Review: BioShock (PS3)

Yes, you should play BioShock. Not finish, mind you, but play. You can get everything you need by reaching the big confrontation, putting the controller down, and pretending that was the final act.

BioShock gets one thing perfect: a beautiful and dark alternate history vision of a 1950s-era dystopia, Rapture, created on the ocean floor by an affluent Objectivist. Decor, apparel, and music blend together brilliantly within a majestic but cracked underwater complex. For hours I was satisfied to stroll through the world and soak up the rich atmosphere.

The grotesque genetic modifications common among the remaining Rapture survivors lured me deeper into the city and drove the basic combat and defense which served as my only interactions with most of those survivors. As I collected Adam and Eve, the two substances used in the genetic upgrades, I modified my own body and grew in both power and versatility.

That the game boils down to these simple combat interactions is its ultimate failing. There are only three persons in the world of Rapture with whom I could interact meaningfully. Andrew Ryan, the creator of Rapture, insulted me over my radio, sent his underlings to kill me, and ultimately proved me the lesser man. Atlas, resistance fighter and nemesis to Ryan, kindly asked me to join his side and fight to survive and escape from Rapture. And Sander Cohen, a demented and cruel artist who trapped me and enlisted me in the creation of a mixed media assembly.

The last of these, Sander Cohen, is the height of the game's vision. After carrying out the assassinations required for his art, Sander rewarded me with some resources, and turned his back to me. I had a clear choice. I could let him live or I could kill him, and my role within the game told me that killing him was not only the rational choice but the correct moral choice. So I shot him in the back, and ultimately destroyed him.

I actually felt good about that, and truly understood why BioShock is so highly regarded.

Later, when I finally dealt with Ryan, the game reached another climax -- but did not end. While that confrontation had clearly been a primary goal all along, my character's motivation beyond that point is weak to the point of irrelevance. The game finishes with a contrived scavenger hunt, a Sister's Keeper mission, and a boss battle that was as uninspired and simple as the rest of the game had seemed complex.

BioShock delivers an unforgettable experience. Ultimately my disappointment with it stems from its failure to live up to the promise of its premise.

(Image credit: This amazing thread of alternate cover art.)

Labels: bioshock, ps3, reviews

--jvm at 18:41

link

Comment [ 4 ]

The Other Side

Eurogamer's crew put Tomb Raider: Underworld at #19 on its list of 2008's top games. I rated it a stinker. Comments like these I simply cannot understand:

Kristan Reed: [...] By building on the more exploratory approach of Anniversary and giving the series the best game engine by a mile, Crystal Dynamics delivered what amounts to the first 'proper' new Tomb Raider since 1999's Last Revelation. Apart from that ridiculous swimming bit near the beginning, it's got everything you want in a Lara game - great controls, taxing puzzles and oodles of atmosphere.

Yes. EVERYTHING you want in a Lara game.

Simon Parkin: Some critics have misconstrued Underworld's precision and polish for soullessness and yes, there are times when the design's meticulous order robs its world of credibility. But really this is a game of supreme competence, executed by a developer that understands its heroine and the laws of her universe in full.

I never understood Lara, I suppose, since I missed the whole brooding, harpy Lara who misses her dear lost Mommy from the original games.

John Walker: The entire world has gone bats*** insane. Look at the reviews for this, and the reviews for the dreadful Prince of Persia, and then bang your head against a wall until you're dead. This is the best Tomb Raider has ever been, and I'm losing my mind over people's false memories of the original games, and the lack of recognition for the astonishing architecture and puzzle design here. It's epic. The story is complete toss, which is a colossal shame after Legend set things up so nicely. But this is a game about solving puzzles the size of hillsides while fluidly and beautifully leaping about. That POP could get higher review scores while being so loathsomely stupid as to be a series of tediously connected boss fights, and Tomb Raider could have the balls to include not one single boss encounter but instead replace them with elaborate and ingenious challenges and not get championed, makes me want to set fire to all of gaming.

I think this is where I diverge from the traditional gaming culture. Punishing games with cheap design simply don't entertain me like games with stories and character and mechanics that allow me to enjoy the flow instead of repeat it ad nauseum.

Also, I am pretty frustrated with IGN's review of Super Stardust Portable. I think the game is brilliant, because it achieves much of the same challenge on the PSP that you can find on the PS3, with suitable modifications. Having gone back to the PS3 version for a bit before leaving for the holidays, I realized that Portable is in fact a far different game. Still exciting and brilliant, but different.

So I was annoyed to read:

If you're a hardcore Super Stardust HD player, Super Stardust Portable will feel totally alien to you. If you're trying this out for the first time, things won't be as tough but the game is still very clearly designed around different hardware -- it just wasn't made for the PSP. If you can get by these restrictions, you'll enjoy the download, but veterans beware.

This simply was not true for me. The fact that I was (in my own eyes) a veteran SSHD player meant that I was more disposed to understand and work with the adaptations, not fight against them. I knew it couldn't be the same as the PS3 game, embraced the differences, and found a gem of a game.

The folks that I see as the traditional gaming critics and I have somehow parted ways in the past year. I'm not sure what changed. I don't think it's that I'm more casual or hardcore -- my goals and sense of enjoyment have changed, and my taste in games accordingly.

Labels: other opinions, reviews

--jvm at 11:00

link

Comment [ 3 ]

Review: Super Stardust Portable (PSP)

Super Stardust HD is one of the finest PlayStation 3 games ever made. Yes, it looks like pure eyecandy, but the gripping, seat-of-your-pants gameplay stands the test of time. I recently commented that Space Invaders Extreme is to the original what Tempest 2000 was to Tempest, and I'm tempted to compare SSHD to Asteroids. Honestly, that's the wrong comparison. It is a new Robotron: 2084 for the HD generation.

When I heard the Super Stardust HD developer, Housemarque, was making a PSP version I laughed out loud. How do you condense a two-joystick game with countless objects on the screen at any given moment onto a handheld with only one analog nub (not even a stick!) and far reduced RAM and CPU capabilities? "Madness!" I thought, "It will look and play terribly."

I was wrong. (Regular readers no doubt are used to that by now.) In fact, it is now one of the finest PSP games I've ever played.

The second joystick -- used for shooting -- is handled with the four right buttons, used as a directional pad, but that's just the obvious bit. The brilliant part is that tapping a direction will generate a wide spread of random shots. The gold melter, which is one of the key weapons to master, will fire out a pleasing sinusoidal wave using this tapping approach, mimicking just the way I use it in the PS3 version. And holding down all four buttons (not difficult, in my experience) will fire the melter in a swift circular pattern -- again, just as I've used it many times in the other version.

Graphically, the game gives the appearance of handling enough objects that it really doesn't matter if falls short of the PS3's billions. Everything looks beautiful, and I'd say it's one of the better demonstrations of the PSP's abilities. One important difference here is that the spherical play surface in the original has been replaced with a spherical-looking background image and a toroidal playfield. (The use of a torus to give the illusion of a sphere is a trick I last saw in Tetrisphere on the Nintendo 64.)

The only quibble, and it's not difficult once you learn to cope, is that weapon selection is on the D-pad. That's awkward, and I'd make a couple of suggestions to improve it. First, there should be a way to map the D-pad directions to a particular weapon; for example, I should be able to make up select the rock crusher, right the gold melter, and down the ice splitter. This would eliminate some of the frustration. The final direction could be used as a cycler, or (better) a means of selecting the most upgraded weapon currently available.

The pacing has been tweaked a bit to make accomodate the adjustments in the controls. The result is a game which has kept me in awe for a solid week, and shows no intention of slowing down. I've sunk over 6 hours into this version already, and that was during a busy week when I've also been playing BioShock and doing holiday chores. (For comparison, I have well over 12 hours in the PS3 game.)

I've realized, in the meantime, that Robotron: 2084 was ultimately the correct comparison. After all, one of my favorite versions of that classic arcade game is on a handheld. The Atari Lynx version of Robotron: 2084 uses just a D-pad and two firing buttons, but still has a very clever solution to the independent firing problem that impresses me to this day: the two buttons are used to rotate a constant stream of shots while the D-pad handles movement.

Labels: ps3, psp, reviews, sony

--jvm at 23:07

link

Comment [ 0 ]

Winners 2008

With the stinkers out of the way, time for the good stuff.

Enjoyable games of 2008, in no particular order:

• Prince of Persia (PS3) - Beautiful story, entertaining action. (review)
  
• Burnout Paradise (PS3) - Adrenaline distilled (and downloadable).
• PixelJunk Monsters (PS3/PSN) - Cute twist on Tower Defense.
• Super Stardust Portable (PSP/PSN) - Brilliant port of the PS3 classic.
• Stuntman: Ignition (PS3) - Everything the original should have been, with sweet graphics. (comments)
  
• Dead Space (PS3) - An excellent first try at survival action. (discussion)
  
• God of War: Chains of Olympus (PSP) - Tiny K looks and plays incredibly well on the PSP screen. (review)
  
• Professor Layton and the Curious Village (NDS) - Adorable story and another master lesson in how to use a touch screen effectively. (review)
  
• Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee 2 (PSP) -Second entry is just as addictive as the first.
  
• Hot Shots Golf: Out of Bounds (PS3) - Everything addictive about the PSP series, and a slick new take on shot timing.
  
• The Last Guy (PS3/PSN) - Play "Snake" on real satellite photos and save the world one person at a time. Morbid and funny.
• Space Invaders Extreme (PSP) - This is to Space Invaders what Tempest 2000 was to Tempest ... but moreso.
• Pinball Hall of Fame: The Williams Collection (PSP/PS2) - Preserving the beauty (and addictiveness) of pinball for a whole new generation. (Wii version review by JohnH)
  
• Impossible Mission (NDS) - Basic port of the original, but still fun. (review)
  
• Metal Gear Solid 4 (PS3) - Fans like me get the story and the action. Most people would just get the action. Regardless, a fun final chapter. (Note: MGS3 is still the best in the series.)
  

It's difficult to pick a game of the year, because it depends on what you want from a game.

Best experience of the year is definitely Prince of Persia.

Best play is definitely Burnout Paradise.

Best handheld game ... this is the hard one ... I'll go with Professor Layton. Still, you can't really go wrong with Super Stardust Portable, Space Invaders Extreme, or God of War.

What a great year. Here's hoping 2009 can keep up the pace, and so can I.

(Addendum: I'm currently playing BioShock. It still has time to make the list, I suppose.)

Labels: reviews, winners, year in review

--jvm at 15:29

link

Comment [ 2 ]

Stinkers 2008

I played some great games this year. I'll talk about those later. (Now posted: Winners 2008.)

Here is my list of Stinkers 2008, games I'd rather have skipped and saved my money and time. Not all are 2008 releases, obviously.

In no particular order:

• Devil May Cry 4 (PS3) - I gave up after I vanquished the giant frog boss with glowing lesbian nymphs antennae. Pretty game, but crap otherwise.
• Assassin's Creed (PS3) - Replacing Metroid Prime as my go-to insomnia cure. Boring and washed out.
  
• Mercenaries 2 (PS3) - The original was GTA in a warzone -- and fun. This was just stupid.
• Mirror's Edge (PS3) - Clever mechanic but needlessly unpleasant. Focus on the fun, next time. (review)
  
• LEGO Star Wars II: The Original Trilogy (PSP) - People really enjoyed this? And people griped that Prince of Persia was repetitive. Sheesh.
  
• NovaStrike (PS3) - As pedestrian as a top-down shooter can get. But it has trophies!
• PixelJunk Eden (PS3) - Fertilizing abstract flowers is more work than fun.
• Twisted Metal: Head On Extra Twisted Edition (PS2) - High production values, but ultimately no fun. Watch the lost cut-scenes on YouTube and save your dough.
• Hotel Dusk: Room 215 (NDS) - Yawn.
• The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass (NDS) - My annual "try to like Zelda games" fling. After a brief honeymoon I realized how long of a slog it would be to finish, how repetitive the dungeons seemed, and how much I wanted to spend my time elsewhere.
• Tomb Raider: Underworld (PS3) - I debated about whether to put this one on the list, but I think it was a grand disappointment. Shows promise, but that's not enough. (review)
  

Ok, that's enough. I'll get around to the good games soon.

Labels: reviews, stinkers, year in review

--jvm at 16:42

link

Comment [ 2 ]

Review: Prince of Persia (PS3)

The new Prince of Persia tells the story a young woman and a young man who fall in love with each other, battle an evil force that threatens their world, and ultimately pay dearly for the choices they make.

When I walked the final steps to the conclusion of the game, I realized that more than any game in recent memory I was the character on the screen. The hours of conversation between the handsome, plucky Prince (a commoner with a fancy nickname) and his legitimately royal foil, the lively Princess Elika, had had their intended effect.

I was the Prince, and he was I. I knew what I had to do. I knew why I had to do it. I knew there would be dire consequences, and I felt a moment of uncertainty.

In that moment, I considered turning off the console, removing the disc, putting it away. Yet I could not -- I could no more avoid my fate any more than the Prince could avoid his. So the Prince and I did what had to be done. The final images of the game I shall not soon forget.

Surrounding the tale is an action game for casual players. The Prince and Elika move through a beautiful, intricate fantasy world via rhythmic acrobatic challenges, what I think of as Parappa parkour. Except for one moment near the climax, honed reflexes are not really required for the jumping and running. Combat is simple pattern recognition and interruption combined with improvisation using an elaborate -- but friendly -- combo system.

As I said, it's for casual players: you can't die, it uses a type of magic cursor to guide you when you're lost, and the autosave system is always keeping track of your progress. All the frustrations have been removed so you can enjoy the game's story and its satisfying movement challenges.

Don't go into this game expecting it to be Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. It is not -- and never was intended as -- a modern version of that classic. This is a brand new experience with new challenges and a story that grownups can appreciate.

Labels: ps3, reviews

--jvm at 18:23

link

Comment [ 6 ]

REVIEW: Civilization Revolution DS

The novelty of being able to play Civilization on a pocket-sized device got to me, and I bought Civilization Revolution for my DS. The result is rather good, excellent even, but it also suffers from a number of irritating little lacks, lacks that result from the developers not taking the DS version seriously.

Let's do the DS stuff first, and talk about Civilization Revolution itself, as a game divorced from platform, later. It's a major point in the DS version's favor that, although it lacks the Civilopedia, that massive database of information on everything in the game, and scoreboard support, it is an essentially-complete version of the game. As far as the core gameplay is concerned, it has been crippled in no way by being for the DS. The DS version of Civilization Revolution is, basically, the same game as that for the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3. It uses the same game rules (a simplified mix from across all four Civilization games), it has the same four victory conditions, and the same punishing A.I. drives the computer players.

And why shouldn't it be the same game? The DS is not an underpowered piece of hardware, compared to many systems. It's much more muscular than the Gameboy Advance, and that handled Advance Wars 2 with style. It turns out that, in Japan, the Super Famicom got a release of the original Civilization, and that's on a processor clocked at less than 2 mHz. These are turn-based strategy games, which are not known for tiring out a processor unless it's high-level chess or something similarly insane. If the core logic of a Civilization game is demanding enough that it requires a Cell processor to make it run then frankly I don't think I'd want to play it. Let's keep the difficulty level within the realm of human ability, hm?

In one respect the DS version is better than the 360 and PS3 versions. Because it's a portable system, no one expects it to have great graphics, so visually the game has been graphically regressed to Civ 1 style. And to that let me add: it's about time!

Isometric tiles and 3D interfaces may look great, but they're really fancier than a Civilization game has to be, a feature to sucker people into buying it who have no real idea what Civilization is about, and probably have no business playing it anyway. This is a game series that, even from the first version, was pushing it concerning control complexity. Adding in visual clutter was ill-advised. "Normal" players might be drawn to the game by the visuals, but the players who are really serious about Civilization will want to keep the display as simple as possible. And the DS version of the game does this pretty well. Screenshots of the 360 and PS3 versions reveal that the graphics in those versions has been given a thick coat of fluorescent paint. Oh well, at least it's not gray and brown.

The primary advantages of the DS version are simplified display and holy cow porta-Civ. These are huge benefits, enough that, if done perfectly this could have been the version of Civilization Revolution to own. It seems it was hard for the developers to believe because there is ample evidence they viewed the DS version as a throwaway project. There are a few notable lacks that, while I'm not sure they're not similarly lacking in the other versions, I doubt it.

One of the most surprising has to do with an outright error in the inexcusably-poor manual. It claims that on the easiest difficulty the requirements for winning are relaxed, but this is completely false: I've played several Chieftain-level games, and none of them has ended early.

Second, although they tried to make the interface DS-ish by using the second screen a bit (and having a a battle display obviously inspired by Advance Wars), I'd much rather have that screen used to provide an overview map of the known world. There is no way to get a view zoomed out any more than the normal view. It's infuriating, especially since the game is obviously capable of displaying a zoomed-out map: it uses just such a map to show the game history movie at the end! (That movie, by the way, is itself buggy and inaccurate with nation borders. Did this game get put through QA or not?)

As mentioned before, leaderboards are not supported in the DS version of the game. But why? The end-of-game score list ranks the player on what looks very much like a vanity board, but it doesn't persist; the next time you play, your game will be ranked against the same list of default names. Considering that the first time the game is turned on it spends several minutes erasing an epic amount of EEPROM storage, it seems laughable that they couldn't spare a few hundred of those bytes to implement a real score list.

One particularly galling lack amounts to the only gameplay difference between the versions that I can see, but strangely it has nothing to do with system power. I've not played the other versions in order to verify, but cross-platform reviews remark that the DS version is lacking the ability to sell units for gold. Why this might be missing, of all features, I have no idea. It's as if they simply forgot to add that button to the game. I suspect that whatever reason they might give would be an incredibly poor one.

There's a UI flaw that I find consistently annoying. After a unit's last move is used, the game will instantly scroll the map over to the next unit to be moved, even if there was something more you could have done with the previous unit. This is really obnoxious when you want to have a settler build a city before an enemy unit captures it. Also, when a unit with automatic moves lined up gets its turn, it moves immediately; those moves aren't queued for the end of the turn. This gives the player a reduced chance to stop it if he wishes the movement to be aborted.

Another bugs that crops up from time to time involves the Oxford University Wonder of the World. When built, it's supposed to grant the player a random advanced technology. The computer players go for it fairly reliably on higher difficulties, but when the human player goes for it, something like half the time, upon completion, it vanishes, replaced by a nearly-useless SDI Defense building. When this happens the Wonder completion message fails to appear , and apparently the player doesn't get credit for it, although it does disappear from the Wonders-to-be-built selection. Whether this is intentional or not isn't explained by the (again, woefully inadequate) manual, and I have no idea if it happens in other versions, but even if it is somehow planned behavior, the very least the lack of feedback to the player that it has happened is infuriating.

All this may sound like I'm griping. And I am, dammit, none of these limitations are excusable. But the game itself is still marvelously addictive. In the couple of months I've had it I've played dozens of games, and it's yet to get old. In all, Civilzation Revolution is one of the best versions of Civilization. It might lack some of the epic sweep of other versions, but as a pick-up-and-play game that can be completed in an afternoon it's excellent. And the DS version, played on a portable, is well-suited towards just that scale of experience. It's a shame that the developers didn't have that vision for the game, because with a better UI this could well have been an Advance Wars killer. Even the game's bugs and maddening limitations can't quite diminish the brilliance here. It is just really nice to play.

Labels: Civilization, ds, firaxis, meier, reviews, strategy

--JohnH at 21:55

link

Comment [ 3 ]

Review: Tomb Raider: Underworld (PS3)

Strictly as an exploration game, Tomb Raider: Underworld falls short of the standard set by the original Tomb Raider. However, it does provide a better run/jump/climb experience than either of its immediate predecessors, Tomb Raider: Legend and Tomb Raider Anniversary. Regrettably, that's about all it does competently.

Each of the last three games has a key strength: Legend provided a strong characterization of Lara, Anniversary was exceptional for its story and level design (which leans heavily on the original), and Underworld gives us the skilled Lara we've been waiting for ever since Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time opened the door to the new generation of acrobatic platforming. If Lara has another adventure -- and I'm not convinced she should -- the designers would be well-advised to keep the Lara of Underworld. She really is a joy to watch, and not just for her curves and slinky attire.

When I played Anniversary I felt that the designers had not taken enough liberties with the original material. When I see the opportunity offered by Underworld go wasted, I wonder if the designers simply aren't up to the task of creating compelling worlds.

Here's the problem in a nutshell: the original Tomb Raider was built out of large, dense levels, dominated by a giant structure which Lara needed to approach in several different ways. Underworld goes for gigantic levels with lots of wasted space.

The Sphinx level from Tomb Raider is the easiest example, although the Obelisk of Khamoon, St. Francis' Folly, and The Colosseum would serve just as well. Within minutes of emerging on top of the Sphinx, Lara sees ledges and doors which cry out to be explored. Looking up, you wonder if she can find a way on top of the beast's head. Eventually, each of these is visited, figured out, and bested. Despite the grand scale each level had a special intimacy, a sense of discovering and mastering a whole sequence of devious riddles which fit together like a tightly-packed mechanical watch.

By contrast the levels in Underworld are needlessly gigantic and boring, as if size alone would make them better. Instead of seeing obvious signposts around you, leading you onward to deeper and darker secrets, Lara's Underworld consists of desolate, uninteresting expanses with tiny oases of adventure connected by long hallways or jungle roads. The motorcycle that Lara straddles for half the game -- yes, half the game! -- is proof that the levels are anything but tight, fun experiences. Truly, the best moments of the game, when you first see and later scale a giant mechanical tower of stone, recall precisely the design of the original. They feel out of place compared to everything else in Underworld.

In the final level of the game the designers commit an unpardonable sin: they go from a set number of enemy creatures per level to respawning enemies. The difficulty goes way up, but not in a way consonant with the game's other challenges: running, jumping, and climbing. Perhaps I should have shelved the game, given the frustration this section caused me, but I felt the need to finish even in the face of cowardly tricks.

I'm willing to excuse modestly clumsy design if the story is top notch, but Underworld has no such saving grace. Amusingly, the designers have replaced Lara the cipher of the original game (often derided for being zero- or one-dimensional) with Lara the smoldering, resentful harpy who misses her dear, lost Mommy. She yells and threatens and glowers, hoping the noise will distract you from the stupidity of it all. Sure, you can claim there's more detail to this Lara, but you just can't bring yourself to care.

On top of that, the writers have attempted an embarrassingly amateur Grand Unified Theory of World Mythology. You'll laugh out loud more than once at the blithering stupidity Lara mutters for her little recording device.

Reportedly the original Tomb Raider developers, Core Design, wanted to make a grand trilogy starting with the ill-fated Angel of Darkness. Crystal Dynamics has pulled off a trilogy in four years, which is quite an accomplishment. I am impressed that Crystal Dynamics pulled the thread of the original game's story and wove it together with the seemingly separate thread from Legend, all leading to a tidy resolution in Underworld. It's quite a trick, but ultimately nothing more.

Note: I experienced two hard lockups while playing this game. Each required me to power cycle my PS3.

Labels: ps3, reviews, tomb raider

--jvm at 19:57

link

Comment [ 4 ]

Review: Mirror's Edge

Mirror's Edge is a new high-concept game from EA that combines parkour with a first-person perspective. From a technical standpoint it succeeds in several areas, and I heartily recommend the demo. I do not recommend the full game.

The key mechanics problem here is that developers and designers can't quite tell what is a well-designed level and what isn't when they're creating such a new kind of game. There are times when the design is inspired, but there are also many, many sections that remind me of slapped-together Action Quake 2 levels from back in the day. Frankly, it gave me new respect for the original Tomb Raider -- someone on that team had real vision, given that they really were breaking new ground (in 3D). Yet, for a total of maybe five minutes spread throughout Mirror's Edge, I felt like I was really living up to the game's promise of power and grace.

Mirror's Edge is not Prince of Persia: Sands of Time but is dangerously close to the original Stuntman. Too often you want to take back a half-second twitch to save you from redoing the same tedious 90 seconds of tricky movement, but there you are again, staring at the same white loading screen and cursing at your aging reflexes.

The real breaking point for me, though, was the very end.

Few games have made me as emotional as Mirror's Edge. Regrettably, the emotion I felt -- red, blinding rage -- had nothing to do with the game's story or characters.

You see, I went through the prologue, the eight chapters, and 50% of the finale without firing a single shot. Instead of killing the murderous police officers and paramilitary soldiers I encountered, I had disarmed them and left them unconscious. I was well on my way to the Pacifist trophy that the game offers if you finish without killing anyone but the chap in the final confrontation.

But, I will never get that trophy and I'm never playing this game again. The last half of the finale profoundly angered me. A man can only eat so many cheap sniper shots, so many deaths by machine gun from over 75 meters away, so many attempts at a final tricky jump to a tiny ledge across a giant gap, so many degrading restarts.

I relented. I neutralized a sniper, picked up his gun, and carefully shot my enemies one by one. It felt good, honestly. For once, those jack-booted thugs got a taste of their own medicine, and I hope they felt a little stab of fear right before I trepanned their f---ing skulls. Then I popped every other man that dared step in front of me from there to the end of the game. And all I got was an incomprehensible cut scene and a promise of a sequel.

Sometimes I hate games so very much.

Labels: anger, ea, reviews

--jvm at 21:40

link

Comment [ 0 ]

Dead Space: A conversation

One of EA's big titles this quarter is Dead Space, a survival horror game set in a shipwrecked mining vessel sometime in the future. It draws from a lot of familiar games and movies: Alien, Aliens, Resident Evil 4, Half-life 2, BioShock, and others. I was only mildly interested at first, but I got drawn in as I learned more after its launch.

I noticed that Josh Birk (of Cathode Tan) was playing it, and after LittleBigPlanet got pushed back a week, I opted to pick it up. What follows is a discussion Josh and I had after we'd finished.

JB: My quick take: this is still a top tier shooter which plays off previous games really, really well. It managed to spook me and keep me pretty tense, which isn't the easiest thing in the world.

JVM: I think my recent experience with shooters is so sparse that borrowed ideas in Dead Space would have seemed completely new. (I've played only two hours of Half-Life 2, for example, so my experience with a gravity gun is pretty limited.) So my perspective is different there. I'd say I've played more survival horror lately, and I'll add that I was very spooked in the beginning. Toward the end, however, I felt the game jettisoned scares in favor of action, and while I generally agree with that choice, they forgot to shorten the key-hunting to maintain the energy.

JB: Still, it's also example of why storytelling in games is hard. Why exactly am I returning this evil thing to this evil planet again? And the whole Nicole thing was contrived and a bit B-Movie.This is all compounded by the fact that Isaac could be replaced by a robot and the plot would remain nearly the same.

JVM: The designers attempt to humanize Isaac very late in the game, and it simply did not work for me. I even found myself trying to inject some emotions into the game. In one scene where there is another human in danger, I tried to rescue him with the kinesis module, but it did not help. I was disappointed that I was trying harder than the game to be a real person.

And not only can't Isaac react to other humans, but they don't even acknowledge him. When I was in a scene with another character speaking directly to me through a pane of glass, that character's model didn't even bother looking in my direction. I ran around on my side of the glass and the other character simply stared straight ahead, oblivious to my actual location. So not only did the design remove any options for me to act human, but they failed to add the obvious things that would have made the NPCs at least treat you like another human.

JB: The glass became something of a metaphor for me - that the game couldn't connect characters to each other. I consider what goes wrong in Dead Space when it comes to the character interaction twofold. One is this concept in modern gaming that you can't have cut scenes. Dead Space has a few cut scenes - and they actually work very well. The first few scenes of the game feel like the intro to a really decent sci fi movie. I've honestly never cared for the Half-Life approach and I think Dead Space is a good example why I'm not - to tell a good story it helps to have good characters. When you remove the main character from the equation, it doesn't take long for the story to unravel.

And the story here really unravels. I'm still confused by the whole Kendra hijacking the shuttle thing. The twist about Nicole in the end feels confusing and odd, not clever and insightful. I end up on this planet with little choice in the matter when I've got no reason to think Isaac wouldn't bolt at the first possible chance - and that's because I know nothing about him as a character.

I hope the sequel will introduce a real main character and decent camera direction. I've said all along that Dead Space is a good amalgamation of previous mechanics. They should play Uncharted a few times through before continuing the franchise.

JVM: Visually and aurally, Dead Space is at the top of class. Its vision of the Ishimura is so seamless and detailed that immersion is virtually guaranteed. To this end, I think the in-game holographic interface was essential. Moreover, having Isaac's suit itself display health and stasis energy was downright brilliant. The only time this broke down for me was the opening of doors -- they appear to be used to cover the loading times, and that's a shame.

JB: This is a beautiful game. I saw a couple of collision problems (one humorous one where the undefeatable deadite was sticking his head out of a crate) and occasional the physics on the bodies was odd. The HUD is design genius. The Girl kept telling me to turn the sound down, too, because I really liked playing this game in the dark with the volume cranked up. The Ishimura just breathes at times.

My real complaint visually is that we didn't get enough views of the scenery. When I first hit the bridge, I saved the game just to show The Girl the meteor storm. The inside of one Chapter begins to feel the same as the next by the end of the game, but the outside is usually interesting.

JVM: Dead Space communicates very effectively with sound. Obviously the scary noises are important, but the atmospheric sounds flesh out the world and enhance the sense of spatial relationships. What really blew me away was the effect of almost no sound when Isaac had to work in a vacuum. After the game trains you to know the sounds of your enemies, you suddenly find yourself in an environment with practically no sound at all. That contrast is one of the game's high points. Each time Isaac had to enter a vacuum after that, I shifted my play style to constantly scan the corners of the room for any movement, relying on vision almost exclusively.

JB: This is where that shooter genealogy kicks in. Since Doom designers have played with just how much information to broadcast to the player via sound without giving too much away - and I think Dead Space hits it just about right. Totally agreed on the vacuum - some of the interior vacuum scenes are about the most memorable.

So about half way or little more through the game - you analyzed the ammo system. Did this break you out of the game, realizing at one point that the ammo is somewhat rigged? Also, the ammo drops themselves - I wonder if this isn't a mechanic starting to lose its welcome. I had a party last week where guests tried Dead Space out a lot and the most frequent question they had was "why do all these dead things carry plasma rounds"?

And I wonder - if I only carried the cutter, would I only get plasma rounds?

JVM: Right. To explain briefly, there was a checkpoint in the game right before an ambush that I found particularly challenging. After each restart, I would go past the same locker and pick up whatever item was in the locker. This revealed that the item generation was pretty random -- I could get ammo or a health item or money -- but not completely random. I had upgraded two weapons and not another, and the game would generate ammo almost exclusively for the weaker, stock weapon. In effect, the game was acknowledging that each round for a stronger gun was more valuable, and balancing the probability distribution accordingly.

To the extent that I was nearly completely taken in by Dead Space's world, this did break the illusion. I realized that I could game the system in precisely the way you suggest: carry only one weapon. Ultimately, I wanted to carry only the line gun and the plasma cutter -- one for crowd control, and one for precision amputation. Instead, I used my cash and upgraded the third weapon I had until all three were effectively equals. At that point, ammo drops went back to completely random, and I enjoyed the game much more.

And that's the invisible hand of the designer, pushing me toward what I think they intended people to do: upgrade weapons evenly. That annoys me.

JB: At the same time, I appreciate the designers trying something new. This wasn't a game breaker for me, but it's something I'd like to see tweaked for a sequel.

JVM: Incidentally, how much cash did you have when you finished? I fell back into my usual survival horror habits, originally learned playing Resident Evil on the PS1, where I conserve every resource I can. As a result, I didn't do much upgrading of weapons for the first couple of chapters, and then didn't spend money for much of anything until the last two chapters. I ended the game with 250,000 credits and that was after a big spending spree before the final confrontation (and before the 50,000 credits you get as a reward for finishing the game).

JB: I'd have to pull it up, but I think the last time I hit the final confrontation I blew through most of it. Mind you, in that last run I also had a lot of leftover rounds and health packs, and I think I went ahead an bought a couple of power nodes that I didn't really need. I was way more spendthrifty though, I wasn't too afraid of running short of supplies in part because the game seemed to provide when I needed it. I'd love to know how much I has spent on plasma rounds by the end of the game though, since the cutter was by far my prime weapon.

I'd be curious to know how much you managed to conserve on ammo by using the kinesis more. I don't know if I couldn't get the hang of it or if I just liked knowing that the cutter was effective.

In the long run, though, I have the same question here that lingers from RE4. Is a store metaphor really fitting for a survival setting? I can't think of an example in movie or fiction which really fits. I get that resource management is an important part of the whole dynamic, but it seems like the horror side of things might need an update.

JVM: I'm about to start BioShock. I've tried to shield myself from spoilers, and have only played the demo that was made available on PSN. From what little knowledge I have, it would appear that Dead Space and BioShock share some traits: upgrading weapons, an enclosed environment, and modified humans. However, here is what I'm wondering: did you feel that BioShock had a mature treatment of Objectivism and how does Dead Space's treatment of Unitology/Scientology compare? EA had a series of Dead Space trailers produced in graphic novel form that really fleshes out the Unitology cabal angle, but that seemed terribly underplayed in the actual game.

JB: Oddly, I think Bioshock does a better job of presenting some of the underlying concepts of its backstory. The whole religious aspect of Dead Space felt like it mostly window dressing, as if the designers had a hard time tying these elements to what was happening to Isaac. This is partially because the resulting carnage is less direct than most games and the scenery in Bioshock is more diverse. At the same time, in both games you're dealing with just that - the aftermath.

For both games, and it will be interesting to compare when you get done with it, I'd honestly rather see a prequel for the next one than a sequel.

Labels: cathode tan, conversations, reviews

--jvm at 21:32

link

Comment [ 0 ]

Review: Prof. Layton and the Curious Village (NDS)

Professor Layton and his ward, Luke, set out to find The Golden Apple, a treasure hidden in the village of St. Mystere. Each resident of the town plies the famous professor for solutions to various brain teasers, many of which make good use of the stylus for sketching out solutions as well as actual puzzle piece manipulation. As the story progresses, multiple mysteries arise, are solved, and ultimately conclude with a teaser for a sequel that leaves you hoping it arrives sooner rather than later.

The charming animation, voicework, and soundtrack will leave you convinced that the Nintendo DS is a system whose best days are still ahead. The meat of the game, the puzzles, are almost perfect with only a few questionable word choices along the way. Regardless, the game provides hints to get you out of a pinch.

I got Layton for the puzzles, but realized I had seen many of them before. (Such was my upbringing with puzzle books and Games magazine.) Regardless, the story and mystery were more than entertaining enough and I eagerly await news of Layton's return.

Labels: nds, nintendo, reviews

--jvm at 15:46

link

Comment [ 1 ]

The appearance of impartiality

That's what vanishes when people sign on to do things like this:

Nintendo's recent ploy, in the UK at least, is to require reviewers to visit the 'Nintendo Flat' in London, a place where one can book slots to review titles for a period of time (depending on what slots are left over from the prioritised lifestyle mags and newspapers) from the comfort of one of the company's armchairs.

Of course it's not just Nintendo -- the commentary in question is really about Rockstar and GTA4 -- but this really does bring the point home. I've come to rely more and more on blogs and NeoGAF poster comments before buying a game.

There was a time when I loaded up sites like GameSpot and IGN to check the latest reviews. I can't recall the last time I did that. Instead, I rely on word of mouth. Sometimes a demo suffices (Uncharted) or reputation (my MGS4 preorder).

Labels: media, reviews

--jvm at 12:38

link

Comment [ 1 ]

Nega-review: Grand Theft Auto IV - Joystiq:

'GTA IV has its flaws as a game.' (1) 'The flow of the game basically goes like this: you watch a cutscene, someone in the cutscene says that someone has done them wrong, you're told they need to be taught a lesson, and then you get in a car and go teach them the lesson. At that point another cinema is triggered and the process repeats. ... it can definitely become a little repetitive.' (2)

And thus begins my first experience with a Nega-review, where Kyle Orland puts together a composite of all of the negative-esque points and quotes from reviews for a game at major gaming sites for you to read in a single sitting. It's an incredibly enjoyable and informative piece even though, as he says later, "it was actually relatively hard to pull negative quotes from most of the reviews of GTA IV."

If you haven't stumbled over it before I did, head over and take a quick read.

Labels: gta, joystiq, reviews

--ruffin at 09:00

link

Comment [ 0 ]

Review: Defender of the Crown (GBA)

For $3, I couldn't pass up a used copy of Defender of the Crown for the GBA. The classic game I'd loved as a youngster, now in handheld form? Brilliant.

I'm happy to say that the nostalgia comes through nearly unspoiled. The graphics remind me of the Amiga version whose screenshots I'd envied back when I played the Commodore 64 version until the disk drive wore slam out. The music is more modern, and I think I actually prefer the SID version.

As for gameplay, it's exactly the same. You play a little RISK-like strategery, claiming land and building an army. Occasionally you raid castles, try to rescue a damsel, or joust at a tournament. (Ok, there is something new in the tournament. I don't recall ever bashing my opponent in a one-on-one mace battle.) Ultimately, you want to take over the entire country and claim the crown.

The random setbacks (losing a territory, money, or sabotaged catapults) feel a little too frequent for my tastes. And the swordfighting I found to be frustratingly hard. In the original there were only two opponents, now there are ... four? Forget it, I'll stay a bachelor until I'm king. Also, how the heck does jousting work? It seems completely random to me.

I've seen some reviews complain that this game could have used some extras. Ok, sure, paying full price I can understand the disappointment. On the other hand, it makes a perfect cheap game that is way easier to pull out and play than my Commodore 128 system.

(Or, you could just play the official versions online. For essentially free.)

Labels: c64, gba, reviews

--jvm at 11:27

link

Comment [ 2 ]

Review: Impossible Mission (NDS)

I just finished a game I never finished almost a quarter century ago: Impossible Mission. My original experience was with a pirated copy (yes, pirated) on the Commodore 64. I just finished it on the Nintendo DS. Frankly, it's a little depressing.

Here's the gist of the game: collect pieces of punchcard keys from rooms guarded by lethal robots and then make it to a special room to stop a nuclear weapon launch. You can run, jump, search for keys, and use the computer terminals to reset lifts and disable the robots temporarily.

First, the very fact that this game is still being sold -- practically unchanged -- is alarming. I understand nostalgia, it's my personal excuse for playing this game, but how can this game be on store shelves in this day and age? My guess is that it's just simple enough to appeal to the casual Nintendo DS player. After all, the game involves only a few platform-mechanics in several barely-randomized rooms and some 30-odd puzzle pieces to find.

Second, the game is easier for everyone now because you can save at practically any moment and then reload later. Messed up a jump and lost 10 minutes off the countdown? No problem. Reload that save and it's like it never happened. You can (and I did) save-crawl the game to completion.

Additionally, the only novelty aside from the save game option, is a set of improved graphics. Purely cosmetic. The game even offers the option of playing with the original 8-bit graphics, which are strikingly neon-looking. I guess I've become accustomed to "realistic" graphics after all this time.

Finally, after all these years, I'm disappointed in the end-sequence. I thought there might be something significant to facing the madman, but here it's just a cut scene. SPOILER: He presses the button to launch the missile and you press another one to stop it. What drama! END SPOILER.

For $10, Impossible Mission for the Nintendo DS isn't bad. I'll settle for the comfort of striking this title off my list of uncompleted games.

Labels: nds, nintendo, reviews

--jvm at 13:18

link

Comment [ 1 ]

Review: God of War: Chains of Olympus (PSP)

In about the last year I've played God of War and its sequel God of War 2 to completion. The former is better with plot and the latter with combat, but both are well above average in both departments. With blood and nudity and a mythological soap opera, the God of War series strikes me as the modern male escapist fantasy equivalent of Burroughs's A Princess of Mars.

Last week the PSP received its own God of War game and I'm pleased to say that it recreates everything I loved about the PS2 games, including a decent story. Frankly, with external developer Ready at Dawn creating this prequel, I was concerned the plot would be second-rate. However, its proficiency at storytelling lags the original slightly while outdoing the sequel. This time we follow the adventures of Kratos, the superhuman servant of Ares, just prior to the events in the first God of War.

While Chains of Olympus succeeds at many things, I was most impressed by the pacing:

• The opening level presents the game's biggest boss (but not the toughest one).
• The third is full of puzzles.
• The fourth provides you with the truly enjoyable hit-reflection ability.
• The sixth takes you to a whole new setting, with several new enemies.
  
• The seventh introduces a new and immensely rewarding weapon.
  
• The eighth is a series of strenuous battles, a plot twist, a final battle, and a clever little conclusion that leads directly into the story of the original God of War.

I don't care how much people complain about the length of the game (which I completed in just over six hours), it's really packaged quite well. As for the length -- I don't want to spend more than six hours playing any handheld game, even over the course of several days.

Interestingly, my favorite moment in the game didn't involve combat or a puzzle. As you may know, heavy doors and objects are lifted in God of War by pounding the circle button repeatedly. Near the end of Chains of Olympus, Kratos has to commit a difficult act of personal sacrifice which is acted out through circle-button mashing. It's a simple variation on a common mechanic, yet I thought it was effective in conveying the emotional weight of the moment.

All around, I enjoyed God of War: Chains of Olympus a great deal -- both for its gameplay and its furthering the story of Kratos -- and I recommend it.

Labels: psp, reviews, sex, story, violence

--jvm at 20:41

link

Comment [ 2 ]

Review: Uncharted: Drake's Fortune (PS3)

Uncharted: Drake's Fortune tells the story of Nathan Drake as he seeks the treasure his ancestor, Sir Francis Drake, left hidden on a remote tropical island. A reporter, Elena, and his best friend, Sully, tag along for the ride. Vicious competitors arrive simultaneously and the two groups race to unlock the island's secrets and locate Drake's treasure.

All of the gameplay falls into two categories: movement puzzles and combat. Most of the former is unoriginal, but the lush scenery almost makes up for it. Combat takes over as the game reaches its climax, which helps the pacing but also reveals the game's design limitation. Fortunately, the brutal pack intelligence of the enemies makes every encounter a challenge, even when replaying the same scene. While you can effectively use cover to maximize your firepower, you can also be overwhelmed from the flank if you don't subdue the enemy quickly enough.

Able-bodied and lithe, Nate parkours through the island's jungle and hidden ruins with visible effort. And while he is armed, he lacks the action game genre's armor and health packs. Except for his amazingly steady aim, he is a very human actor. Recent Tomb Raider games have humanized Lara and smoothed her movement, but future entries in that series will rate poorly if they don't match Uncharted's standards for characterization and action.

The game's biggest weakness comes at the end when the near-realism is nearly jettisoned for a fantastical action game (and movie) cliche. Fortunately, the twist doesn't play out as ham-handedly as it first appears, nearly saving itself by the end. Redemption comes in a pivotal scene which feels ripped directly from a classic action movie I'll decline to name, but then plays out satisfyingly differently.

Uncharted isn't quite the personal revelation that Tomb Raider was in 1997 or that Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time was in 2005, but it's still an awesome experience.

Technical note: While playing I experienced one hard lock that required me to reboot my PS3.

Labels: ps3, reviews, sony

--jvm at 19:38

link

Comment [ 0 ]

Review: Tomb Raider: Anniversary (PS2)

Crystal Dynamics stuck close to the source material for this remake of the original Tomb Raider. As she did over 10 years ago, Lara Croft ventures through tombs and learns the dark secrets of the Scion of Atlantis. Along the way she runs, jumps, and climbs past devilish traps and hungry wild animals.

The original levels have almost all been reimagined in Tomb Raider: Anniversary, and they often look quite good. Regrettably, some vistas lack the grandeur that this dedicated fan would have liked. Lara herself is generally responsive, but the precise controls of the original have been replaced with the less predictable control system from Tomb Raider: Legend. In brief, the game doesn't allow you to do whatever you want whenever you want. (See the bit about magic at the end of this journal entry.) And while the manual grab is an option, some difficult movement puzzles betray a developer's bias for automatic grab. The Quick-Timer Events are almost uniformly poor, as they were in Legend.

While the remade levels are fitting updates to the originals, I think that Crystal Dynamics should have taken more liberties with their material. What was brilliant 10 years ago simply isn't strong enough by today's standards and some completely new ideas would have served the game well. (If a Tomb Raider II remake is considered, Crystal Dynamics will have to indulge itself in rethinking huge sections of it, in particular the Venice levels. Too bad it wasn't done here.)

The outline of the plot is essentially unchanged, but the changes within that framework are welcome. Specifically, how Lara kills is treated with care, an issue I've raised many times before and which I'll tackle once more in a future post. What struck me, however, is that this is merely an improved story told in precisely the same manner used 10 years ago. It is revealing that the cutscene-action-cutscene loop is practically unchanged after a decade of new products from an industry that likes to tout its innovation.

Labels: ps2, reviews, tomb raider

--jvm at 20:36

link

Comment [ 1 ]

Review: God of War 2 (PS2)

I savored God of War over the course of several weeks. I ripped into God of War 2 and finished in less than seven days. I recommend them both, provided you at least tolerate glorified brutality and some female partial nudity.

All you'll ever need to know about the plot: Kratos is killed by a fearful Zeus, but the Titans save him and send him to find The Fates and change the past. Along the way he kills lots of things (mostly using a fun almost-button-mashing combat system) and earns new powers.

God of War 2 has a more refined control system, which means you'll want to play God of War first. The wider array of weapons in God of War 2 also permits more customization to suit your style and cover your weaknesses.

Regrettably the story in God of War 2 falls somewhat flat. In the original, Kratos played a classic underdog, a mortal taking on a God. While he's ostensibly mortal again, his plight seems far less compelling. His personal need for revenge grounds the character far less than his need to avenge his wife and child.

My biggest complaint with God of War 2 is, I regret to say, a purely technical one. I am distracted by the extent of image tearing, at least in progressive scan mode. I appreciate that Sony's team in Santa Monica pushed the PlayStation 2 further than anyone else has, but I wonder if they could have backed off just a hair and reduced the tearing almost entirely.

Labels: ps2, reviews

--jvm at 22:09

link

Comment [ 0 ]

Not Ready for Prime Time

GameSpot recently changed how their site handles reviews. Among other things, the 0.1 granularity in scores is gone. Tonight they reviewed the PS3 game Super Stardust HD and the page I got came up with a score of 0.0. Here's the screenshot:
Looks like the system needs a little work guys. Although, if the score stays at 0.0, I'll at least give them credit for sticking it to (what appears to be) a copy-cat game with a thick layer of eye candy. (Of course, by the time you read this, they will probably have updated the page to show the correct score...)

Labels: gamespot, ps3, reviews

--jvm at 21:07

link

Comment [ 5 ]

What the heck is it about EB Games that has "readers" writing "reviews" like they've the IQ of kittens?

***** want it soo badly
Reviewed By: simcrazy Date: Monday, June 18, 2007
i really dont care if people say this game is bad because the guys actually have a better bathing suit! i think this is a must have expansion pack.

*** Really not worth it!!!!!
Reviewed By: Susame Date: Thursday, June 07, 2007
I bought this game yesterday and it has about ten new outfits for the girls the men don't really have as many. The game is not bad but it wasn't what I expected I thought you will be able to create your own outfits, but that's not the case. So it's not a must have, but if you jus ... [More]

***** Tested... liked it
Reviewed By: Evelin Date: Wednesday, June 06, 2007
I tested this game for maxis & it rocks!!I love the sims & never get tired of it like some people. This game is new & fun...Like they said this is a must-have for your sims!!I know youll enjoy this
Happy Simming
E.M

First, the obvious question. Why was I looking at this Sims expansion? I get the EB Games' email, pretending some day I'll find a deal, and had no idea what "H&M Fashion Stuff" was. They got me; I had to give it a quick look. H&M is apparently some "European fashion retailer that is taking the US by storm with its trendsetting contemporary fashions". Go figure. Now H&M is a game, of sorts. That's right, there are people willing to purchase advertising for $20. No wonder everyone wants to copy the "success" of The Sims. I just don't get it. (Caveat: I did, at one time, wear a Coca-Cola collared shirt in junior high, and occasionally wear highly commercialized t-shirts to this day. Idiots abound.)

The problem is that, regardless of how inane the expansion being "reviewed" sounds, it doesn't explain the comments above, which I find are pretty representative on ebgames.com as a whole. I particularly like the reviews for games that haven't even been released. "***** This R0x0rz!!! I'm gunna git it fur shur!"

Now here's my only semi-serious point that could possibly take this painful post away from being nothing more than another ill-begotten rant: Could the gaming rag culture of providing overly-positive previews and advocacy-disguised-as-journalism be contributing to the production of this sort of mindless drivel by consumers?

Like cows to the slaughter, I wonder.

Labels: culture, journaltisement, reviews, useless

--ruffin at 09:41

link

Comment [ 0 ]

Review: Prince of Persia: The Two Thrones (PS2)

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time is equal parts romance, time travel, and glassy smooth action sequences: a traceur prince seeks redemption, falls in love, and earns the power to bend time. Prince of Persia: Revelations, also known as The Warrior Within, was an ugly scar of a sequel, unplayable and buggy. The third game, The Two Thrones, was hailed by Ubisoft and reviewers as a return to the romance and action of the first game, with the improved combat of the second.

They were wrong. It's just another soulless sequel whose misunderstanding of Sands of Time beggars the imagination.

It has but a mere glimmer of romance. Its plot hinges on timelines that are neither novel nor compelling. And the action -- while certainly an extension of the previous games -- frustrates almost as often as it entertains. Whoever designed that ridiculously cheap puzzle-to-chariot-race-to-boss-battle sequence in the middle of the game should be unceremoniously sacked. Nothing in this game justifies the time you'll spend fighting against its flaws, certainly not its perfunctory final sequences. Heck, the best line in the entire game isn't even original: it's borrowed from the very first game!

I should have taken heed when I saw that Jordan Mechner -- writer and designer of The Sands of Time and the creator of Prince of Persia and Karateka -- had no part in the latter two modern Prince of Persia games. Clearly he knew that the conceits of the first game would work once, but no more. Now I know better and so should you.

Labels: ps2, reviews

--jvm at 16:02

link

Comment [ 3 ]

Notes: Payback (GBA), Gradius Collection (PSP)

While I'm working on Beyond Good & Evil (i.e. winner of this comments thread), I've picked up two new handheld games to pass the time.

• Payback (GBA) - I am a sucker for oddball games, it's true. So when I saw Payback, a nearly-full-3D Grand Theft Auto clone for the Game Boy Advance, I was instantly intrigued. Regrettably, it was never released in North America, and Nintendo's rules prevent the publisher from shipping the international version to me directly.
  
  My first attempt to get it from someone who listed himself as being in Australia, where the game was published, netted me a package shipped directly from Hong Kong with -- you guessed it -- a cheap rip-off. That copy has been donated to academia for further study.
  
  A European friend arranged to purchase from the publisher on my behalf and forward the game to me here in the States, so now I have the real thing.
  
  I spent about an hour with it this afternoon, and it is really a fascinating clone of GTA. The pay phone missions start you off in Liberty City ... ahem ... I mean Freedom City. Running down a pedestrian leaves bloody tire tracks on the pavement. Missions involve the usual Point A to Point B to Point C mechanics. Practically the only familiar GTA hallmark I haven't seen is the line of Hare Krishnas in the park.
  
  The controls are a bit wonky. Be prepared to struggle with them a bit, but they'll grow on you. If there is a lot of gunplay later on, I suspect it will mean frustration. I should also mention that Liber--Freedom City is located on an island nation, so you'll be driving on the wrong side of the road.
  
  I enjoyed the time I dropped into the game and I suspect I'll pick it up again from time to time. However, it won't be an obsession.
  
  
• Gradius Collection (PSP) - The recent Best Buy clearance netted me my first $5 PSP game, Gradius Collection. While I've played side-scrolling shmups before (like R-Type), I have never seen a Gradius game, either in an arcade or on a home system.
  
  The short of it is that I like what I've seen so far. Granted, I hated my first three games, because I had no idea what was going on, but now that I understand a bit more about what's going on I really enjoy it. Gradius and Gradius II are the games I've played the most and they're similar enough that the skills carry over, but the levels are different enough that I'm enjoying them independently.
  
  The options allow you to tune the difficulty, which is helpful for newbies like me. There are also options to view the game at the resolution offered in the arcade and in a stretched mode to use all the PSP screen.
  
  For $5, I'd buy just about any game. However, Gradius Collection is one that I'd've picked up at $15 had I known how much fun it could be.

That is all.

Labels: gba, psp, reviews

--jvm at 21:58

link

Comment [ 4 ]

Review: God of War (PS2)

God of War for the PlayStation 2 does almost everything right. It tells the epic and memorable tale of Kratos, a Spartan, and his quest to kill Ares, the Greek god of war. The entertaining combat system is receptive to frantic button-mashing but rewards skilled, rhythmic tapping. It's about as graphically seamless as any game I've seen anywhere.

I enjoyed it immensely and recommend it for those who are willing to endure the unblinkingly violent images and occasional partial nudity.

That said, I still have some complaints. There is a section late in the game which overwhelmed me with a bunch of cheap tricks: conveyor belts, flame jets, archers, and harpies by the dozen. Even after I figured out the best way to optimize my limited resources in that battle, I had to endure several attempts before I got lucky and survived to the end. Even the last three battles, the climax of the game, were easy by comparison.

For a man broken up missing his wife and child, Kratos sure didn't mind hopping in the sack with a couple of pneumatic floozies at the beginning of the game. That bit strikes me as an exploitative stunt which mars an otherwise well-written story. It's particularly noticeable because of the two teenage fantasies the game glorifies, violence and sex, only the bloodshed persists beyond the first third of the game.

Labels: ps2, reviews

--jvm at 20:44

link

Comment [ 2 ]