The Invisible Eyeball

Publishers insist that used game sales are killing them.  Gamestop laughs all the way to the bank with their massive profits from used game sales.  Gamers, well, gamers are torn on the issue, including me.  Part of me thinks when you buy a product, you should have every right to re-sell that product in its entirety.  NOT with featured disabled or removed.  Another part of me understands that some publishers and development houses are fighting tooth and nail to survive.  The last thing I want to see is a gaming industry where only the giant, mega companies like Activision can survive.  The third part of me, the smart part, realizes that there MUST be some sort of compromise to be made.

The publisher’s position on used game sales is easy to understand.  Publishers don’t see a dime from used game sales – at least not directly.  They tend to dismiss the idea that used game trade-ins actually contribute to new game sales.  

Retailers certainly don’t give publishers any portion of used game sales.  In addition to that, retailers tend to only knock off 5 bucks at the most on the price of used – which they have learned is a perfectly acceptable price point for consumers.  “I can get the same game for 5 bucks less?  I’ll take it!” 

Used game sales are almost pure profit for retailers.  With sites like Amazon that can cut prices to the bone on new games, retailers HAVE to keep their margins low on new games, and hence don’t see a large profit.  But sell them your used game for 25 bucks that they can turn around for more than double that, and you can see why they are happy with the way things are now.  Like the publishers, they are in business to make money. 

So how could retailers and publishers work together to fix this?  I have a few ideas that they could try.

Make new game sales more compelling by lowering the introductory price.  If you want to make new games more compelling, quit trying to push prices UP.  I remember when game makers started making the switch from cartridges to disc-based media.  One of the way they sold this was that game prices would come down.  What they failed to mention is that they would shoot right back up shortly thereafter.  Now I’m not naive, I realize that development costs are a little bit crazy, but games at a softer price point could spurn larger sales numbers to make up the difference. 

Lower initial game purchase price to brick and mortar retailers.  B&M stores NEED used game sales right now because they can’t compete with the power of Amazon and other retailers that can slash prices due to lower overheads and such.  Publishers have to help B&M retailers out, and one way to do that would be to sell new games at a discount to those retailers.  If you let them increase their profit margin on new releases, perhaps you could also work out a deal for part of that used game pie.

Find a way to restrict used game prices.  If you insist on implementing things like the $10 fee EA is putting in place, you need to control the price used games can be sold at.  Savvy gamers will be smart enough not to pay for used games at a mere $5 discount if they then are forced to pay $10 for full functionality, but not all game consumers are that well informed.  Work with the retailers.  Tell them if they want to be able to sell your NEW games in the future, they have to keep their used game prices down. 

My question is this:  why aren’t the publishers working with the retailers to find a way to remedy this?  From the recent “new game only” DLC to the new one-time-use online codes from EA, the publishers are going right after the people who buy used games.  Let’s imagine that a particular store is breaking street dates with reckless abandon.  You decide to head over there to grab Super Awesome Robot Hunter 6 a little bit early.  The game company finds out about said store, and decides to punish the people who bought the game early while allowing that store to continue its practice with no repercussions.  In what universe does this make sense?  If publishers want to see some money from those used game sales, they should start with the companies reaping all the profits – not the consumers.

While there aren’t as many “blockbuster” level announcements at E3 as there were in my younger days, I’m always hoping for some some surprises from the industry.  I thought it would be a fun exercise to think about what my “dream” E3 announcements would be.  Here are a few of the things I would love to see announced, but will not likely see the light of day for one reason or another.

A REAL Online Strategy for Nintendo

I know I’m far from alone on this one.  How great would it be to hear of the the arrival of a legitimate online strategy from the big N?  My first hope would be to hear that the idea of “friend codes” had met its demise, to be replaced by the WiiID.  (Use it Nintendo, please – I won’t even charge you!)  Nintendo NEEDS a persistent, unified online ID to join the 21st century online.  Everyone seems to understand this as necessary to a great online experience – at least everyone outside of Nintendo. 

At the same time they could unveil their own achievement system.  (I thought about calling their achievements Wii Wees, but that’s too crass for my taste.)  Nintendo should understand that other people have good ideas too, and it’s ok to steal them from time to time.

Natal and Move at Reasonable Price Points

Another pipe dream, I know, but I’d be on board with both of these if I didn’t have to shell out a Benjamin or more for them.  Why on earth would I spend over a hundred bucks on a borderline gimmicky add-on?  I’m finding every way I can to scrimp on cash nowadays (as are MANY people) and I’m not going to buy anything game-related that costs much more than a new game.

It’s also imperative that both accessories come with a packed-in game – and it MUST have some real value.  I practically wore out my Wii Sports disc because it was just plain fun. 

More Mature Gaming Experiences

And I don’t mean more boobies and gore.  I think Heavy Rain has shown that there IS a market for gaming experiences that handle more mature subject matter.  I don’t want my M ratings to be due to buckets of blood, decapitations, and sex mini-games; I want real content.  I want a story I have to think about every once in awhile.  I want experiences that speak to my demographic in new and exciting ways.  In my earlier days, I prided myself on my twitch skills in tough-as-nails platformers and action games.  I’m over that now.  I like games that make me think to win, games that will stay with me long after I power down the system. 

You know, like art.

Developers Realize We Don’t Care About 3D

Yes, I know 3D movies are all in vogue right now and all, but 3D gaming ain’t the same thing.  You can find a local theater to see a movie in 3D, and it’ll only cost you a few bucks more.  For a 3D gaming experience, you’re looking at an outlay in the $1500 range.  I sure as hell ain’t ready for something I’m not sure will be that much better than what I have now. 

The first time I saw an HDTV in action, my jaw hit the floor.  I HAD to have one.  The first time I saw a 3D TV?  I thought it was cool.  That’s it.

So please devs, focus your efforts on excellence in old-fashioned 2D gaming, and forget about the third dimension for now.  (Other than Nintendo anyhow, a portable system with a little 3D thrown in sounds alright to me.  Well, as long as we don’t get another Virtual Boy.)

A New PSP2 is Announced and Doesn’t Suck

As I said in a previous article, I really want to love the PSP. It’s just plain broken in too many ways.  The analog nub sucks and there’s only one of them, slow loading times are no good on a handheld, and the game library is tepid at best.  I want a handheld that’s both a graphics powerhouse and a great gaming machine with amazing titles.  Sony can get hardware right, they’ve proven that in the past.  I hope they took an honest look at what people didn’t like about the PSP and made some changes.  They certainly didn’t address enough of the issues with the failure that is the PSPGo, but I’m willing to give them another shot. 

Those are just a few things that would raise my gaming pulse.  Another online shooter?  Not so much.  Another mature, grisly open-world game?  Nah.  Give me some meaty announcements like the old days, and I’ll be a happy gamer.  So what are some things YOU would like to see out of E3?

I have a bit of a confession to make.  I like to fancy myself a real gamer, but my past is pock-marked with missing “must-have” gaming experiences.  I’ve never played Counter Strike or Gears of War.  I never even so much as looked at Portal.  Also, while I’m loathe to admit it, I never finished the first God of War, and I never even considered trying God of War II.  Thankfully, the folks at Sony saw fit to give me an opportunity to right some of those wrongs with the HD-ified God of War Collection.  With God of War III slated for release in March, I figured it was now or never.  So I took it upon myself to play through all three games in succession.  And rather than add to the massive pile of plain old God of War III reviews, I decided to do the unthinkable, and review all 3 at once.  So get yourself a drink, buckle your seatbelt, and try to relax – we’re going to be here for awhile.  Here is my review of the God of War Trilogy.

God of War

Five years is quite a long time in the world of video games. They’re kind of like dog years; multiply by 3 to see just how long ago that really was in terms of gaming technology. Popping in the God of War collection, I had reservations about whether it would hold up today, even if it was "upgraded" for HD. It turns out my trepidations about the game were largely unfounded. God of War is a stellar action-adventure title that not only holds up in 2010, it even manages to best some recent efforts in the genre.

Even in its relatively “infant” stage, the combat engine in God of War is top-notch.  Kratos is a whirling dervish of death, and his ability to smoothly eviscerate a roomful of enemies while maintaining seemingly unbroken combos is amazing.  A lot of games have combo-heavy combat that moves at breakneck speeds, but I find they often leave you feeling a bit out of control.  Kratos is incredibly responsive, and even in the midst of a massive combo attack, I felt completely in command.  In some games of this type (I’m looking at you, Dante’s), I find myself mashing a single button incessantly, performing the same attack over and over again with great success.  In God of War, I’m able to constantly mix it up, whether on the ground or in the air. 

As you might expect, the graphical presentation is probably the game’s biggest weakness.  The in-game engine has been polished and brought up to a silky-smooth frame-rate, but the other visual elements, namely the cut-scenes, are still stuck in 2005.  On my 42” plasma, the graininess and overall low quality of the cinematic breaks couldn’t be ignored.  This doesn’t detract from the overall experience as much as I might have feared, however.

The boss fights in God of War are just as breathtaking and bad-ass as they ever were.  The very first boss battle with the massive Hydra really sets the stage for what is to come in the entire series.  I was blown away by the scale and intensity of this first major fight, and I was pleasantly surprised by how well Quick Time Events (QTEs) worked within the context of the battle.  They allowed the developers the latitude to create impressive combat stunts that couldn’t be handled within the context of the actual gameplay system.  The great thing about QTEs here is that they allow such glorious representations of combat while still allowing the player some influence and participation.

God of War is not perfect, however.  I found the difficulty to be ratcheted a bit on the high side at times.  This didn’t have so much to do with actual combat as it did with some of the environmental “platformy” type sections – especially the balance-beam areas.  The fixed camera often made it difficult to ensure that Kratos moved in the proper direction in these sections, and this led to quite a few fall-and-die-instantly moments. 

God of War also carries with it the worst block puzzle ever.  If you’ve played the game, you surely know what I’m talking about.  A room filled with spikes and a box that has to be moved through the room and around two corners within a very scant time limit.  This particular puzzle may have taken me a dozen tries to get it right.  This block puzzle made for soul-searing, rage-inducing fits of frustration.  If I never have to attempt that again, it will be too soon. 

I also need to mention the desert/siren stage.  This is the reason that I never finished the game my first time around a few years back.  I loved every second of God of War up to that point, but then I found myself wandering aimlessly through the desert trying to find those dang sirens for far, far too long. 

My last major gripe with the game is its tendency to repetition at parts.  I’ve made it pretty clear that I love the combat system, but there are times where it feels like that’s all that is happening.  Fighting wave after wave of enemies can be fun, but it has to be broken up with other gameplay elements.  There are times where I plain lost interest in never-ending combat.

The story of God of War is interesting enough; it’s not going to win any drama awards, but it kept me engaged throughout.  Beginning the game with Kratos diving off a cliff was an excellent choice, and the mystery of how he would have gotten to that point piqued my interest immediately.  The main crux of the plot involves Kratos’ quest to kill Ares, the God of War.  He gets a fair amount of help from the Goddess Athena by way of directing him to Pandora’s Box, which holds the power to destroy a God.  Of course Pandora’s Box is exceedingly difficult to obtain, and there are quite a few hoops for Kratos to jump through.  The narration of the entire tale is excellent, and I felt real empathy for Kratos and the past that haunted him. 

Overall, God of War is a wonderful game that holds up even today.  The brutal combat, interesting narrative and stunning boss fights combine for a marvelous action-adventure package.  Even with five years’ worth of dust and cobwebs, Kratos’ initial journey is well-worth taking.

[xrr rating=4.5/5]

God of War II

While the first God of War released midway through the PS2′s life cycle, God of War II hit at the end of PS2′s days, even after the release of the PS3. Because of this, the developers were able to squeeze every last bit of performance out of the PS2 to create possibly the best looking PS2 title of all time. God of War II looks pretty dang good even today, but did they manage to recapture the magic and majesty of the first game?

Unequivocally, yes. 

We’ll start with the heart of God of War, the combat.  Wisely, the development team elected to refine the gameplay rather than try to rewrite it; after all, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.  They did refine the controls even further to improve the already great responsiveness, and Kratos’ selection of combos is different but just as satisfying.  One of the biggest additions to the gameplay involves the addition of new weapons.  Over the course of the game, you’ll gain a giant barbarian hammer as well as a massive spear.  Both weapons have unique move sets and can be upgraded just like Kratos’ default blades.  These extra weapons aren’t just throw-ins, either.  I found quite a few situations where one of the new weapons was superior to the default weapon – though admittedly I spent most of my time wielding the trusty blades.  Overall, the stellar combat of God of War is only better in the series’ second chapter.

Another new gameplay element is the introduction of Kratos’ blades as a grappling hook.  This opens up a whole new way of traversing the environment, and allows for a lot more vertical-style platforming action.  This also upgrades the game’s overall epic-ness quotient, as there are times where the grappling function is used for some truly dazzling stages, including the famous Pegasus rides.

Another hallmark of the series are the magnificent boss fights.  God of War II does not disappoint in this area.  As a matter of fact, God of War II starts with one of the best boss fights I have ever seen – the Colossus of Rhodes.  A massive stone statue magically brought to life, the battle to take him down spans nearly an entire city and goes on forever (in a good way). 

God of War II is stuffed to the brim with boss fights, and each one is both different and exciting.  The QTEs are back, of course, and the acrobatic feats they invoke against the game’s giant enemies are even more brutally satisfying than before.  If I had any complaints about the selection of boss fights, its that they occasionally make them a little too graphic for my taste.  I enjoy gore as much as the next guy, but there are times they really go over the top with Kratos’ decimation of his opponents.

Another improvement is the removal of much of the tedium and “cheapness” of the first game.  The few spots of balance-beam platforming are much easier to complete, and the developers didn’t try to one-up themselves in terms of the “worst box puzzle ever.”  Because there are so many great boss battles, much of the repetitiveness is gone.  You no longer spend long stretches of the game in massive hack-and-slash fests.     

The story of God of War II (which will carry on into its sequel) revolves around one word: revenge.  While the first tale dealt more with a man looking for relief from a haunted past, God of War II begins Kratos’ quest to bury his blades in Zeus’ belly.  The story here is more intricate and detailed, but at the same time I found it less engaging.  Where I felt some degree of sympathy for Kratos’ plight in the first title, I can no longer feel sorry for a main character whose entire aim is to kill Zeus, regardless of the cost.  I understand that he has a right to be severely miffed at Zeus (he does steal all of Kratos’ powers and, well, KILL him) but I don’t know that this excuses his actions.  In God of War II Kratos has lost any sense of morality or sympathy, and his character devolves into not much more than a rabid dog. 

Still, the story is presented beautifully, and it leads to a fantastic ending sequence that leads directly into God of War III.  While the narrative in the first game seems to live on a bit of an island, the story of God of War II and III seems to have been conceived of whole cloth, and I appreciate that.  Riding a Titan into a massive battle on Mount Olympus is one of the most satisfying and epic endings I have ever experienced.

God of War II took everything from the first game and made it better.  The combat is smoother and more brutal, the boss fights and general scope of the narrative is more epic, and the visuals presented look good even by today’s standards.  Sequels in video games are often superior to their predecessors, but it’s rare that they are better in every conceivable way.  God of War II is about as close as you can come to perfection in gaming.

[xrr rating=5/5]

God of War III

God of War III arrived with sky-high expectations. For one, God of War II sits comfortably near the top of many "best of all time" lists. Beyond that, it is also the first next-gen title in an enormously revered series with a rabid fan-base – anything shy of amazing would be a huge disappointment.  It’s kind of like being the guy that had to follow-up Michael Jordan.  How the heck do you deal with that?

Right from the get-go, God of War III doesn’t pull any punches.  The ending sequence from God of War II is one of the best I’ve ever played, and the dev team decided to follow that up with one of the best opening sequences I’ve ever played.  God of War III begins right in the middle of the epic battle at the foot of Mount Olympus, and the epic scale of the confrontation is mirrored in the massive Titan Gaia you ride into war.  And rather than have you bother with bunch of filler, you get right to the meat with a massive boss battle atop the Titan.

Again the developers were smart enough to leave the combat system mostly intact rather than try to rework the whole experience.  Even though recent titles have tried to mimic the feel of God of War’s combat, they always to seem to miss the mark.  Dante’s Inferno probably came closest, but the sheer repetitiveness and lack of variety caused it to pale in comparison to the majesty that is God of War’s combat.  As in the previous entry, Kratos will gain the use of additional weapons to use alongside his trusty chainy hand-blade thingies.  In this case, two of the additional weapons are a lot likely the aforementioned blades, being some kind of variation on the original chain weapon.  But though they do LOOK similar, they play quite differently with different types of attacks.   

Basically everything about God of War III looks absolutely amazing.  The character models are richly detailed, the lighting, reflections and environments are about the best in the business, and the set pieces take “epic” to a whole new level.  Kratos’ character model in particular is astoundingly detailed, and he’s often sporting a glistening sheen of blood from his defeated foes.  I don’t see how you could be disappointed with the look of God of War III unless you are watching it on a 19” standard definition TV.  I’ll bet it would look good even there.

The excellent visual design is accompanied by the best sound design and voice acting in the series.  The actor who voices Kratos is largely forgettable, but to be honest he doesn’t have a whole lot to work with – there are very few ways to scream in rage and keep it fresh.  The rest of the voice talent is rife with talented, recognizable actors.  Rip Torn is a fine choice for Hephaestus, and I really enjoyed Malcolm McDowell’s turn as Daedalus.  An appropriately majestic score hits all the right notes, and the sounds of dudes being ripped in half is better than ever.

For me, the Colossus of Rhodes boss fight was the previous high-water mark for epically huge battles; but then God of War III started with me fighting a God while riding a frigging Titan.  Just as its forebears, God of War III puts a lot of effort into unbelievable bosses.  I thought I had seen it all with that first battle, but then I found myself fighting a skyscraper-sized Titan.  I can’t put into words just how great that particular fight is, but you’ll fight your way on, over and through said Titan in an attempt to find a soft spot in which to bury my blades.  The great thing about God of War III and the series as a whole is that I can’t think of a single disappointing boss fight.  On the contrary, all I can think of is how awesome they usually are.

At this point we are all well aware of the story in God of War III.  Kratos is continuing his quest to kill Zeus and take his lunch money.  While God of War II had us thinking riding Gaia into Olympus was the way to get that done, things change a bit as the story progresses.  It doesn’t matter a whole heck of a lot, though.  All you need to know is that Kratos is still mightily pissed and he will still stop at nothing to send Zeus to the underworld.  This brings me to one of my primary complaints with God of War III – Kratos is still bereft of any redeeming qualities.  He’s a bad mofo, to be sure, but that’s about it.  The game would carry an awful lot more weight if Kratos showed some element of humanity, or at least the merest hint of morality.

As in God of War II, I also had a problem with the level and graphic detail of the violent acts Kratos commits.  While I took mild issue with it in God of War II, in this installment the dev team took the violence even further.  A brutal curb-stomp every now and then is one thing, but repeatedly pushing the limits of violence is tough to stomach.  I’ve rarely seen this extreme level of violence in movies, and I fail to see why it needs to be present here.  Everything else about the game is astounding, and it’s a shame that it is sullied in some ways by extreme, unnecessary violence.  I also don’t understand why Kratos has to kill nearly everyone he happens to meet.  The violence here is also often directed at those who can’t defend themselves.

I also have a bit of a beef with how the game ends.  I won’t spoil anything here, but I will say that I thought the end-game carried on far too long, and took some odd and pointless directions.  I suppose it didn’t help that I felt nothing for Kratos by the end, as that most likely contributed to my apathy during the final sequence.  The aforementioned egregious violence also affected the final confrontation in a negative way, at least for me.

My complaints about the level of violence aside, God of War III is quite possibly the best action-adventure experience I have ever had.  From it’s jaw-dropping visuals, to its razor-sharp combat engine, to its boss fights of massive proportions, God of War III gets just about everything right.  It managed to fully live up to its Mount Olympus-sized expectations, and made for a fitting conclusion to an amazing trilogy of gaming goodness. 

[xrr rating=5/5]

Remember way back in the day, when you first heard about the coming prequel trilogy for Star Wars?  If you’re anything like me, and you grew up on Star Wars, the news very nearly caused your head to explode like a pumpkin hitting the pavement on Halloween.  We were finally going to get the whole story about how Darth Vader became Darth Vader?  How could it go wrong!  Well, as it turns out, a lot of ways.  The point is this: oftentimes ideas look a heck of a lot better on paper than they do in practice.  Similarly, when I first caught wind of the coming PSP, I was beside myself with anticipation.  A handheld with analog support, a beautiful widescreen, and disc-based media – how could it go wrong?   

Control Issues

When I think of excellence in terms of ergonomics, I think of Apple.  Every piece of hardware they make is incredibly easy to use.  From the first time I picked up an Ipod, I could navigate the interface and buttons as if it were the most natural thing in the world – not so with the PSP.  Why is the primary means of control on the PSP (the dreaded nub) positioned so close to the outermost corner of the unit?  I have hands that are on the small side, but even I have difficulties accessing and using the nub easily.  Besides its poor location in terms of actually trying to reach the thing, it can also make it difficult to maintain a firm grip on the $170 piece of hardware that you DO NOT WANT TO DROP. 

The actual motion of the nub is problematic, as well.  It has an odd, slide-type motion somewhere between a control pad and a true analog stick.  In a lot of ways it reminds me of the slide pad on the old NES Max (way to use 20 year-old design ideas, Sony).  The wonky, slippery, imprecise control offered by the nub makes for a terrible gaming experience – I always seem to find myself over-correcting or losing grip on the stick entirely.

Perhaps the most egregious mistake of all regarding the analog nub is that there is only one.  If your system is designed to feature advanced 3D gaming, you dang well better have a second analog stick.  Think about it this way, how would you like to play a match of Halo 3 without the second analog stick?  Does that sound like fun to you?  Because of this, developers have to use hackneyed, Frankenstein-like control schemes in many 3D games on the PSP.  A not-so-fine example of this is the PSP version of Resistance, which used the four face buttons as a sort of stand-in for a second analog stick.  I haven’t had to do that since the days of the N64, and I don’t want to.

A Beautifully Broken View

The 4.3 inch widescreen on the PSP is breathtaking.  When I first powered mine up, the crispness and brightness of the screen blew me away.  It looks amazing whether you are watching your coveted UMD of Superbad or playing Gran Turismo PSP.  It is the greatest overall viewing experience I’ve ever had with a handheld.

Looks (even when talking about the screen) aren’t everything, however.  In my experience, 3D gaming on the PSP plain doesn’t work.  The reason isn’t the brightness or clarity of the screen, but rather its dimensions.  Widescreen is a great idea when talking computers or TVs, but I’m not sure it’s the right idea when it comes to handheld gaming.  I’ll show you why.

This first image comes from one of the Ratchet and Clank games for the PS2.  And now, for comparison, an image from R&C for the PSP.

Do you notice how much of the screen Ratchet occupies, and how much less real estate is devoted to the actual game world?  Between him and the UI elements at the top, there isn’t a whole lot of room for things like enemies and platforms.  The widescreen looks amazing, it really does, but it also tends to look squashed.  With R&C, I had a  hard time seeing enemies, or figuring out where the heck I was half the time.  I had similar issues with the GTA games – it can be tough to make a smooth getaway if you can’t see where you’re going.  There are games that get it right in this area, God of War among them, but just as many fail miserably. 

The UMD

I’ll admit, I got suckered in by the allure of the lush soundtracks, voice-work, and storage space the UMD would provide.  I failed to recognize an awfully big drawback, however – loading times.  I tend to play handheld games more in snippets than in long sessions; I’ll try to snag five minutes while I’m making dinner, or squeeze in fifteen minutes while on the train.  If I have a mere five minutes to play, I don’t want to use 3 of them waiting for a game to load, or manage 2 minutes of actual gameplay only to be interrupted for more loading thereafter.  In the words of Liz Lemon, “that’s a deal breaker.” 

Now I DO like the fact that, for the most part, I can switch the unit off in the middle of the game without causing any issues.  That’s just not enough to forgive the constant loading I have to deal with.

One last note about the UMD, why does Sony always have to use proprietary technologies when it comes to media?  The UMD, the Memory Stick, the Mini-Disc – maybe they should spend less time developing new media formats and more time working on ergonomics. 

Why It’s So Hard to Fix

You’ll notice a theme in the major issues I have brought up here: they are all hardware related.  No firmware update can fix the poor location of the nub, and no game can expand the vertical real estate of the screen.  When Sony did decide to undertake a major hardware revision, they failed to address these key issues.  (On the contrary, they made some horrendous mis-steps, including removing the UMD drive completely, moving the nub to perhaps a WORSE location, and raising the price significantly.)

Hardware issues aside, any console is all about the games.  Many a powerful system has floundered due to poor software support, and Nintendo is living proof of the opposite: an underpowered machine can have great success with the right games.  I find it helpful to try and come up with the “must have” games for any particular platform – so what are the must have PSP titles?  God of War, Lumines, Patapon 2, maybe Metal Gear Solid, and….I’m starting to struggle already.  That’s not a good sign.  This isn’t to say there aren’t a lot of good games for the PSP, but I know of very few that fall into the category of must have.

Perhaps the issue is that Sony has attempted to bake too many functions into the PSP.  From the start they have pushed the PSP as a true multimedia device, focusing on things like its video and music capabilities.  The PSP is perfectly capable in these areas, but everyone and their grandmother has an Ipod to handle music duties (and handle them better), and I’ve never relished the idea of watching a lot of movies on a 4.3 inch screen.   What I had hoped for with the PSP was a handheld for the hardcore gamer in me; what I ended up with was akin to The Phantom Menace – a whole lot of wasted potential.

I won’t lie. Seeing the phrase "free to play" associated with a game will prompt me to run for the hills more often than not. This is a little odd, as usually the word free draws me in like an ice cream truck to a Weight Watchers convention. In the world of video games, however, I associate F2P with half-assed, graphically challenged boutique games littered with bugs and ads. Due to these prejudices, I approached League of Legends with a bit of trepidation – but its combination of strategic depth and devilishly addicting, competitive team-based gameplay kept me logging in on a nearly daily basis.

League of Legends is the spiritual successor to Defense of the Ancients, an enormously successful mod for Warcraft III which has now spawned its own genre.  (If you’d like to know more about DotA, there’s a detailed Wikipedia entry here.)  League of Legends is a 3v3 or 5v5 team-based game that is played on a map with a home base for each team: one in the southwest corner and one in the northeast corner.  There are “lanes” that connect these two bases, and AI-controlled creeps spawn periodically fight their way towards the opposing base.  These lanes are also lined with turrets, which are defensive structures that fire powerful missiles at any enemy that comes within range.  The goal for each team is to invade and destroy the enemy base.

League of Legends presently features 49 different champions to choose from, though not every champion is available for use at all times.  The way it works is that there are 10 champions that are free to play, and these 10 free champions are rotated every week.  You can unlock permanent access to champions by spending influence points (earned at the end of every match) or by spending Riot points (bought with real-world cash.)  Champions have different pricing levels associated with them, with the most expensive running 6300 influence points or roughly 7 dollars in Riot points.  There are also quite a few “cheap” champs that you can unlock rather quickly.

These champions are split into different categories such as tank, support, mage, and assassin.  You won’t find re-skinned champions with identical skill sets; each champion is unique.  Now balance can be a bit of an issue (from time to time some champions emerge as “overpowered”) but developer Riot Games has been very quick to implement changes to keep the experience as fair as possible.

While champion variety is one of LoL’s strengths, it can also be one of the barriers to access for new players; that long list of champions is daunting at the beginning.  Luckily, LoL has a solid but quick tutorial that introduces you to the game and a single hero.  There is also a practice mode where you can play against other players or AI controlled bots.  Practice games play exactly like the official matches only without the pressure to win.  (I’m a very experienced player with over 250 matches under my belt, but I still play practice matches when I want to try a new champ.)  There is a lively community on the game’s official boards with a plethora of useful information for new players (and the requisite trolling, QQing, and so forth – this is a highly competitive game, after all).

So how do the matches actually play?  At the beginning, your champion starts at level 1 with a set allotment of gold and one skill point to spend on skills.  As you kill creeps and enemy champions or structures, you gain experience and gold.  Each level (the level cap is 18) awards you a stat increase and an additional skill point to use as you see fit.  One important element of strategy in LoL is your skill build order.  Some skills are more useful early in the game, while others don’t really play a major part until later in the match.  Whether it’s best to try to max out one skill as soon as possible or to build your skills in a more balanced fashion depends on the type of hero you have selected.

The next element of strategy is the item system.  Each home base houses an item shop where you spend your gold on items and/or consumables.  The shop interface is very well-laid out with items categorized by the stats they enhance.  Aside from browsing the shop, LoL also provides recommended items for each champion.  Though these builds are not “ideal,” they often get the job done and make a good starting point for new players.  You’ll also find a huge number of build recommendations in the official forums along with the expected debates over which build is best.

I’m a bit of a number-cruncher at heart, and LoL most certain scratches that itch by way of its deep and complex item system.  Two identical champions can play completely differently based on their item choices.  My main champion at the moment is Sivir, a ranged DPS champion.  Some games I elect to focus on damage and attack speed to attempt to squash the enemy, while other times I can choose to build aura items.  Aura items affect all champions within a certain range, and building Sivir in this way focuses more on making the overall TEAM better, and focuses less on my individual performance.

If that’s not enough depth for you, there is the added element of the summoner.  The summoner is a persistent profile associated with your account that levels up as you complete matches.  Your summoner has a three-pronged mastery tree (ala WoW) and the ability to equip runes to enhance your champion’s abilities.  In addition, you select two summoner spells in each match; these are powerful abilities (with long cooldowns) that do things like heal or teleport your champion.

The overall look of the game is excellent.  The graphics won’t blow you away by any stretch, but they are clean and help keep track of what’s happening on the often chaotic battlefield.  I’m sure they could have invested in fancier spell effects, but I believe that would be a detriment to the gameplay.  The interface is well-designed with a bevy of tooltips and hotkeys, with all the information you need is well-placed and easily accessible.

As mentioned in the intro, League of Legends is completely free to play.  You can elect to spend real-world cash to buy Riot Points, but these points can only be spent on optional skins, IP or EXP gain enhancements, or to unlock permanent access to new champions.  You can’t really “buy power” in the game, and people who elect to spend cash on LoL don’t get any sort of preferential treatment.  Now it would take quite awhile to unlock all the champions without spending any money, though I don’t see the need to have ALL of them unlocked.  Since I’ve enjoyed the game so much, I had no problem investing 20 bucks in the boxed collector’s edition, which unlocked 20 champions gave me a few other extras, like a couple of skins and some Riot points.

There are two significant issues I should point out.  Games are joined based on a matchmaking system which, in theory, matches players in such a way to make the game relatively even. While I find it works fine for the most part, there have been times where one side had an obvious, huge advantage over the other.  In my experience, that is the exception rather than the rule.  The second issue revolves around “leavers.”  Success in LoL is largely dependent on teamwork and good team composition.  If a player disconnects, rage quits, or otherwise exits the game, that particular team finds itself at a huge disadvantage.  While there are presently some penalties for players who leave often, they are not significant.  The majority of the time you find yourself in a match down a player or two, you will lose.

Taken together, all of these elements make for an incredibly deep and amazingly competitive gaming experience.  Even six months in with 250+ matches under my belt I still get the itch to log in as much as possible.  If I find myself getting bored with the game, all it takes is a switch over to a new champion to rekindle my desire to play.  Even after all those matches, I don’t see myself ever mastering all the champions, especially since Riot is adding new champs at a steady rate.  Although there are still only two different maps available for play (one map for 5v5 battles and one for 3v3) I don’t see that as a problem.  Because map knowledge and awareness is such a huge factor, it actually helps that the map choices are somewhat limited.  Also, every match plays entirely different as you rarely see the same players or champs on both sides.  And while I’ve had my share of bad matches, the majority of them have been a lot of fun.  If you’re a competitive gamer looking to try something new, I highly recommend giving League of Legends a whirl – it won’t cost you anything to try.  Well, other than the next 6 months of your life, perhaps.

[xrr rating=4.5/5]

Like a bout of flu in the office, God of War style gaming seems to be going around the development community.  This isn’t anything unusual – when a game gets it right and has great success, it spawns a lot of imitators.  Eventually the imitations become so pervasive (see Mario style platforming, for instance) that we forget they are imitations at all.  But isn’t every pop-rock quartet that uses harmonies some imitation of The Beatles?  It’s HOW you imitate that really matters – you can steal ideas and still present a fairly unique experience.  The developers of Darksiders are equal opportunity thieves; they didn’t just lift the combat from God of War, they appropriated elements from Zelda, Portal, and even Panzer Dragoon.  There really isn’t a single original element in Darksiders, but perhaps its originality rests in its unique mix of a variety of game play elements.

In Darksiders you play War, one of the Four Horseman of the Apocalypse.  It seems someone broke the mythical seven seals by accident, or maybe pushed the wrong button, and the gates of heaven and hell are opened and humanity is wiped out.  Bummer, I know.  It turns out that the Apocalypse came a little earlier than planned, and War is kinda on the hook.  He’s miffed that somebody managed to fool him into bringing about wanton destruction, and the ambiguous Council (which consists of talking caves straight out of Aladdin) gives War a chance to figure out who hoodwinked him.  The story is a bit weak at first, especially considering it’s an end-of-days tale (talk about instant box office), but it does gain momentum as the game goes on and more of the mystery is revealed.

The combat of Darksiders is pure God of War.  You start out with a giant, menacing sword that you swing about willy-nilly, hacking apart enemies and causing many a fount of blood.  You start off with a few basic combos and can purchase additional moves as you progress.  You will also pick up 2 more main weapons along the way, a scythe and a fist weapon.  All three weapons have their own little experience bars and gain levels of power through use.  In addition to power levels and additional combos to unlock, there are a variety of artifacts you find throughout the game that will enhance or change a weapon’s capabilities.  Of course War can also wield a few helpful magic spells, and he even gets the opportunity to “hulk out” into a red demon-o-death form.

I had a couple of issues with the game play.  Changing weapons and items in Darksiders is janky at best.  Sure, I was able to change quickly, but I seldom really knew what I was changing to.  This became a real problem later in the game as there are a couple instances where you need to be able to switch up items while in mid air.  This caused me more than one unneeded death.  I also took issue with a few of the platforming sections.  I’m still waiting for that game that gets 3D platforming right and minimizes cheap, instant deaths.

The secondary weapons and items are where the Zelda influences start to creep in.  You’ll find a star that acts an awful lot like a boomerang, a chain to grapple things, a projectile weapon (in this case a gun) and even a ocarina-like horn used to open certain “doors.”  Another component of the Zelda influence is the inclusion of many sections, secrets, and entire areas that are unreachable without a certain item.  You know the type, the old “come back for this later” chest just out of reach, or the wall of crystal that sure LOOKS like it could be broken.  Frankly, I love this type of game design.  Call it what you will, I really enjoy making mental notes to revisit old areas in order to loot them of all available treasure.  It’s the kind of thing that really makes me want to revisit a game I’ve already “beaten”.

Zeldic influences (yes, I just made that up) also play a part in the overall level design.  The story arc of Darksiders sends you on a quest to kill a collection of big, bad demons and gather their still beating hearts.  (Ok, that’s totally not Zelda-like, but bear with me.)  The world is split into roughly a dozen zones, many of which play a lot like dungeons straight out of Zelda.   You’ll cleave enemies and solve various environmental puzzles to progress through the dungeon.  Heck, there is even a little musical jingle that plays every time you solve a puzzle and gain access to a new area; every time this happened, I sang “do, do, do do doooh” to myself.  Along the way you will find things like maps, keys to open locked doors, and of course new secondary items to help you progress. 

Each of the dungeons culminates in an epic boss fight.  You fight everything from shining human-sized angels to ginormous, fire spewing demons.  Every boss fight basically boils down to figuring out what the gimmick is and how to exploit it (this is true throughout gaming), but I enjoyed every one.  Each boss fight plays much differently from the one before, and this was key to keeping me interested.  I was also pleased that Vigil Games didn’t feel the need to include long quick time events to take down the big bads.  No crazy X, Square, L1, R2, Triangle combinations here, thankfully.  I want to make particular note of the last 3 or 4 boss battles, which really did a fantastic job of pulling the various game play elements of Darksiders together. 

The overall look of the game is good but not great.  The appropriately destroyed environments have a good level of detail and show a lot of variety, each new zone featuring an entirely new aesthetic.    My main beef with the look of the game are the character models – most of them have jagged edges and a glassy look, and don’t quite look right on the backgrounds.  War himself also has that overly large shouldered, big hand look sort of like a puppy with its too big paws.  Everything moved at a consistent clip, however, and I never experienced any significant slowdown or glitches.  I would rate Darksiders neither high nor low on the presentation scale, but somewhere in between.  I should add here that I hardly noticed the musical score at all, though perhaps the mix was too overwhelmed by the symphony of tearing flesh and spraying blood.  The voice work was adequate, but beyond Mark Hamill as your companion and “guide”, nothing stood out for me.

The story of Darksiders is on the weak side overall, which is a shame.  If you’re going to destroy humanity, you should be able to do so dramatically, but I found the delivery ineffective.  War doesn’t have any real character, he’s just plain angry most of the time.  An epic story with Angels, Demons and the Apocalypse should be easy to make interesting, but the weak characters and mostly confusing plot left me muddled and confused.  I just knew I had to kill stuff, and I suppose that’s enough.  The story does start to get interesting by the time all the threads start to become clear leading up the the finale, and I LOVED the very end, but it took a whole lot of nothing to get there.

What separates imitation from inspiration?  When you get down to it, how much out there is truly original?  Flower maybe?  Even a universally great game like Bioshock took a lot from games that came before.  Dante’s Inferno and Darksiders were released in roughly the same time frame, and both were judged God of War clones.  Having played both, I have to disagree.  Dante’s attempted to mimic God of War almost completely.  Darksiders, while aping the combat from God of War, also drew its inspiration from a LOT of different sources.  Take the combat from God of War, add the level and item design from Zelda, mix in a little bit of 3rd person shooting and just a dab of Portal, and you might end up with something like Darksiders.  Then again, you might not.  The point is that even though the elements that make up Darksiders are not original, the game as a whole is.  Haven’t you ever wanted to play a non-kiddie focused Zelda game with fancy God of War combat and a good old decapitation now and then?  I know I have.  Darksiders really isn’t imitating God of War; it’s mixing several excellent elements from some of the paragons of game design, and in doing so Vigil Games has actually created a wholly original experience.

[xrr rating=4/5]

It can be hard to live up to expectations. Heck, just imagine being little Suri Cruise, you’re expected to be both good looking and certifiably insane. Rough. Video game sequels, however, are quite often superior to their predecessors. Developers are able to improve upon what came before, with better controls, more intricate level designs, or higher production values; they also get the opportunity to flatten major faults like a Yankee fan at a Red Sox convention. The problem facing Bioshock 2 is that they are trying to create the follow-up to one of the most beloved games in the last decade.  In a lot of ways it’s like trying to follow up Star Wars or The Matrix – how do you please the ravenous, bloodthirsty fans while at the same time eliciting the praise of the critics?  To further complicate matters, the team behind Bioshock wasn’t even involved in the creation of its sequel, so many fans approached Bioshock 2 with quite low expectations.  Would we end up with a stink bomb like The Matrix Revolutions, or a work of art like The Empire Strikes Back? The answer is neither.  Bioshock 2 is an excellent game, but it doesn’t quite reach the admittedly lofty heights of its sire.

The first thing you’ll notice upon entering the world of Rapture is that it is, well, still Rapture.  Bioshock 2 takes place in a different section of the underwater city, but it has all the charm of the first game.  The game world is rendered in the same art-deco, 50’s era style.  The major details of the environment are the same right down to the security systems and vending machines.  (Am I the only one who finds it odd that Andrew Ryan, in creating his “utopia”, thought it was a good idea to put ammo vending machines everywhere?  He had to know that would be BAD.)  In terms of level design, it gets off to a slow start, but by the mid-game some great set pieces start to pop up, like a ruined amusement park and a giant water tank with a nefarious inhabitant.  Overall the look of the game is great and just as detailed as the first, yet I didn’t find the world nearly as haunting this time around.  It’s most likely just a case of “been there, done that.”  I’ve seen the spider slicers, the Big Daddies, and the creepy Little Sisters – at this point I’m largely desensitized to the denizens of Rapture.

A hallmark of the entire “shock” series (and there are more, try to find yourself a copy of System Shock 2 sometime if you can) is fantastic sound design.  Bioshock 2 is no slouch in this area, featuring the same spooky sounds from the Big Daddies, Little Sisters, and more.  They also utilize the same retro music style, that some love and some hate (I am in the former camp).  The voice work here is also very well done, and the story is propelled again by various audio diaries scattered throughout the levels.

In terms of game play, Bioshock 2 features some genuine improvements.  The idea of using both superpower-like plasmids and classic weaponry has always been great, but its implementation in the first game came up a little short.  In theory, using the two together could make for some great combo attacks, but the limited way you could only use a plasmid OR a gun, and the janky way you switched between them made pulling off fancy combos difficult.  In Bioshock 2, you can thankfully wield a gun in one hand and a plasmid in the other.  It works very, very well, and makes Bioshock 2 a far superior pure shooter than the first game.  At one point, I set a splicer aflame and immediately nailed his still-burning body to the wall with the spear gun.  It was one of the coolest combos I ever pulled off in a video game, and it made me giggle like a Catholic school girl.  I almost wish they could do some super special edition of the first Bioshock with the combat engine from Bioshock 2.

Aside from dual wielding, the way hacking works has also been vastly improved.  The fluid and pipes mingame from the first Bioshock is gone, replaced by a simpler and more efficient system.  The new hacking system consists of a meter with a moving needle, and in order to hack a machine you need to stop the needle in a special green or blue area.  It’s a much more streamlined implementation, but just as challenging.  Besides the actual act of hacking, Bioshock 2 also includes the ability to hack machines from afar with the remote hack tool.  You no longer need to constantly zap machines long enough to hack them, but can now do it from a safe distance, which is particularly beneficial with the nasty turrets.

The selection of plasmids and weaponry is tweaked in mostly minor ways.  The available plasmids are mostly the same, with some minor changes, but as you buy the more powerful versions, they have more significant effects.  The third level of telekinesis, for instance, will let you pick up and throw smaller, live enemies.  The weapons list has been tweaked as well.  Gone is the wrench, replaced by the drill – it can be used as a simple melee weapon or spun (if you have the fuel) for extra gory damage.  I enjoyed the addition of the rivet gun, which is a very accurate, fast firing weapon, and the spear, which can do a LOT of damage if you can hit with it.  One of the biggest improvements in the area of weaponry is the dedicated melee button.  You no longer have to switch to your melee weapon to bash enemies over the head in the absence of ammo.

Another change in Bioshock 2 is the way you collect Adam.  In Bioshock you simply needed to kill a big daddy, harvest or save his little sister, and profit.  Well, those salad days of easy Adam are gone.  In Bioshock 2, you also need to carry the little sister around with you and gather the Adam from corpses.  Well, you know what happens when little sisters are gathering Adam, the junkies come out of the woodwork to try to take her.  Your job, of course, is to keep them at bay.  This proves to be quite difficult early on, as your arsenal is fairly limited, and the splicers come from every angle; but it gets easier as you collect more powerful weapons and plasmids, along with nifty toys like the mini turret.  These gathering events are white-knuckle exciting, and a great addition to the game play.

The difficulty of Bioshock 2 is a bit on the erratic side.  I played through the game on normal, and found it just shy of frustratingly difficult in some of the earlier sections, most notably during the gathering missions.  By the game’s midpoint, though, the difficulty subsided dramatically; this change is most likely due to an increase in weapon and ammo selection as well as ever more powerful plasmids.  I found myself feeling nigh unstoppable in the game’s climactic final battles, and approached each new area with reckless abandon. 

Now, you can’t talk about Bioshock without discussing the story.  I won’t spoil anything here, but the fact is that the story is excellent, but not on the same level as the story of the original.  It doesn’t have the same crazy dramatic turn to make your jaw drop, but twists like the one from the first Bioshock are few and far between.  Heck, M. Night Shyamalan has been trying to recreate the mega-twist from The Sixth Sense for over a decade with little success.  The story still provides plenty of twists and turns, and provides a good deal of insight into just HOW things went wrong with Rapture.  The problem with the story in Bioshock 2 is that it has so much to live up to; if it were to be taken on its own merits, it would garner much higher praise.

One surprise with Bioshock 2 is the inclusion of a multiplayer mode.  I had doubts about it, but I found myself pleasantly surprised by its quality.  It isn’t a hackneyed, at the last minute addition, but a full-featured multiplayer experience.  It has ranks, loadouts, unlockable weapons, plasmids and boosts, and a multitude of maps and modes.  It’s obviously not as complete as Modern Warfare, for instance, but it certainly holds its own.  It also manages to fit the multiplayer into the greater context of the Rapture universe in a believable way. 

I came into Bioshock 2 with fairly low expectations.  The first Bioshock is one of the greatest gaming experiences I’ve ever had, and I had my doubts that a different studio could continue the story in a worthwhile way.  While not on the same level as its predecessor, Bioshock 2 is a brilliant game in its own right.  The uniquely beautiful, broken world of Rapture is a place I could visit again and again.  The developers may not have gone in any original directions with the story or the world, but they got the most important elements just right.  The environments are well-laid out and detailed, the audio is top notch, and the improved game play elements make for potent and enjoyable gaming experience  The addition of a solid multiplayer mode only enhances the overall value.  So while I don’t believe Bioshock 2 is a GOTY candidate, I enjoyed every moment I spent under the sea, and look forward to going back again soon.

[xrr rating=4.5/5]

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!