy and I'm not a dirty stinking pirate)........I'd talk about my laptop issues but it's boring and doesn't have to do with games. Bah. Read more...

News: Gamerscore blog team let go by Microsoft.....

.....and it's news like this that really saddens me, because Microsoft says they're all about community. Sure, they have a lot of problems, but what huge company doesn't? But letting go a large part of their direct link with the people who like their products and services doesn't sit well with me. I understand why this happened - the economy sucks, and they had to trim their belt a bit. But it's people like Major Nelson and the Gamerscore blog folks who kept their community alive, so I would think they could find a way to keep those few people under their employ. I don't really have much else to say about it except that, especially since the 1up debacle, I've found it increasingly more important for me to go to the smaller sites and blogs for more in-depth and thoughtful discussions. Gamerscore blog was no doubt part of Microsoft's PR machine, but when you look at how Sony does things, you should be able to appreciate what Microsoft was aiming for with the blog team. This sucks, but at least some other company will eventually pick up some enthusiastic people who actually care about what people like us have to say.

Read more...

Ninja Gaiden 2 : Ninja Harder

Between the blood-curling cries of exuberance from a black spider ninja, stands Ryu Hyabusa and his deadly yet lethal blade, the Dark Dragon blade. In the sequel to 2004's Ninja Gaiden, you are once again tasked with the opposition of many foes, and it's up to you to stand straight and stop a great evil from destroying the world. But story, as tertiary as it often could be in the all-action genre, stays the same here as well, with no vicissitude on the part of the developers. So how is the gameplay? It adds different weapons the first game didn't have, and more moves with the change pace-wise. Slicing your way from enemy to enemy was never as blustery and impetuous as it is here, but it's in the long run that it counts, and this game will definitely still be among the greats in some of the years to come. It's a long game too, so you'll want to buckle down in your favorite couch for hours at a time until you get to the end.


Speaking of the end, there are many boss fights in a row without a save or Muramasa statue, so you'd better be on the tip of your toes to get passed them. As indisposed as I think that kind of design is, in Ninja Gaiden 2 your remonstrance will get the best of you, and eventually you'll finish the game, high-fiving anyone in the room with you and you'll feel a sense of consummation that few other games offer in pure twitch gameplay despite the many offerings other developers try to proposition you with. Something should be said for the viscerality on display, because other games such as Heavenly Sword, try as it might have done, just doesn't equal or surpass the level of intuition in regard to the combat abilities. It's a colloquy to Team Ninja and the (former) head, Tomonobu Itagaki.


The levels on a whole are better, I think, than the first Ninja Gaiden. There are forests with ninjas going furtively from tree to tree, and even though you don't know that until they're on top of you, I still think forests and ninjas coalesce greatly. There are also waterfalls and raindrops of blood that dot the sky if you were to look up, and it's breathtaking to behold. If only I had a cup big enough, I could catch it all and take a sensuous bath in it!! Besides that, you also get to go to New York. I don't think that's really what New York looks like, though. Despite those perceptions against it, all the locations are great, and you'll be waiting persistently for the next one to arrive.


Ninja Gaiden is a game of many pitfalls of circumstance. While not your own, it still makes you ask of it, why is it so hard? I died many the time to a fusillade of blows before I was able to react, and before you say it, I'm good at games. Especially the action genre, so it's not because of skill lacking. I think the game is cheap at times, but when you finally get to the denouement, you'll be the better person of it. Ninja Gaiden is a must-play action game for anyone with proclivity towards as such, and obviously, its rewards will satiate even the most jaundiced of gamers.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you honestly liked any of that excellent review I just wrote, then this site will offer a trove of treasures you'll likely never come across again. Fair warning, though, as pretty much all of it is just like the above...... Read more...

Presumptions of a Protagonist

A discussion over at Brainy Gamer got me thinking: just what is it that we look for in a protagonist? Does it depend on the genre? The story? Lets assume, for the sake of argument, that the protagonist in a game functions as our own avatar -- we project at least some part of ourselves onto that character. In doing so, do we also try to instill a set of beliefs to uphold while we play? I'm aware that some people really don't care, and they just play games to have fun. But others do insist on keeping a kind of moral decorum throughout their playtime, and that ties into the central question of identity that I'm trying to explore.


Let's first look at what is necessary for there to be any point in being self-aware while playing a game. First, the game world has to allow you some degree of choice or consequence that forces you to act according to your own standards. Second, the story has to be believable enough that those choices and consequences have meaning to the player. I'll admit it's not the best of examples, but Bioshock is a game where your choices directly affect the outcome of the story. If you choose to harvest the little sisters, at the end of the game Rapture has turned you into a monster. If, on the other hand, you choose to free them, you become a savior to those children and the story adjusts to accommodate your choice. Other than the simple fact of the two different endings existing, what are the motivations for choosing one over the other? In my case, I couldn't find it in myself to add to the already rapidly decaying citizenry of Rapture. The little sisters may have had to adapt to their surroundings in order to survive, but if I could free them from their fate, there was really no question in my mind. The game also presented its main character as a blank slate, with no dialogue or input from his own thoughts, and in doing so, made it easier for me to make decisions based on what I would do if I were in his shoes.


Another, perhaps better example of a game that let me add my own consciousness to the experience was Fable II. A lot of the quests involved me deciding whether I should help the people of Albion, or make their lives miserable by siding with the various criminals scattered throughout the world. I could protect farmers by eliminating the raiding parties trying to make off with their valuables, or I could join in on the looting and get the farmers killed in the process. Each like decision had a direct influence on my character's physical appearance, and my reputation changed accordingly. And as the game drew to a close, it presented a moral dilemma: save the world, save your friends, or save yourself. I chose my friends, and as a result, the world changed to reflect my choice. It was a tougher decision to make than the one Bioshock asked of me, and its consequences were farther-reaching both in concept and execution. When it was all said and done, my judgments made the game what it was. You could argue the significance of my choice at the end of the game, since I don't think it had much of an impact on the physical world I inhabited -- outside of the central characters' roles in that world, everything basically stayed the same. But the narrative didn't, and for better or worse, it was of my own doing.


Both Bioshock and Fable II meet the criteria for being self-aware while playing a game. I'd like to focus now on a game that meets some of, but not all those criteria: Grand Theft Auto IV. The environment that Rockstar crafted is a fully-realized, living, breathing world. People walk the streets while talking on their cell phones, drivers get into car accidents, the weather changes, and you get a strong sense that you are in an actual city where things happen whether you're there or not. Such a world is an ideal place to have the player experience the full potential of the medium. What could happen in the context of the story if, say, you were driving along the streets of Liberty City and you struck and killed a pedestrian? How could the designers factor in such situations to make a more relative experience? It's fascinating to think about, but unfortunately Rockstar didn't entertain the same thoughts. Or if they did, they weren't able to make a polished game out of them. But still, the world they created remains, along with the potential for the brand of immersive storytelling that lets the player become one with his avatar. The designers not being able to tailor their story to the unique characteristics of their world doesn't negate its existence. And as grand as it is, it's only half of what makes a game fully immersive.


The narrative centers on a man who is looking to escape a world of crime, yet always finds himself dragged(without much resistance, I would add) back in. Initially I was drawn to the character -- I sympathized with his plight, and I tried to see and feel what he saw and felt. But as the game went on, I felt more and more disconnected from what was happening. In a scene central to the motivations of my character, I could choose to shoot someone or let them live. I chose the latter, and was told by another person in the game that I did the right thing. Did my character just grow as a person? At this point, I knew better. The main problem is the way the story and game world mix together. After the scene I just described, if I so chose, I could go about murdering hookers, blowing up police cars and helicopters, setting fire to pedestrians, and committing all sorts of other over-the-top violent acts. Which, taken by itself, I have absolutely no problem with. It's actually fun to me. But the disconnect occurs when I've had enough murder and mayhem for the time being, so I get in a car, drive far away and wait a few minutes, then everything resets in the game. It's like nothing ever happened, and I can continue following the narrative -- which is about my reluctance to commit crimes -- while pretending I didn't just burn thirty people alive. I think GTA IV is such an aggregious offender because of how obvious the disconnect between player and avatar really is. Right when a part of the story sucks you in, you then have to play the game, and all emotional investment is immediately lost.


So it's with that in mind that I ask: are sandbox games not tailored to the self-awareness in games I want to experience? My answer would be no -- at least for the time being. I assume at some point a game will come along that takes both pieces of the puzzle and arranges them in the correct way. But for now -- I don't know, maybe it's a technological shortcoming -- a more focused experience seems to be a better fit for total immersion. I'm hoping Heavy Rain turns out to be one of those experiences, but there's still a lot about the game I don't know. However, judging from the developers at Quantic Dream, it stands a good chance of succeeding where others have failed. At the very least, it will be an aesthetically pleasing adventure game with superficial choices and a very linear plot progression. I'm sure the story will be great, but if it's to do what I think it can, the game will need to give me choices on a far greater scale than most others use.


Aside from player input, another aspect that influences the level of immersion achieved is the physical appearance of the on-screen avatar. Liking or disliking the presentation goes a long way for measuring how much a game connects with the person playing it, and good character design is paramount to getting the best possible connection. Conversely, poor character design can immediately turn off the player, no matter how well other aspects of the game are implemented. Creating the perfect design can be difficult, and depending on the genre, the definition of "perfect" changes. For instance, Mirror's Edge is a game about free-running. To effectively convey that the character belongs in the game world, their design needs to match their surroundings. As such, DICE chose to use a female character design that was more slender and athletic, and she looks like a person accustomed to sprinting and hurdling obstacles. Faith does speak during cutscenes, but her design, combined with the first-person viewpoint allows the player to be more in-tune with her character. Playing the game feels like an extension of your own body instead of just pressing buttons for a desired effect. Add to that a control scheme that compliments the feeling of self, and you end up with a great, immersive experience.


My next point is rather obvious, but the overall quality of a game also determines how well the player is able to combine identities with that of the game character. Jerky animations, rough or unpolished textures, and poor voice acting are all factors that detract from the desired effect. Budget and time constraints weigh heavily on the quality of a game, but a team with enough talented people and creative freedom should be able to excel in any given framework. Braid is an example of a very small team creating an amazing experience with a small budget. While it might not have even made a million dollars, it only cost about $180,000 to make, or at least that's what Jonathan Blow put up from his own pocket to fund the project. Even if that cost was tripled, based on the amount of people who downloaded Braid in its first week of release alone, it still would have made a profit. On the artistic and technical side, Braid used a nostalgic viewpoint as the gateway to a different kind of experience. It may seem like just a platformer with a creative gameplay mechanic, but there are some subtle(and some not so subtle) bits of storytelling strewn about the game world. Everything looks like it's part of a watercolor painting, and just looking at all the art is half the enjoyment of playing. While I don't feel Braid achieves total immersion, it does represent what can be created with limitations in place if the talent is there.


A game could have the greatest story of the last decade, but if the character models look and move like mannequins, the illusion of them being alive is gone. However, I think this only applies for the current generation of games(Xbox Live Arcade exluded), meaning if a game is from before the current hardware cycle, it should be viewed as such. The games that truly make the generational leap intact won't need explaining or excuses for how they look or play. They're looked upon with the same respect they received initially because something about their design still hits a chord with players.


In closing, I'd like to share my personal feelings on why total immersion is so important. I'm a heavy film buff, and along with games they are my primary source of entertainment and critical thinking. With film, I don't expect to relate to a character in the same way I do with games. The people and places depicted in film have a definite story arch that cannot be altered. I begin watching, experience what the filmmakers want me to, and the experience ends. I'm certainly capable of relating what the characters go through to my own life, but with games, the potential for me to do so is far greater. By dictating what happens in a game with my own ideals and beliefs, I feel a greater sense of ownership and have a deeper emotional investment in what's going on. But that only happens when a game allows it to. Most of what I play doesn't aspire to such heights, and that's fine by me. But when they do, it solidifies my assertion that as a medium, video games are totally unique in regard to any other form of entertainment. I'll continue to play and enjoy games that are solidly built yet flawed, but when those special gems come around with higher aspirations that elevate them above the pack, it makes me proud to call myself a gamer.


Read more...

The Shortest Distance Between Two Points.

So I'm playing Tales of Vesperia, and I found myself thinking about the linear nature of its world. While the game is pretty big so far, it urges you forward by only letting you explore small sections of the map at any one time. I don't really mind it; in fact, I might even prefer it this way. When I'm playing a game that lets me roam around a huge expanse, I usually find myself getting sidetracked by various side quests, and sometimes by just running around looking at random shit. That's all well and good, but when a game allows you to do that, it runs the risk of making the story seem almost secondary. Granted, when it's done right it can exponentially increase the experience, but sometimes I really just want a more direct apporach to storytelling.


And with Vesperia, the story is good enough so far that all I want to do is progress through it. There haven't been any meaningless side quests with endless repetition to wrap my brain around, making me forget just what the fuck it is I'm actually trying to accomplish. As much as I like both Oblivion and Fallout 3, I haven't played more than around 35 hours in each game. Those hours have been great, but eventually I just flame out and play other games. It takes so long to do something actually worthwhile, that by the time I finally get to that point, something else comes along and I end up not coming back to either game for months. I still like those games a lot, and I haven't given up on them. It's just going to take me a hell of a lot longer to get around to finishing them. Maybe before this generation is over, even. In the mean-time, I'm having a blast with Tales of Vesperia, and I still have to finish Far Cry 2, Prince of Persia, and Yakuza 2. Holy shit, why am I still yammering in your ear then? I have about 60 more hours to play of Vesperia. Good day to you, then. Read more...

I just got a call from Samuel L. Jackson.

And he said, "Hi, I'm Samuel L. Jackson. Did you know that if you pre-order my new game, Afro Samurai from Namco-Bandai games, from your local Game Crazy store, you'll receive a free ninja-ninja figurine? Take it with you everywhere you go. It'll be like having a little pocket insurance. It'll be there to remind you every time you do something dumb."

That was the greatest wake-up call I've received in recent memory. I'm still waiting on that call from Scarlett Johansson telling me she thinks my Blood - The Last Vampire t-shirt is awesome. I'm a patient man. Read more...