Having had a few days to really reflect on 2011 as a whole (that is, check on Wikipedia which games were actually released in 2011), I've picked out seven games that have really left a lasting impact on me from last year. Rather than ordering them by merit, instead, I've ordered them by release date.
Magicka
Initially bugged to hell, though that was fine, because I didn't buy it until it had been patched into a state that was vaguely playable. Magicka (not a vampire!) is a delightful little game. It has a wonderful internal logic in the way that you combine spells together, actually has a lot of freedom and flexibility in the way you can create your own tactics for dealing with singular or groups of enemies, plus it really pushes all the parody buttons you can think of: Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Warhammer, and many, many more. It also has some inspired DLC and lots of replay value, as you really try and get to grips with the sheer breadth of the spellcasting system. Like many of the other games on my list, I wish I'd had more time to devote to it. Not finishing it, nor getting to try out the online co-op and combat modes is one of my great gaming regrets from last year.
Dragon Age 2
This was arguably the first of the laughably-called "Triple AAA" titles of 2011. Featuring the greatest (possibly only) Welsh game character ever, Dragon Age II was a wee bit lacklustre - obviously rushed and dumbed down compared to its predecessor; Bioware couldn't even be bothered to put a colon and a subtitle into the game's name - but it was sufficiently interesting enough for me to want to finish it. What it lacked in finesse and deep game mechanics, it compensated for with some of the best written characters in an RPG for years. While most Bioware RPGs suffer from the "Ship of Fifth Wheels" problem, Dragon Age II actually attempted to make you want to experiment with all the characters it gave you to play with by giving them interesting story arcs and real character. Isabela, Varric, Bethany and Merrill are all fantastic characters, very well played by their actors. I wasn't too keen on how they'd changed Anders from Dragon Age: Awakening - Bioware seemed to suck out all the fun from his character, going from Alistair-lite-relief to Angsty-Emo-Anders. It just grated with the rest of the atmosphere of the game and his previous character, somehow. The only party character that really fell flat was Fenris, who is so utterly forgettable, I wouldn't have even remembered to include him in the write up if I'd not seen his name on the characters page on Wikipedia... I'll gloss over Carver, since he always died in the prologue due to my character class choices, so I've not played with him through the whole game.
Dragon Age II has a lot of flaws. It's too action-focused, the RPG mechanics are too streamlined for my liking and the main story arc isn't any great shakes. Also, the ending is fairly terrible and arguably doesn't even make sense in terms of the game world, as well-established characters act completely against type to make things more dramatic. But, despite all that, it's fun to play. It's no Baldur's Gate, or even a Dragon Age: Origins (which in my opinion is by far the superior game), but it's not the soulless piece of EA shovelware some internet reactionaries would have you believe.
The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings
Given how voiciferous I was about the merits of the first Witcher game (to the extent of basically getting ostracised by some elements of the games journalism community for criticising a certain review of The Witcher), you may be surprised to hear that I was a wee bit underwhelmed by The Witcher 2, given that it was one of the games I was expecting to r0xx0rz my s0xx0rz last year. My initial reaction to The Witcher 2 was one of horror. Not because it seemed like a bad game. Far from it... Everything about it made me want to play it: the graphics, the setting, the premise - the lack of DRM. This may sound petty, but there was one big thing that really put me off playing the game (which led to it being put aside for the perpetual charms of World of Warcraft and other games), not only is the beginning of the game beset by horrible difficulty spikes and inconsistent difficulty levels, the initial release did not come with the ability to invert the y-axis of the mouselook, instead requiring an ini file hack, until they patched it a few weeks after the release. I've got a lot of time for CD Projekt RED, since I think they've got genuine vision and insight into how PC games should be produced and released (that is, don't treat your customer like a criminal), but this is something that should have been thought of long before the game had even gone gold, let alone been released to the paying public. I will go back to The Witcher 2 at some point this year to finish it off, since it would be a shame to let a game with this much potential stay unfinished, especially as CD Projekt RED have shown the same willingness to provide long term support for their game and really try to make it as perfect as possible - just as they did with The Witcher. It's rare that a developer and publisher give this much long-term love and attention to their games once they're shepherded out of the door. This alone practically merits The Witcher 2's place on my list: PC gaming (and videogaming in general) needs more developers like CD Projekt RED.
Deus Ex: Human Revolution
This is another game I didn't put as much time into as I wanted, and will probably end up completing this year, instead. I have to admit, when I first heard about Desu Ex 3, I was skeptical. Actually, skeptical is an understatement. I thought it would be shite. By goodness, was I wrong. Not only did it feel like Deus Ex, it played like it, too. In any other year, this could have been game of the year. What a shame then, that it was released in the same twelve months as arguably the greatest single-player RPG ever made.
Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine
It's not big, it's not clever, but by the gods of Chaos, isn't it fun. Stomp, slash, shoot and mash your way through a big horde of orks, and then do the same with an even nastier horde of Chaos forces. Short, accessible, direct, to the point, and lots of fun. The one stand-out game mechanic is the way you regain health by performing execution moves. It adds a surprising amount of depth to the combat, so it's a crying shame that the end boss battle sucks out all that depth and turns it into a Quick Time Event button-mash-fest. Press X for the Emperor! The storyline was rather ponderous and predictable, too, but that's not stopping me holding out for a sequel at some point.
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
I've got over 144 hours currently logged on Skyrim, according to Steam. Considering that the game's only been out for 2 months and for one week of that I was away from my games rig in France and for the rest of the time I was working about 60 hours a week in my day job, I think that's pretty appalling and pretty impressive. I can't think of a game I've enjoyed this much since Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic. Never mind game of the year, Skyrim's gone straight into my All Time Top 5 Videogames. Okay, it's buggy and glitchy and you have to hack the game to marry the Athene-like Lydia, but it's just such a well realised game world, that I find it hard to care about the giants that send NPCs into orbit with a hammer strike, dragons that fly backwards, horses that can climb sheer rock faces and other such problems. Skyrim's a truly great game. There's just so much to discover and do. It's achingly beautiful and the RPG mechanics are streamlined, but not dumbed down. My main character (who's finished the Alduin and the civil war questlines now - so has effectively "completed" the game) is Level 49 now, but still isn't utterly untouchable. Ancient dragons can still hand him his arse on a plate if you get the battle tactics wrong and multiple enemies can still pose quite a serious challenge. But the real motivation to keep playing with him is that Skyrim is a game where there are strong story threads weaved throughout the game, but there's still plenty of scope to create your own adventures and narratives. If I had time I could write up dozens of anecdotes of amazing experiences I've had in the game - ranging from the awe-inspiring to the farcical. Its a game where the world gives you freedom and where the mechanics give you real choice as to how to customise your character - and it's a match made in Sovngarde. I'm going to be playing this for a very long time to come, because when I get bored with my main character, I've got a Mage and a Thief waiting in the wings to play with.
Star Wars: The Old Republic
As one of the guild names on my server (The Arkanian Legacy) so succinctly points out, Star Wars: The Old Republic is "WoW in space". A gaming paternity test would tell you that it's the bastard love-child of WoW and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic. I've put a few more hours into it since I wrote about it last, and the game's starting to grow on me, though I still have grave doubts as to whether it's the long-awaited-for WoW-killer the MMO genre really needs to breathe fresh life into it. I've tried four of the character classes so far: Bounty Hunter (Level 17), Jedi Knight (Level 17), Sith Inquistor (Level 11) and Smuggler (Level 5). My Bounty Hunter and Jedi Knight both have recently acquired their ships, but it doesn't seem to do that much in terms of fundamentally changing the game, though I must caveat that in saying that I've not had chance to try out the space combat yet.
While the game is starting to grow on me, I'm still yet to be convinced that the 100% voiceacted script truly makes it more immersive and involving than your average MMO. In my mind it's almost like the game has been designed to be a single-player MMO, as weird as that sounds. The problem with voiceacted cutscene conversations is that they inevitably focus more on the player watching the unfolding story, rather than making the player drive on the story for themself. As I see it, the common-or-garden MMORPG player plays an MMORPG for one of two reasons.
One: To develop characters and explore the game world (i.e. The MMO Tourist), or
Two: To play socially within a guild for dungeoneering, raiding and PvP (i.e. The MMO Hardcore)
Neither of these two kinds of player really wants to be sitting around watching conversations between NPCs and their toon. They'd both much rather be out in the game world doing cool stuff. It's for this reason that I think that while the game will be a success, it's not going to be a game changer for the genre. That's not to say it's no good at all - I will probably sink a few hundred hours into it over the next year or so - but will it topple WoW from the top of the MMO tree? I don't think so.
Saturday, January 07, 2012
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Byte: Star Wars: The Old Republic - The Emperor's New Clothes?
Given that I'm on holiday and that I've had a bit of free time, I've spent the last couple of days playing Star Wars: The New Republic. I'm sure I'm not the only person who's going to use the "Emperor's New Clothes" line in the coming weeks and months about The Old Republic. I haven't quite made my mind up about the game yet, but the obvious one-liner is that it's the bastard love child of World of Warcraft and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic. Given that these are two of my top five games ever made, by rights, The Old Republic should be the end of my social life and career. But somehow, I'm not convinced quite yet...
Bioware's big claim for The Old Republic is that it's supposedly a game-changer for the MMORPG genre, in that it's resolutely story-based and no expense has been spared in the production. Every single line is voice-acted and the experience is undoubtedly cinematic with interactive cutscenes and set pieces, but the question for me is, does this make it a better game? More on that later...
Here's where I am so far: in the last two days of play I've rolled a Bounty Hunter and a Jedi Knight and levelled them up to level 12 and level 11, respectively. It should be said at this point that the Bounty Hunter/Imperial Agent starting area on Hutta is fairly terrible. Dull, ugly, not much variety in terms of enemies or scenery, it's a fairly depressing place to spend your first half dozen or so hours in the game. While that's more to do with the planet itself than the game engine (which is impressive for an MMO - at its best, it's really quite pretty and expansive indeed, not nearly to the level of Skyrim of course, but the game engine is a quite massive step up for those familiar with WoW) - I'd question the decision of the designers to have you start one of the more iconic character classes on such a horrible little muckball. Tython, the Jedi Knight/Jedi Consular starting planet is much prettier by comparison, so it's a bit of a shame that it takes ten levels for you to earn your lightsaber (in itself, wearily predictable) and that the prologue is beset by the main enemies you fight (the ludicrously named "Flesh Raiders", which sounds like a rejected Russ Meyer film title) lack variety and are spectacularly tedious.
I'm not convinced by the presentation, either. The cutscenes are obviously given a greater level of graphical fidelity than the main game engine, so while the story cutscenes (which take place in instanced Story areas, so you don't get munched by mobs in the meantime) are immersive and quite well done, the biggest issue I have with them is that the time you spend watching the cutscene is time you could really be spending doing something productive in the game. At least the cutscenes can be subtitled and are skippable, so if you're a very swift reader like myself, you can read the exposition, rather than listen to it being drawled over in Star Warsy mock-British accents. Don't get me wrong: I'm all for story in MMOs. One of the key things I play World of Warcraft for is the story and the world lore. But the game doesn't try and force it down your throat - you can take it at your own pace and access as much detail as you like. I suppose, in modern Star Wars style, The Old Republic is caught up a little bit in its own gravitas, by focusing on delivering an "experience" rather than just being a game to play.
It's easy to see why, because mechanically speaking, The Old Republic isn't really pushing any boundaries. Combat is an MMOtastic blend of cooldown management and quick-button mashing (just like WoW, then) and if you look too closely at the ability descriptions, you can see the class balancing at work. That is, all the powers are essentially identical in effect, they just have different animations. So while, as a Bounty Hunter, you can do pretty much everything that the Bounty Hunter in the Deceived trailer can (only in rather more crappy armour), somehow it feels a little empty. Again, this is more of a criticism of the genre in general than The Old Republic in particular, but if you're really trying to make the definitive statement in MMORPGs, you shouldn't really just be repackaging World of Warcraft in Jedi Robes.
This isn't to say that the game is bad. I don't think Bioware have truly created a bad game yet - an average one or two, perhaps (Neverwinter Nights, anybody?) - but I would be lying if I said at this point I was blown away by the game. I can see myself giving it a chance for a few months to see what kind of direction Bioware take it, and see how the game changes as you get characters up past level 20 and 30, but can I see myself playing it in five years time? Not really. Not unless it goes free-to-play, which I expect it (and WoW too, incidentally) will do in the next couple of years.
My most memorable experiences with the game so far have been with playing with small parties in Flashpoints - the story-based instanced missions - which are effectively The Old Republic's dungeons. Having smaller groups for instances (with gaps able to be filled by the surprisingly effective AI Companions), makes the dungeon content more accessible to everyone and the Social Points system actively rewards you for not playing the game solo. Obviously, it's early days yet for the game and I've not played any of the PvP content yet, but at this point, if there's one thing that's going to keep me motivated to play the game, it's going to be the flashpoints, because the world design isn't open enough to really reward exploration for the sake of sightseeing and the story so far isnt doing anything beyond what I'd expect of a Star Wars game - it's diverting rather than utterly compelling - doing enough to keep me interested without totally grabbing me by the lapels and forcing me to want to sit down and play.
So is The Old Republic a game changer for the MMORPG genre? Not from what I've seen. Not by a long shot. Is it a failure? Again, no - with the amount of polish and backing from Bioware and EA, The Old Republic will be a success, at least in the short term, though that's not to say that it's bug or glitch-free. Also, reports of the horrific server queues (2 hours plus) experienced by some players are not what you'd want to be hearing about a game in launch week. I've not experienced any queues myself - the PVE server I'm on isn't completely barren, but has a healthy population to be getting into groups easily, without having to wait to get onto the server. I'd say that it's an interesting experiment in terms of exploring how to tell stories in MMOs, but I think that the storytelling emphasis has gone too far. Players play games to be in control, not to watch cutscenes. There's a balance to be struck somewhere in telling a personalised story and allowing the player to do stuff without having to wait for hours and hours of exposition to play itself out. Star Wars is at its best not when people are sitting (or standing) around mumbling incoherently about midichlorians or the Living Force, hokey religions or ancient weapons, but when the Tibanna Gas hits the fan and the action starts and doesn't stop for half an hour.
I'll be interested to see what happens to the game over the next six months, particularly if they do something with the obligatory, godawful standard GUI (for Yoda's sake, someone show them the Bartender mod for WoW!), and how Bioware reacts to what I expect will be pretty vociferous feedback on how they should improve the game. I'll give the game a few months, but with WoW's next expansion around the corner (which I can't say I'm too fussed about, frankly) and Guild Wars 2 due next year (which I am most certainly fussed about!), The Old Republic's got its work cut out to keep its head above the murky waters of Hutta's polluted swamps... I'm calling it here and now: Free-to-play within two years, three at most.
Bioware's big claim for The Old Republic is that it's supposedly a game-changer for the MMORPG genre, in that it's resolutely story-based and no expense has been spared in the production. Every single line is voice-acted and the experience is undoubtedly cinematic with interactive cutscenes and set pieces, but the question for me is, does this make it a better game? More on that later...
Here's where I am so far: in the last two days of play I've rolled a Bounty Hunter and a Jedi Knight and levelled them up to level 12 and level 11, respectively. It should be said at this point that the Bounty Hunter/Imperial Agent starting area on Hutta is fairly terrible. Dull, ugly, not much variety in terms of enemies or scenery, it's a fairly depressing place to spend your first half dozen or so hours in the game. While that's more to do with the planet itself than the game engine (which is impressive for an MMO - at its best, it's really quite pretty and expansive indeed, not nearly to the level of Skyrim of course, but the game engine is a quite massive step up for those familiar with WoW) - I'd question the decision of the designers to have you start one of the more iconic character classes on such a horrible little muckball. Tython, the Jedi Knight/Jedi Consular starting planet is much prettier by comparison, so it's a bit of a shame that it takes ten levels for you to earn your lightsaber (in itself, wearily predictable) and that the prologue is beset by the main enemies you fight (the ludicrously named "Flesh Raiders", which sounds like a rejected Russ Meyer film title) lack variety and are spectacularly tedious.
I'm not convinced by the presentation, either. The cutscenes are obviously given a greater level of graphical fidelity than the main game engine, so while the story cutscenes (which take place in instanced Story areas, so you don't get munched by mobs in the meantime) are immersive and quite well done, the biggest issue I have with them is that the time you spend watching the cutscene is time you could really be spending doing something productive in the game. At least the cutscenes can be subtitled and are skippable, so if you're a very swift reader like myself, you can read the exposition, rather than listen to it being drawled over in Star Warsy mock-British accents. Don't get me wrong: I'm all for story in MMOs. One of the key things I play World of Warcraft for is the story and the world lore. But the game doesn't try and force it down your throat - you can take it at your own pace and access as much detail as you like. I suppose, in modern Star Wars style, The Old Republic is caught up a little bit in its own gravitas, by focusing on delivering an "experience" rather than just being a game to play.
It's easy to see why, because mechanically speaking, The Old Republic isn't really pushing any boundaries. Combat is an MMOtastic blend of cooldown management and quick-button mashing (just like WoW, then) and if you look too closely at the ability descriptions, you can see the class balancing at work. That is, all the powers are essentially identical in effect, they just have different animations. So while, as a Bounty Hunter, you can do pretty much everything that the Bounty Hunter in the Deceived trailer can (only in rather more crappy armour), somehow it feels a little empty. Again, this is more of a criticism of the genre in general than The Old Republic in particular, but if you're really trying to make the definitive statement in MMORPGs, you shouldn't really just be repackaging World of Warcraft in Jedi Robes.
This isn't to say that the game is bad. I don't think Bioware have truly created a bad game yet - an average one or two, perhaps (Neverwinter Nights, anybody?) - but I would be lying if I said at this point I was blown away by the game. I can see myself giving it a chance for a few months to see what kind of direction Bioware take it, and see how the game changes as you get characters up past level 20 and 30, but can I see myself playing it in five years time? Not really. Not unless it goes free-to-play, which I expect it (and WoW too, incidentally) will do in the next couple of years.
My most memorable experiences with the game so far have been with playing with small parties in Flashpoints - the story-based instanced missions - which are effectively The Old Republic's dungeons. Having smaller groups for instances (with gaps able to be filled by the surprisingly effective AI Companions), makes the dungeon content more accessible to everyone and the Social Points system actively rewards you for not playing the game solo. Obviously, it's early days yet for the game and I've not played any of the PvP content yet, but at this point, if there's one thing that's going to keep me motivated to play the game, it's going to be the flashpoints, because the world design isn't open enough to really reward exploration for the sake of sightseeing and the story so far isnt doing anything beyond what I'd expect of a Star Wars game - it's diverting rather than utterly compelling - doing enough to keep me interested without totally grabbing me by the lapels and forcing me to want to sit down and play.
So is The Old Republic a game changer for the MMORPG genre? Not from what I've seen. Not by a long shot. Is it a failure? Again, no - with the amount of polish and backing from Bioware and EA, The Old Republic will be a success, at least in the short term, though that's not to say that it's bug or glitch-free. Also, reports of the horrific server queues (2 hours plus) experienced by some players are not what you'd want to be hearing about a game in launch week. I've not experienced any queues myself - the PVE server I'm on isn't completely barren, but has a healthy population to be getting into groups easily, without having to wait to get onto the server. I'd say that it's an interesting experiment in terms of exploring how to tell stories in MMOs, but I think that the storytelling emphasis has gone too far. Players play games to be in control, not to watch cutscenes. There's a balance to be struck somewhere in telling a personalised story and allowing the player to do stuff without having to wait for hours and hours of exposition to play itself out. Star Wars is at its best not when people are sitting (or standing) around mumbling incoherently about midichlorians or the Living Force, hokey religions or ancient weapons, but when the Tibanna Gas hits the fan and the action starts and doesn't stop for half an hour.
I'll be interested to see what happens to the game over the next six months, particularly if they do something with the obligatory, godawful standard GUI (for Yoda's sake, someone show them the Bartender mod for WoW!), and how Bioware reacts to what I expect will be pretty vociferous feedback on how they should improve the game. I'll give the game a few months, but with WoW's next expansion around the corner (which I can't say I'm too fussed about, frankly) and Guild Wars 2 due next year (which I am most certainly fussed about!), The Old Republic's got its work cut out to keep its head above the murky waters of Hutta's polluted swamps... I'm calling it here and now: Free-to-play within two years, three at most.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Byte: Five days in Skyrim
I think I'm going to have to re-write my Top 5 favourite videogames. I've stuck in over 120 hours in the last month on the PC and Xbox 360 versions of Skyrim and it's only now I really feel that I could really go about reviewing it.
Obviously, a game this big is not going to be as flawlessly polished as a single-player game with an eight hour, linear campaign. Some people are quoting Skyrim as having at least 300 hours of unique gameplay for a single campaign, and I can well believe it. I've got over 120 hours logged on Steam playing it, and I've just finished the main storyline quest threads (the defeat of Alduin and the Liberation of Skyrim), and while I've completed about 50 side-quest chains, I've not finished any of the main faction quests (Companions, Dark Brotherhood, Thieves Guild, etc), and despite having finished the main storyline quests (and just in time, given that Star Wars: The Old Republic goes live in a couple of days), I'm still motivated to keep playing. In the 120-odd hours of game time so far I've experienced some spectacular bugs - from random crashes to desktop, dragons that don't know which direction they should be flying in, purple placeholders instead of real textures, giants launching mobs into orbit with a swing of their warhammer, and many, many more.
The key to the success of any game isn't whether it's buggy or not, but whether the bugs deter you from playing or not. As with an old favourite of mine, Vampire - The Masquerade: Bloodlines, Skyrim's bugs and glitches don't kill my desire to play the game. They're annoying, for sure, but I'm always straight back, clicking at the shortcut on the desktop to launch the game again, always wanting more frosty, Nordic fun, punching dragons in the face.
The thing I really love about the Elder Scrolls RPG system is that the character classing doesn't really limit your options to a single character class. So my PC character (with whom I've stuck in the vast majority of playing hours - though I've dabbled with the 360 version as well, which is likewise awesome) is almost a Baldur's Gate style multi-class Fighter-Mage-Thief, given that he's specialising in Heavy Armour, Archery, One-handed weapons and Destruction Magic. He's also a world-class Enchanter and Blacksmith, and a decent lockpicker and sneak. Now that my character is knocking about in the mid-to-late level 40s, I'm mildly surprised (after the utterly broken level-scaling in Oblivion) that I'm still able to compete fairly with scaled enemies in the game world. One thing I like to do is imagine the conversation my character has with dragons as they battle; my character fully clad in Dragonbone armour.
"Hoy, Dov! I'm wearing your Mum! And now I'm going to punch you to death!"
I was pretty fond(ish) of Oblivion (despite its many, many flaws), but the changes to the levelling and the addition of a Fallout-style perks system has really improved the character-customisation aspects of the game. Skyrim doesn't restrict your choices of what skills you can level up - whatever you use the most, you end up specialising in - so you can become a genuine Jack-of-all-trades if you so choose. It's one way of giving the player genuine freedom in terms of play style, and not only that, it works: a heavy armour-wearing ninja-assassin-sneak-thief is a viable possibility, if you're willing to put in the time earning the necessary skills.
One thing that's surprised me, looking at the Steam Achievement stats, is that less than 20% of the player base have had their characters get married. Now, I don't necessarily believe that responsible adults should get married as a matter of course, but in game terms, it's a no-brainer of a decision, given that your spouse opens a shop earning you a tidy profit of 100 septims a day. And also, why would you NOT want to marry Lydia? (Note to trolls: DON'T answer that in the comments... I have a Daedric Sword with 32 bonus points of fire damage...)
It's difficult to know where to start when trying to talk about Skyrim and just how good it is. It's graphically one of the most gorgeous games I've ever played, with stunning scenery, handsome NPCs (Hello, Hroki! Hello, Fastred!) and it's just as pretty at night as it is during the day, if not more so. The aurorae you get to see at night while wandering in the high north are spectacularly good. There are also some lovely set pieces, such as the taking of cities or forts during the Skyrim civil war, as well as some challenging random encounters (it's always fun when a cave bear turns up in the of a dragon battle!), but what I like the most is that there's genuine variety in the quests. Your interaction with the game world isn't limited to killing other people. On the contrary, you can help people find true love or help solve murder cases, deliver messages or carry out errands... the game world is just so rich and diverse and all the better for it. The open worldliness of Oblivion always felt a little directionless, to me. In Skyrim there's always something interesting lurking around a corner. There's just so much out there to be found and played with; and yet, even though I've completed the main "save the world" and "save the Nords" quest threads, I still don't feel like I've seen everything the game has to offer. The flexibility in the character customisation is enticing in the sheer amount of play styles the game can offer you. I've discovered 17 different Shouts, (including - SPOILER WARNING! - the one that calls in your own personal close air support dragon to sort out anyone who's giving you too much trouble) though I haven't really played about with most of them in combat yet. When you can Shout people off the top of towers and watch them ragdoll pathetically down the side of a mountain to their deaths, it's not really motivating you to try out all the others...
I think the game I've put most hours into (barring World of Warcraft) over the last couple of years is Dragon Age: Origins (171 hours, according to my Steam stats). I can easily imagine that being doubled in Skyrim before I start being bored with it. Skyrim is such a compelling game world that I'm even dreaming about it - a sure sign of dangerous levels of obsession. There's just so much more I still want to do, even with my 100+ hours main character. It's not even about getting the "achievements" - that kind of thing doesn't make me want to play. No, I like setting my own targets, such as topping out skill stats in all of my main "class" skills - so in the case of Cathal, my fighter-mage-thief, I want 100 in Archery, Destruction Magic, One-Handed Weapons, Heavy Armour, Enchanting, Smithing, Sneak and Lockpicking. As leader of the Thieves Guild, one "achievement" I do actually quite want is to restore the Thieves Guild to its former prosperity. (Incidentally, if you are playing a Thief/Assassin type character, make sure you do the Nightingales questline as soon as possible - the armour you get for it is awesome - not just in terms of stats; aesthetically it's fabulous.) It seems only fair that under my leadership, though by "leadership" I actually mean "doing all the jobs that Vex and Delvin can't be arsed to do themselves"... after all, I sold my soul to Nocturnal in order to oust Mercer Frey, so I might as well get the Thieves Guild up and running. And then once my Sneak skills are up to scratch, I can make a start on the Dark Brotherhood jobs.
I also want to own fully upgraded houses in all the Skyrim holds that I can (I already have houses in Whiterun, Riften and Windhelm) and give legendary dragonbone armour to all my housecarls. There are just so many things I still have to do. So I guess I better stop writing and just do it...
Obviously, a game this big is not going to be as flawlessly polished as a single-player game with an eight hour, linear campaign. Some people are quoting Skyrim as having at least 300 hours of unique gameplay for a single campaign, and I can well believe it. I've got over 120 hours logged on Steam playing it, and I've just finished the main storyline quest threads (the defeat of Alduin and the Liberation of Skyrim), and while I've completed about 50 side-quest chains, I've not finished any of the main faction quests (Companions, Dark Brotherhood, Thieves Guild, etc), and despite having finished the main storyline quests (and just in time, given that Star Wars: The Old Republic goes live in a couple of days), I'm still motivated to keep playing. In the 120-odd hours of game time so far I've experienced some spectacular bugs - from random crashes to desktop, dragons that don't know which direction they should be flying in, purple placeholders instead of real textures, giants launching mobs into orbit with a swing of their warhammer, and many, many more.
The key to the success of any game isn't whether it's buggy or not, but whether the bugs deter you from playing or not. As with an old favourite of mine, Vampire - The Masquerade: Bloodlines, Skyrim's bugs and glitches don't kill my desire to play the game. They're annoying, for sure, but I'm always straight back, clicking at the shortcut on the desktop to launch the game again, always wanting more frosty, Nordic fun, punching dragons in the face.
The thing I really love about the Elder Scrolls RPG system is that the character classing doesn't really limit your options to a single character class. So my PC character (with whom I've stuck in the vast majority of playing hours - though I've dabbled with the 360 version as well, which is likewise awesome) is almost a Baldur's Gate style multi-class Fighter-Mage-Thief, given that he's specialising in Heavy Armour, Archery, One-handed weapons and Destruction Magic. He's also a world-class Enchanter and Blacksmith, and a decent lockpicker and sneak. Now that my character is knocking about in the mid-to-late level 40s, I'm mildly surprised (after the utterly broken level-scaling in Oblivion) that I'm still able to compete fairly with scaled enemies in the game world. One thing I like to do is imagine the conversation my character has with dragons as they battle; my character fully clad in Dragonbone armour.
"Hoy, Dov! I'm wearing your Mum! And now I'm going to punch you to death!"
I was pretty fond(ish) of Oblivion (despite its many, many flaws), but the changes to the levelling and the addition of a Fallout-style perks system has really improved the character-customisation aspects of the game. Skyrim doesn't restrict your choices of what skills you can level up - whatever you use the most, you end up specialising in - so you can become a genuine Jack-of-all-trades if you so choose. It's one way of giving the player genuine freedom in terms of play style, and not only that, it works: a heavy armour-wearing ninja-assassin-sneak-thief is a viable possibility, if you're willing to put in the time earning the necessary skills.
One thing that's surprised me, looking at the Steam Achievement stats, is that less than 20% of the player base have had their characters get married. Now, I don't necessarily believe that responsible adults should get married as a matter of course, but in game terms, it's a no-brainer of a decision, given that your spouse opens a shop earning you a tidy profit of 100 septims a day. And also, why would you NOT want to marry Lydia? (Note to trolls: DON'T answer that in the comments... I have a Daedric Sword with 32 bonus points of fire damage...)
It's difficult to know where to start when trying to talk about Skyrim and just how good it is. It's graphically one of the most gorgeous games I've ever played, with stunning scenery, handsome NPCs (Hello, Hroki! Hello, Fastred!) and it's just as pretty at night as it is during the day, if not more so. The aurorae you get to see at night while wandering in the high north are spectacularly good. There are also some lovely set pieces, such as the taking of cities or forts during the Skyrim civil war, as well as some challenging random encounters (it's always fun when a cave bear turns up in the of a dragon battle!), but what I like the most is that there's genuine variety in the quests. Your interaction with the game world isn't limited to killing other people. On the contrary, you can help people find true love or help solve murder cases, deliver messages or carry out errands... the game world is just so rich and diverse and all the better for it. The open worldliness of Oblivion always felt a little directionless, to me. In Skyrim there's always something interesting lurking around a corner. There's just so much out there to be found and played with; and yet, even though I've completed the main "save the world" and "save the Nords" quest threads, I still don't feel like I've seen everything the game has to offer. The flexibility in the character customisation is enticing in the sheer amount of play styles the game can offer you. I've discovered 17 different Shouts, (including - SPOILER WARNING! - the one that calls in your own personal close air support dragon to sort out anyone who's giving you too much trouble) though I haven't really played about with most of them in combat yet. When you can Shout people off the top of towers and watch them ragdoll pathetically down the side of a mountain to their deaths, it's not really motivating you to try out all the others...
I think the game I've put most hours into (barring World of Warcraft) over the last couple of years is Dragon Age: Origins (171 hours, according to my Steam stats). I can easily imagine that being doubled in Skyrim before I start being bored with it. Skyrim is such a compelling game world that I'm even dreaming about it - a sure sign of dangerous levels of obsession. There's just so much more I still want to do, even with my 100+ hours main character. It's not even about getting the "achievements" - that kind of thing doesn't make me want to play. No, I like setting my own targets, such as topping out skill stats in all of my main "class" skills - so in the case of Cathal, my fighter-mage-thief, I want 100 in Archery, Destruction Magic, One-Handed Weapons, Heavy Armour, Enchanting, Smithing, Sneak and Lockpicking. As leader of the Thieves Guild, one "achievement" I do actually quite want is to restore the Thieves Guild to its former prosperity. (Incidentally, if you are playing a Thief/Assassin type character, make sure you do the Nightingales questline as soon as possible - the armour you get for it is awesome - not just in terms of stats; aesthetically it's fabulous.) It seems only fair that under my leadership, though by "leadership" I actually mean "doing all the jobs that Vex and Delvin can't be arsed to do themselves"... after all, I sold my soul to Nocturnal in order to oust Mercer Frey, so I might as well get the Thieves Guild up and running. And then once my Sneak skills are up to scratch, I can make a start on the Dark Brotherhood jobs.
I also want to own fully upgraded houses in all the Skyrim holds that I can (I already have houses in Whiterun, Riften and Windhelm) and give legendary dragonbone armour to all my housecarls. There are just so many things I still have to do. So I guess I better stop writing and just do it...
Friday, December 16, 2011
Bark: A final Project Werewolf update
Big thanks to everyone who donated to my MoSpace page or gave me cash in person to support a very good cause. All in all, I raised £123, which is a whole £23 (or 23%, statistics fans - not adjusted for inflation!) better than last year. I'm hoping to raise even more next year, potentially by looking even more ridiculous and outlandish.
The Shaving Of The Mo was met with a mixed reception at my school. While some claimed I look far younger without the Mo, lots of people also said it really suited me and that I should have kept it. Of course, the deciding opinion was that of my girlfriend, who only tolerated it because it was to raise money for charity. She'd chuck me out of the house if I even tried to keep it permanently. Either that or shave it off in my sleep (possibly with my eyebrows as well). So I'm back to being (occasionally) clean-shaven. I don't miss the itching of the facial fungus, but I do miss the opportunity of looking enigmatic and wise when the occasion arose to stroke my Mo thoughtfully whenever I was asked a question...
Thursday, November 24, 2011
Bark: An elegant facial hair, from a more civilised age
Movember is coming to a close, and it's time to get the begging bowl out.
Project Werewolf is progressing nicely (since I don't quite have the chops for a full-on Captain Price SAS handlebar), and I'd like to direct everyone to my MoSpace page if they would care to donate a little money to a really good cause.
My Mo is much more fearsomely bushy than last year.
Project Werewolf is progressing nicely (since I don't quite have the chops for a full-on Captain Price SAS handlebar), and I'd like to direct everyone to my MoSpace page if they would care to donate a little money to a really good cause.
My Mo is much more fearsomely bushy than last year.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Byte: For the love of Lydia
It seems like I'm not the only one with a soft spot for Skyrim's Lydia. Herr Walker's tragic account of her untimely demise in his game is both touching, yet mildly disturbing.
John, my shield-brother, I feel your pain. And then I reach for the reload button.
Lydia, my love, I would never let such a terrible thing happen to you... not after all the effort and expense I went to enchanting your weapons and armour...
John, my shield-brother, I feel your pain. And then I reach for the reload button.
Lydia, my love, I would never let such a terrible thing happen to you... not after all the effort and expense I went to enchanting your weapons and armour...
Byte: Don't cross the memes!
I suppose this was inevitable, given all the Chuck Norris jokes that happen in the General and Trade channels.
Chuck Norris vs. WoW - the advert.
Chuck Norris vs. WoW - the advert.
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Byte: Skyrim thoughts
Holy crap, this game is good. (Here be spoilers, by the way...)
I have to admit, I'd been tempted to wait until the price dropped to £20 or so before getting it, but I'm glad I went for the Day One purchase. I liked Oblivion quite a lot, but I was only ever really able to play it by avoiding levelling up like the plague, so to avoid the spectacularly broken auto-scaling system that levelled up enemies to keep you "challenged" - that is, dead at the slightlest provocation. Skyrim is much more like Fallout 3, in that if you go too far off the beaten track, there'll be a giant or something ready to hand your head back to you on a platter, but if you follow some kind of sensible progression, going through the main story and not straying too far into the spectacularly gorgeous wilderness, you should be okay for the most part.
But I'm rambling already. I suppose I should start at the beginning. If you've played Morrowind and Oblivion, it's probably not going to come as a surprise to find out that you start out the game as a prisoner. You're just about to get executed (for crossing the border into Skyrim at an inopportune time and walking into a bit of local trouble and being mistaken for a rebel) when suddenly a big, scaly deus ex machina turns up and starts gobbing fire over the pesky Legion guards that were (quite literally) about to knock your block off. In the confusion, you get to escape, notionally picking a side for who's going to walk you through the tutorial quest. In the opening sequence, the first thing that strikes you is just how beautiful the game is. The character animations (especially the lip-sync) is a whole lot more naturalistic compared to Oblivion, and the dragon is fearsomely impressive. But more on dragons later. The voice acting is improved, too, though a lot of NPCs do tend to run out of new lines of dialogue all too quickly.
Once you escape Helgen and get out into Skyrim proper, it's the sheer scale of the game that takes your breath away. Oblivion was pretty, and so was Fallout 3 in a post-apocalyptic kind of way, but Skyrim is a whole order of magnitude prettier. If you see a mountain on the horizon, you can walk there (at least in theory), but the standout feature for me, graphically, is the water. The rivers. The waterfalls. The streams in Whiterun. The lake outside Riften... The water effects in Skyrim are absolutely stunning. And the weather effects aren't bad, either. Snow. Fog. Rain. Mist. Blizzards on the top mountains. It's all there and just adds to the sense of immersion.
If you decided to follow the story quests rather than just play with the game world after finishing the tutorial, the first city you'll come to is Whiterun. You have to take a message to the local Jarl (the ruler of the city and local area) warning him about the dragon that smacked the shit out of Helgen, and obviously, the Jarl uses this as an opportunity to basically turn you into his latest dogsbody. Within a few quests, you'll be facing off with that very dragon with a few dozen local guardsmen to help. As set pieces go, it's pretty fucking spectacular. I was so taken aback I forgot to take screenshots. After this encounter, you get your first "Shout" and find out that you're "Dragonborn", meaning that you have a natural ability to speak the language of dragons, which obviously means you should immediately go forth and start killing them and stealing their souls. Well, okay then. If I must...
The greatest benefit of completing this quest is that the Jarl of Whiterun appoints you "Thane" of the city and assigns you Lydia, a "Housecarl", who I have been steadfastly trying to keep alive, given my terrible record in Fallout 3 with getting my companions and assistants killed. I'm really rather fond of Lydia, as she is tough, loyal, a good fighter, and very forgiving when I accidentally shoot her with an arrow or set her on fire with a spell. She still "carries my burdens" without complaint. (I really hope that's a euphemism, given that she has an "owned" bed in my - now fully furnished - house in Whiterun). She was vital in helping me defeat a dragon on the way up the 7000 steps to see the Greybeards at their base, conveniently placed on the top of a remote mountain (hence the 7000 steps - and no, I didn't count them, but it's a bloody long way). I think I may try to marry her. AND IN THE GAME! (*coughs*)
My character is now up to level 15, and is half decent with a bow, heavy armour and single-handed weapons. I'm also experimenting with dual-wielding destruction spells (perhaps an odd choice for someone primarily speccing as a Warrior). The Fallout 3 style Perks are a nice improvement to the levelling system compared to Oblivion. All skills contribute to you levelling up, so you can get to be a real all-rounder, being skilled in everything from Alchemy to Smithing or Lockpicking to Two-Handed Weapons and everything in-between.
I'm loving the game so far. It's not without the odd bug or glitch, but I've found it much more compelling than Oblivion. I can see myself playing this more than both Dragon Age games, and (according to Steam) I've sunk upwards of 200 hours into those. I could probably put 100 hours in Skyrim on just one character. It's vast, beautiful and utterly compelling - a perfect antidote to the scourge of the modern, military first person shooter. And thank Akatosh for that.
I have to admit, I'd been tempted to wait until the price dropped to £20 or so before getting it, but I'm glad I went for the Day One purchase. I liked Oblivion quite a lot, but I was only ever really able to play it by avoiding levelling up like the plague, so to avoid the spectacularly broken auto-scaling system that levelled up enemies to keep you "challenged" - that is, dead at the slightlest provocation. Skyrim is much more like Fallout 3, in that if you go too far off the beaten track, there'll be a giant or something ready to hand your head back to you on a platter, but if you follow some kind of sensible progression, going through the main story and not straying too far into the spectacularly gorgeous wilderness, you should be okay for the most part.
But I'm rambling already. I suppose I should start at the beginning. If you've played Morrowind and Oblivion, it's probably not going to come as a surprise to find out that you start out the game as a prisoner. You're just about to get executed (for crossing the border into Skyrim at an inopportune time and walking into a bit of local trouble and being mistaken for a rebel) when suddenly a big, scaly deus ex machina turns up and starts gobbing fire over the pesky Legion guards that were (quite literally) about to knock your block off. In the confusion, you get to escape, notionally picking a side for who's going to walk you through the tutorial quest. In the opening sequence, the first thing that strikes you is just how beautiful the game is. The character animations (especially the lip-sync) is a whole lot more naturalistic compared to Oblivion, and the dragon is fearsomely impressive. But more on dragons later. The voice acting is improved, too, though a lot of NPCs do tend to run out of new lines of dialogue all too quickly.
Once you escape Helgen and get out into Skyrim proper, it's the sheer scale of the game that takes your breath away. Oblivion was pretty, and so was Fallout 3 in a post-apocalyptic kind of way, but Skyrim is a whole order of magnitude prettier. If you see a mountain on the horizon, you can walk there (at least in theory), but the standout feature for me, graphically, is the water. The rivers. The waterfalls. The streams in Whiterun. The lake outside Riften... The water effects in Skyrim are absolutely stunning. And the weather effects aren't bad, either. Snow. Fog. Rain. Mist. Blizzards on the top mountains. It's all there and just adds to the sense of immersion.
If you decided to follow the story quests rather than just play with the game world after finishing the tutorial, the first city you'll come to is Whiterun. You have to take a message to the local Jarl (the ruler of the city and local area) warning him about the dragon that smacked the shit out of Helgen, and obviously, the Jarl uses this as an opportunity to basically turn you into his latest dogsbody. Within a few quests, you'll be facing off with that very dragon with a few dozen local guardsmen to help. As set pieces go, it's pretty fucking spectacular. I was so taken aback I forgot to take screenshots. After this encounter, you get your first "Shout" and find out that you're "Dragonborn", meaning that you have a natural ability to speak the language of dragons, which obviously means you should immediately go forth and start killing them and stealing their souls. Well, okay then. If I must...
The greatest benefit of completing this quest is that the Jarl of Whiterun appoints you "Thane" of the city and assigns you Lydia, a "Housecarl", who I have been steadfastly trying to keep alive, given my terrible record in Fallout 3 with getting my companions and assistants killed. I'm really rather fond of Lydia, as she is tough, loyal, a good fighter, and very forgiving when I accidentally shoot her with an arrow or set her on fire with a spell. She still "carries my burdens" without complaint. (I really hope that's a euphemism, given that she has an "owned" bed in my - now fully furnished - house in Whiterun). She was vital in helping me defeat a dragon on the way up the 7000 steps to see the Greybeards at their base, conveniently placed on the top of a remote mountain (hence the 7000 steps - and no, I didn't count them, but it's a bloody long way). I think I may try to marry her. AND IN THE GAME! (*coughs*)
My character is now up to level 15, and is half decent with a bow, heavy armour and single-handed weapons. I'm also experimenting with dual-wielding destruction spells (perhaps an odd choice for someone primarily speccing as a Warrior). The Fallout 3 style Perks are a nice improvement to the levelling system compared to Oblivion. All skills contribute to you levelling up, so you can get to be a real all-rounder, being skilled in everything from Alchemy to Smithing or Lockpicking to Two-Handed Weapons and everything in-between.
I'm loving the game so far. It's not without the odd bug or glitch, but I've found it much more compelling than Oblivion. I can see myself playing this more than both Dragon Age games, and (according to Steam) I've sunk upwards of 200 hours into those. I could probably put 100 hours in Skyrim on just one character. It's vast, beautiful and utterly compelling - a perfect antidote to the scourge of the modern, military first person shooter. And thank Akatosh for that.
Sunday, October 02, 2011
Byte: THERE IS ONLY WAR!
This post merits both a YAY and an EPIC FAIL, for two slightly different reasons. I had Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine pre-ordered on Xbox 360 well over a year ago, because I knew it would be right up my street of man-shooting, Ork-bashing, daemon-rending unbridled slaughter, with ridiculously macho metal shoulderpads and slightly fascist overtones. Before I go any further, I should say at this point HERE BE SPOILERS. Spoilers as big as an Ork Warboss's teeth...
Unfortunately, before I could really put more than a few hours into it, last weekend my 160GB Xbox 360 Elite died an ignominous death, by not actually quite dying (no dramatic red ring of death, or anything like that) but one evening my lady turned it on to watch a DVD and while it made all the right noises and booted up, it steadfastly refused to output video or audio, despite me resetting the video output to default (twice) and trying both the HDMI cable and the component AV output ports.
So instead of forking out £200 I don't have on a new Xbox 360, instead I picked up a PC copy of Space Marine, since that was a slightly cheaper option. I've ploughed through the single player campaign in a little over six or seven hours, but had a rather nice time. Some reviewers (quite rightly) have critisized it for being rather on the conservative side, particularly in the plot and storytelling, which is really rather predictable and Captain Titus (while quite nicely voiced by Mark Strong) suffers from being a thoroughly dull protagonist, evidently from Dullsville, Macragge. The final battle with the Chaos lord, Nemeroth, is also rather an anti-climax, given that it's QTE-tastic, which basically sucks all the real skill out of it - the boss battle with the Ork Warboss Grimskull is much more challenging and rewarding. The epilogue is also rather an anti-climax, with Titus being (somewhat predictably) being taken into custody by the Inquisition because of his seeming resistance to the Warp... There are also other annoyances - it would be nice if enemy NPCs had more than half a dozen lines of dialogue... Hearing Orks yell "More humans to kill!" or "Kill those Space Marines!" for the two hundredth time in the space of two hours gets rather tiresome. The Chaos hordes show a similar lack of verbal dexterity too, though at least you don't have to put up with them for so long, given that Chaos forces only show up within the last couple of hours of the game.
But, BUT... if Space Marine has a saving grace, it's this: the combat. It gets a little relentless at times (particularly since the story exposition isn't terribly interesting or well handled), but by the Emperor, this game makes you feel like you can kick the ass of an Ork horde by yourself. This is mainly because of one fact: you can. Lots of people initially said Space Marine would be Warhammer 40,000: Gears of War. While I see the comparison, they couldn't be more wrong. Space Marine is only superficially like Gears of War. Sure, they have the big guns, shoulder pads and token female characters, but Space Marines don't need a cover system. You can hide behind crates if you must, but a true Space Marine just kicks ass bigger, better and faster than anyone else.
What I really love is the melee system. You can really be aggressive and bash your way through massive groups of enemies if you know what you're doing with the combo system. The melee attack-stun-execution system is very well balanced, and it drives the whole game, given that you don't have regenerating health (though you do have regenerating shields, Halo 1 stylée) and if you want to heal up, you have to get close and dirty, stunning and executing enemies. It's visceral and satisfying and in many cases it's tempting to forego the Power Axe in favour of the Chainsword because it has better execution animations and it's slightly easier to chain together stun-execute combos. The Thunder Hammer is a thing of joy, though the downside of using that is you're only able to use your pistol and Bolter as ranged weapons.
Some (OXM 360 Magazine amongst others) have described the ranged weapons as rather clunky and uninspiring... Personally, I don't have that much of an issue with them. I actually rather like the simplicity of a Bolter Pistol & Chainsword combo, as while it may not be the most powerful combination of weapons, it is the most naturalistic for senior Astartes in the Warhammer 40,000 lore. The Stalker bolter and Storm bolter (the latter of which only makes an appearance in the final chapter of the single player campaign) are both lovely. I'm less convinced about the Melta gun, which I found thoroughly useless and I wasn't too fond of the Vengeance launcher, given that it is quite fiddly to use, but don't seem to have that much in terms of stopping power. The Lascannon is great (particularly in the set pieces you get to use it against Ork Nobs), though ammo for it is a little scarce for you to truly make the most of its power and the few occasions you get your mitts on heavy plasma cannons or autocannons are real highlights.
One complaint I've also seen is that you don't get to use the jump pack enough. You get to use it in three chapters out of the eighteen in the story, and I think that's about right, since it's ridiculously overpowered. The way in which the use of it is taken away from you on each occasion is quite contrived, but it makes sense in terms of game balance. The way weapon and ability unlocks (such as Fury and Marksman modes) are handled is very well done and the enemies also scale well. The challenge of the game increases signficantly once the primary protagonists switch from Orks to Chaos, but this is also well handled, as by then you should have gotten to grips with the right tactics and will have unlocked the superior Fury mode, which basically turns you into a rampaging angel of death, if you select your weapons and use the melee combos effectively.
While it's a shame that Space Marine doesn't really try to push the boundaries of the genre, or even really make the most of its source material (you can't help but feel that Relic wanted to make a "banker" title to make money and prove they could develop games in this genre before attempting something really ambitious), it's still a very solid game and an enjoyable enough way of wiling away a couple of lazy autumn weekend afternoons. If that sounds like damning with faint praise, maybe it is, but hey - there's always the inevitable sequel to look forward to...
Unfortunately, before I could really put more than a few hours into it, last weekend my 160GB Xbox 360 Elite died an ignominous death, by not actually quite dying (no dramatic red ring of death, or anything like that) but one evening my lady turned it on to watch a DVD and while it made all the right noises and booted up, it steadfastly refused to output video or audio, despite me resetting the video output to default (twice) and trying both the HDMI cable and the component AV output ports.
So instead of forking out £200 I don't have on a new Xbox 360, instead I picked up a PC copy of Space Marine, since that was a slightly cheaper option. I've ploughed through the single player campaign in a little over six or seven hours, but had a rather nice time. Some reviewers (quite rightly) have critisized it for being rather on the conservative side, particularly in the plot and storytelling, which is really rather predictable and Captain Titus (while quite nicely voiced by Mark Strong) suffers from being a thoroughly dull protagonist, evidently from Dullsville, Macragge. The final battle with the Chaos lord, Nemeroth, is also rather an anti-climax, given that it's QTE-tastic, which basically sucks all the real skill out of it - the boss battle with the Ork Warboss Grimskull is much more challenging and rewarding. The epilogue is also rather an anti-climax, with Titus being (somewhat predictably) being taken into custody by the Inquisition because of his seeming resistance to the Warp... There are also other annoyances - it would be nice if enemy NPCs had more than half a dozen lines of dialogue... Hearing Orks yell "More humans to kill!" or "Kill those Space Marines!" for the two hundredth time in the space of two hours gets rather tiresome. The Chaos hordes show a similar lack of verbal dexterity too, though at least you don't have to put up with them for so long, given that Chaos forces only show up within the last couple of hours of the game.
But, BUT... if Space Marine has a saving grace, it's this: the combat. It gets a little relentless at times (particularly since the story exposition isn't terribly interesting or well handled), but by the Emperor, this game makes you feel like you can kick the ass of an Ork horde by yourself. This is mainly because of one fact: you can. Lots of people initially said Space Marine would be Warhammer 40,000: Gears of War. While I see the comparison, they couldn't be more wrong. Space Marine is only superficially like Gears of War. Sure, they have the big guns, shoulder pads and token female characters, but Space Marines don't need a cover system. You can hide behind crates if you must, but a true Space Marine just kicks ass bigger, better and faster than anyone else.
What I really love is the melee system. You can really be aggressive and bash your way through massive groups of enemies if you know what you're doing with the combo system. The melee attack-stun-execution system is very well balanced, and it drives the whole game, given that you don't have regenerating health (though you do have regenerating shields, Halo 1 stylée) and if you want to heal up, you have to get close and dirty, stunning and executing enemies. It's visceral and satisfying and in many cases it's tempting to forego the Power Axe in favour of the Chainsword because it has better execution animations and it's slightly easier to chain together stun-execute combos. The Thunder Hammer is a thing of joy, though the downside of using that is you're only able to use your pistol and Bolter as ranged weapons.
Some (OXM 360 Magazine amongst others) have described the ranged weapons as rather clunky and uninspiring... Personally, I don't have that much of an issue with them. I actually rather like the simplicity of a Bolter Pistol & Chainsword combo, as while it may not be the most powerful combination of weapons, it is the most naturalistic for senior Astartes in the Warhammer 40,000 lore. The Stalker bolter and Storm bolter (the latter of which only makes an appearance in the final chapter of the single player campaign) are both lovely. I'm less convinced about the Melta gun, which I found thoroughly useless and I wasn't too fond of the Vengeance launcher, given that it is quite fiddly to use, but don't seem to have that much in terms of stopping power. The Lascannon is great (particularly in the set pieces you get to use it against Ork Nobs), though ammo for it is a little scarce for you to truly make the most of its power and the few occasions you get your mitts on heavy plasma cannons or autocannons are real highlights.
One complaint I've also seen is that you don't get to use the jump pack enough. You get to use it in three chapters out of the eighteen in the story, and I think that's about right, since it's ridiculously overpowered. The way in which the use of it is taken away from you on each occasion is quite contrived, but it makes sense in terms of game balance. The way weapon and ability unlocks (such as Fury and Marksman modes) are handled is very well done and the enemies also scale well. The challenge of the game increases signficantly once the primary protagonists switch from Orks to Chaos, but this is also well handled, as by then you should have gotten to grips with the right tactics and will have unlocked the superior Fury mode, which basically turns you into a rampaging angel of death, if you select your weapons and use the melee combos effectively.
While it's a shame that Space Marine doesn't really try to push the boundaries of the genre, or even really make the most of its source material (you can't help but feel that Relic wanted to make a "banker" title to make money and prove they could develop games in this genre before attempting something really ambitious), it's still a very solid game and an enjoyable enough way of wiling away a couple of lazy autumn weekend afternoons. If that sounds like damning with faint praise, maybe it is, but hey - there's always the inevitable sequel to look forward to...
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Byte: You are dead
YOU ARE DEAD.
That's a message that you get to see a lot whenever you play ARMA: Cold War Assault - the game previously known as Operation Flashpoint.
I've written quite extensively about Operation Flashpoint before, not least a review of the Xbox port of the game that was released way back in 2005 (itself over four years after the original PC release) but thanks to Bohemia Interactive re-releasing it as a standalone game in the last week or so (and me being on holiday with quite a bit of time to kill) I've been getting reacquainted with it. Sadly, ARMA: Cold War Assault is missing the rather splendid Red Hammer add-on campaign (though it does include Resistance), but even after a good ten years (and more) since the original release, at £3.49 on Steam, it's still terrific value for money.
Considering that the game is now over ten years old, it still stands up rather well. Thanks to its scale, it was never exactly what you'd call a looker, even back in 2001 - like another long-standing favourite of mine that I'm replaying again (Deus Ex) - the graphics and the animation were always on the rather shoddy side, but it's not as much of a barrier to playing the game as you might think. This is war, after all: it's supposed to be dull, muddy and ugly...
What makes the game special is its sheer brutality. This isn't a military-themed FPS like Call of Duty that mollycoddles you with regenerating health and ammo that you can collect faster than you can fire it... oh no. Operation Flashpoint (sorry, Bohemia, I can't get used to the new name) will make you wait ten or fifteen minutes for you to get into the action and kill you DEAD-DEAD-DEAD before you've even fired a shot if you let your attention wander for even half a second. Oh, and then, just to add insult to injury, the miserly save game allowance will make you replay the majority of the level, not the single encounter you just stuffed up.
But you know what? The game's all the better for it. I think every single 12 year old who plays Call of Duty: Black Ops (just because they think Call Of Duty is the BEST GAME EVAR because it's the most widely hyped) should be strapped to a chair and be made to play Operation Flashpoint without breaks for at least twelve hours. They should do this for two reasons.
1) So that they release that real life and real combat with firearms doesn't have a quicksave or checkpoint system, and
2) So that they get some understanding that war isn't the exciting, glamorous, thrill-ride all the other FPS games they've played makes them think it is.
Most videogames try to empower the player - sometimes to ludicrous degrees. Take COD4, for example - where you can recover from bullet wounds simply by hiding behind a door or under a table for a few seconds. Operation Flashpoint doesn't do this. Not by a long shot. It makes the player acutely aware of their vulnerability and mortality - and furthermore, it follows through on the consequences of making a mistake in a way that's almost unthinkable in games published today. There's no quicksave or quickload, so instead of only losing a few minutes of progress, you might have to replay half an hour or more of a level (depending on when you used your one precious save per mission, or when the auto-retry save point is set). So when you factor in the variability of the AI and the fact that the outcomes of each individual enemy contact can have vastly different outcomes for your squad, depending on the casualties you incur at key points of the mission, a ten minute mission might take you over an hour to complete, after all the retries, during which you learn the correct tactics to use and how to approach an objective properly according to the terrain. This is no linear, corridor shooter: there are so many variables in play that even with the same initial conditions at the start of a mission and any subsequent replays, there's no real way of predicting what will happen.
I can't imagine many 12 year old COD-kiddies being able to stick it out for even a handful of missions. But they should be made to play it - if only to realise that true success has to be worked for and takes skill, persistence and not an inconsiderable amount of luck. What worries me about the "achievements" ethic of modern videogame design is that success only really requires persistence - you put in the time, you get the unlocks and then even people who are more inherently skilled than you (but don't have as much time to play the game) don't stand a chance because they don't have the unlocks that kill everyone on the map without the chance of fighting back. The vast majority of modern game design (especially in multiplayer) rewards sheer bloody-minded persistence over skill, which is why you'll never see me playing COD4 online, but might find me knocking about on an Unreal Tournament 2004 server.
I often wonder about the social messages videogames give our young folk - whether intentionally or not. In my (I suppose rather quaint and old-fashioned) view, anything that sends a message of consequence-free failure and gives reward for simply sticking with something rather than actually trying to get better at it, is not something that should be applauded or encouraged. Though to be fair, I don't think it's just videogames that do this- I think the vast majority of our entertainment media (be it film, games or TV) does the public a massive disservice by assuming that because people have greater choice now, things need to be more instantly engaging, otherwise people will simply switch off or turn over to do something else. All this does is breed a generation with pathetically short attention spans and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. There's no real reason to assume that teenagers twenty years ago (such as myself) are so different from teenagers from today. I just think that people are just more likely to reach for an excuse these days. Lord knows that if some of the kids I taught put half the effort into doing their work that they did for finding excuses for their lack of effort and poor behaviour, they wouldn't need to make excuses, because they'd be too busy to be bored.
This is why I think all these COD-kiddies, used to easy success and reward and no consequence failure, would be better people if they had to sit down to play something like Operation Flashpoint for a day. Our failures - what they cost us, and how we rebound from them - tell us about the kind of person we are. One thing that I think has been lost in modern society is that sometimes it's okay to fail - that we will learn more from a hard-fought failure than an easy win. People are so petrified of failure these days that the producers of mainstream entertainment (not to mention our providers of mass news media) are afraid to challenge people on every level - from their preconceptions and beliefs to what they might find interesting and entertaining. My fear is that if we (as a society and civilization) lose the ability to challenge ourselves in meaningful ways, humanity will stagnate and regress into tribalism and extremism - and over the past decade or two I've seen some signs that this is already happening, with the rise of religious extremism and the rise of the fear of anyone being seen to do anything that might be construed as being offensive to anyone (I don't just mean political correctness, but that's a large part of it).
Real life, for the vast majority of people, isn't a high-tech, lightning-paced, glamorous rollercoaster of easy success and cheap thrills. Instead, it's dull, difficult, mundane and packed with more failures and defeats than victories. Life inevitably has more losers than winners, but that's not to say that failure can't be rewarding, especially if it teaches you something. And that's the moral of Operation Flashpoint in a nutshell for me. It's hard - by goodness, it's hard - but all those failures and learning experiences help make the rare victories all the sweeter.
YOU ARE DEAD.
RETRY OR EXIT?
[clicks RETRY]
That's a message that you get to see a lot whenever you play ARMA: Cold War Assault - the game previously known as Operation Flashpoint.
I've written quite extensively about Operation Flashpoint before, not least a review of the Xbox port of the game that was released way back in 2005 (itself over four years after the original PC release) but thanks to Bohemia Interactive re-releasing it as a standalone game in the last week or so (and me being on holiday with quite a bit of time to kill) I've been getting reacquainted with it. Sadly, ARMA: Cold War Assault is missing the rather splendid Red Hammer add-on campaign (though it does include Resistance), but even after a good ten years (and more) since the original release, at £3.49 on Steam, it's still terrific value for money.
Considering that the game is now over ten years old, it still stands up rather well. Thanks to its scale, it was never exactly what you'd call a looker, even back in 2001 - like another long-standing favourite of mine that I'm replaying again (Deus Ex) - the graphics and the animation were always on the rather shoddy side, but it's not as much of a barrier to playing the game as you might think. This is war, after all: it's supposed to be dull, muddy and ugly...
What makes the game special is its sheer brutality. This isn't a military-themed FPS like Call of Duty that mollycoddles you with regenerating health and ammo that you can collect faster than you can fire it... oh no. Operation Flashpoint (sorry, Bohemia, I can't get used to the new name) will make you wait ten or fifteen minutes for you to get into the action and kill you DEAD-DEAD-DEAD before you've even fired a shot if you let your attention wander for even half a second. Oh, and then, just to add insult to injury, the miserly save game allowance will make you replay the majority of the level, not the single encounter you just stuffed up.
But you know what? The game's all the better for it. I think every single 12 year old who plays Call of Duty: Black Ops (just because they think Call Of Duty is the BEST GAME EVAR because it's the most widely hyped) should be strapped to a chair and be made to play Operation Flashpoint without breaks for at least twelve hours. They should do this for two reasons.
1) So that they release that real life and real combat with firearms doesn't have a quicksave or checkpoint system, and
2) So that they get some understanding that war isn't the exciting, glamorous, thrill-ride all the other FPS games they've played makes them think it is.
Most videogames try to empower the player - sometimes to ludicrous degrees. Take COD4, for example - where you can recover from bullet wounds simply by hiding behind a door or under a table for a few seconds. Operation Flashpoint doesn't do this. Not by a long shot. It makes the player acutely aware of their vulnerability and mortality - and furthermore, it follows through on the consequences of making a mistake in a way that's almost unthinkable in games published today. There's no quicksave or quickload, so instead of only losing a few minutes of progress, you might have to replay half an hour or more of a level (depending on when you used your one precious save per mission, or when the auto-retry save point is set). So when you factor in the variability of the AI and the fact that the outcomes of each individual enemy contact can have vastly different outcomes for your squad, depending on the casualties you incur at key points of the mission, a ten minute mission might take you over an hour to complete, after all the retries, during which you learn the correct tactics to use and how to approach an objective properly according to the terrain. This is no linear, corridor shooter: there are so many variables in play that even with the same initial conditions at the start of a mission and any subsequent replays, there's no real way of predicting what will happen.
I can't imagine many 12 year old COD-kiddies being able to stick it out for even a handful of missions. But they should be made to play it - if only to realise that true success has to be worked for and takes skill, persistence and not an inconsiderable amount of luck. What worries me about the "achievements" ethic of modern videogame design is that success only really requires persistence - you put in the time, you get the unlocks and then even people who are more inherently skilled than you (but don't have as much time to play the game) don't stand a chance because they don't have the unlocks that kill everyone on the map without the chance of fighting back. The vast majority of modern game design (especially in multiplayer) rewards sheer bloody-minded persistence over skill, which is why you'll never see me playing COD4 online, but might find me knocking about on an Unreal Tournament 2004 server.
I often wonder about the social messages videogames give our young folk - whether intentionally or not. In my (I suppose rather quaint and old-fashioned) view, anything that sends a message of consequence-free failure and gives reward for simply sticking with something rather than actually trying to get better at it, is not something that should be applauded or encouraged. Though to be fair, I don't think it's just videogames that do this- I think the vast majority of our entertainment media (be it film, games or TV) does the public a massive disservice by assuming that because people have greater choice now, things need to be more instantly engaging, otherwise people will simply switch off or turn over to do something else. All this does is breed a generation with pathetically short attention spans and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. There's no real reason to assume that teenagers twenty years ago (such as myself) are so different from teenagers from today. I just think that people are just more likely to reach for an excuse these days. Lord knows that if some of the kids I taught put half the effort into doing their work that they did for finding excuses for their lack of effort and poor behaviour, they wouldn't need to make excuses, because they'd be too busy to be bored.
This is why I think all these COD-kiddies, used to easy success and reward and no consequence failure, would be better people if they had to sit down to play something like Operation Flashpoint for a day. Our failures - what they cost us, and how we rebound from them - tell us about the kind of person we are. One thing that I think has been lost in modern society is that sometimes it's okay to fail - that we will learn more from a hard-fought failure than an easy win. People are so petrified of failure these days that the producers of mainstream entertainment (not to mention our providers of mass news media) are afraid to challenge people on every level - from their preconceptions and beliefs to what they might find interesting and entertaining. My fear is that if we (as a society and civilization) lose the ability to challenge ourselves in meaningful ways, humanity will stagnate and regress into tribalism and extremism - and over the past decade or two I've seen some signs that this is already happening, with the rise of religious extremism and the rise of the fear of anyone being seen to do anything that might be construed as being offensive to anyone (I don't just mean political correctness, but that's a large part of it).
Real life, for the vast majority of people, isn't a high-tech, lightning-paced, glamorous rollercoaster of easy success and cheap thrills. Instead, it's dull, difficult, mundane and packed with more failures and defeats than victories. Life inevitably has more losers than winners, but that's not to say that failure can't be rewarding, especially if it teaches you something. And that's the moral of Operation Flashpoint in a nutshell for me. It's hard - by goodness, it's hard - but all those failures and learning experiences help make the rare victories all the sweeter.
YOU ARE DEAD.
RETRY OR EXIT?
[clicks RETRY]
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Bark: Culture vs. Anti-culture
It's been a little over a week since the start of the England Riots, and still the aftermath rumbles on with "Big Broken Society" Dave and Milidum spouting all sorts of rubbish about "moral collapse" and "knee-jerk gimmicks".
One thing that caught my eyes and ears was the Newsnight discussion with David Starkey - if you only caught the out of context condemnation of Starkey's "the whites have become black" line, I recommend you watch the entire debate.
While some have described the comment as racist, I'm not so sure - at least, I don't think Starkey meant it as derogatory to black people. I would actually agree with Starkey in the sense that in some echelons of our society, "white" (in other words, traditionally British) culture is being supplanted by "black" gangsta culture, imported over from America and the Carribean. I use the term culture rather loosely here.
I think the mistake that was made in the debate on Newsnight was to try and label one culture as being inherently "right" and the other "wrong" (the implication being that Starkey thought that "black" culture was wrong - again, I'm not sure this is the case - there's plenty of room for the possibility that both cultures are rubbish), rather than try to understand why this shift has happened.
Milidum put it down to the "me first" culture and talked a lot "responsibility" and "inequality" without really saying anything we didn't already know twenty years ago. Society has always contained inequality, and if anything, the gap between top and bottom has been getting wider since Thatcher came to power in 1979 and 13 years of Labour government didn't do a damn thing to address it effectively. The poorest sections of society have historically always been largely ignored by the political system, mainly because there's not enough votes in it. Instead, the Labour government threw them bones in the form of benefits and tax credits, hoping it would paper over the cracks.
Unfortunately, they forgot one key psychological aspect of the human psyche: something that has not been earned has no value. So the poor and the forgotten were given enough money to scrape together a TV, a Blackberry or iPhone and internet access, but weren't made to get off their arses for it. With this wonderful technology, paid for by the state, they got fed a diet of TV, films, games and internet sites glorifying violence and materialism - they saw a better life in a bigger TV screen, and the internet allowed them (with the help of Twitter and Blackberry Messenger) to run rings around the government and the police for a few days - a whole country shaken to its core by a few thousand immoral, self-centred thugs with just enough brain power to be trouble.
I think it's telling that the majority of the looters went for TVs and consumer electronics, rather than jewelry. It tells you what's valued by society when silicon is more prized than gold (Whoever said money can't buy happiness clearly hadn't heard of flat-screen plasma TVs).
"How did this happen?" ask the social commentators and politicians - I can only throw in my two pence - there's no reason why my theory should be any more correct or wrong than that of the "experts". It doesn't do any good labelling parts of our society "broken" or "sick" and then beating them with a big stick (such as the proposals to remove whole families from social housing and stop their benefits if a family member was part of the looting) - how does that create a more equitable society?
People in so-called sink estates look up to the pimps, drug dealers and gangsters because they have everything that the media in our society tells them is desireable - money, drugs, guns, cars, women, power. By comparison, people in real authority (politicians, police, teachers, doctors - the people who should be real role models for our society) are made to look weak and ineffectual by the news media and the government falls over backwards to not offend anyone rather than show authority.
"British" culture has become so anodyne and uninspiring that it shouldn't be any wonder that the people who need the most help and direction in our society look to people willing to provide them with a vision - even if it is destructive, amoral and anti-social. I can tell I'm getting old and increasingly intolerant, because I can't help feeling some sort of nostalgia for my formative years under Thatcher - a lot of what she did was short-sighted, socially devisive and destructive, but you know that there's no way in hell she'd put up with shit like this...
This weekend I visited Chartwell, Winston Churchill's house in Kent. Now he was a leader - a unifier - exactly the kind of person we need now. Instead, what have we got? A man who couldn't unify a couple of magnets and a man who couldn't inspire his way out of a wet paper bag. Maker preserve us...
One thing that caught my eyes and ears was the Newsnight discussion with David Starkey - if you only caught the out of context condemnation of Starkey's "the whites have become black" line, I recommend you watch the entire debate.
While some have described the comment as racist, I'm not so sure - at least, I don't think Starkey meant it as derogatory to black people. I would actually agree with Starkey in the sense that in some echelons of our society, "white" (in other words, traditionally British) culture is being supplanted by "black" gangsta culture, imported over from America and the Carribean. I use the term culture rather loosely here.
I think the mistake that was made in the debate on Newsnight was to try and label one culture as being inherently "right" and the other "wrong" (the implication being that Starkey thought that "black" culture was wrong - again, I'm not sure this is the case - there's plenty of room for the possibility that both cultures are rubbish), rather than try to understand why this shift has happened.
Milidum put it down to the "me first" culture and talked a lot "responsibility" and "inequality" without really saying anything we didn't already know twenty years ago. Society has always contained inequality, and if anything, the gap between top and bottom has been getting wider since Thatcher came to power in 1979 and 13 years of Labour government didn't do a damn thing to address it effectively. The poorest sections of society have historically always been largely ignored by the political system, mainly because there's not enough votes in it. Instead, the Labour government threw them bones in the form of benefits and tax credits, hoping it would paper over the cracks.
Unfortunately, they forgot one key psychological aspect of the human psyche: something that has not been earned has no value. So the poor and the forgotten were given enough money to scrape together a TV, a Blackberry or iPhone and internet access, but weren't made to get off their arses for it. With this wonderful technology, paid for by the state, they got fed a diet of TV, films, games and internet sites glorifying violence and materialism - they saw a better life in a bigger TV screen, and the internet allowed them (with the help of Twitter and Blackberry Messenger) to run rings around the government and the police for a few days - a whole country shaken to its core by a few thousand immoral, self-centred thugs with just enough brain power to be trouble.
I think it's telling that the majority of the looters went for TVs and consumer electronics, rather than jewelry. It tells you what's valued by society when silicon is more prized than gold (Whoever said money can't buy happiness clearly hadn't heard of flat-screen plasma TVs).
"How did this happen?" ask the social commentators and politicians - I can only throw in my two pence - there's no reason why my theory should be any more correct or wrong than that of the "experts". It doesn't do any good labelling parts of our society "broken" or "sick" and then beating them with a big stick (such as the proposals to remove whole families from social housing and stop their benefits if a family member was part of the looting) - how does that create a more equitable society?
People in so-called sink estates look up to the pimps, drug dealers and gangsters because they have everything that the media in our society tells them is desireable - money, drugs, guns, cars, women, power. By comparison, people in real authority (politicians, police, teachers, doctors - the people who should be real role models for our society) are made to look weak and ineffectual by the news media and the government falls over backwards to not offend anyone rather than show authority.
"British" culture has become so anodyne and uninspiring that it shouldn't be any wonder that the people who need the most help and direction in our society look to people willing to provide them with a vision - even if it is destructive, amoral and anti-social. I can tell I'm getting old and increasingly intolerant, because I can't help feeling some sort of nostalgia for my formative years under Thatcher - a lot of what she did was short-sighted, socially devisive and destructive, but you know that there's no way in hell she'd put up with shit like this...
This weekend I visited Chartwell, Winston Churchill's house in Kent. Now he was a leader - a unifier - exactly the kind of person we need now. Instead, what have we got? A man who couldn't unify a couple of magnets and a man who couldn't inspire his way out of a wet paper bag. Maker preserve us...
Friday, July 29, 2011
Byte: Beyond Good and Evil
As part of my self-set homework for this summer's holiday, I've set myself a few targets. I'm acutely aware that my completion rate, even for games that I really like, is pretty bloody woeful - probably only one game in five, at best.
So this summer I want to knock three (less than 1% of my total games collection) games off my "to complete" list. I'm being remarkably self-disciplined, and playing the games in order of priority, with only a bit of cocking about on World of Warcraft to form a distraction. Given that I don't have a very good track record with sticking to targets, I've tried to be realistic by setting a priority that's remotely achieveable for at least two of the games I want to complete, by tackling them in increasing order of length.
Last on the list will be The Witcher 2, which I haven't made much headway with so far - not due to a lack of enthusiasm, but because I can tell it's the kind of game that really requires a lot of singleminded dedication to get through (like its predecessor), and unless I'm on holiday, I don't have a lot of that to spare. Second on my list is a game that ranks in my all-time top 5 games, yet I never quite got around to finishing - Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. In previous playthroughs I've completed about 80% of the game, but like my previous mental block with Deus Ex, I couldn't quite bring myself to finishing the game off - it's one of those games you never quite want to end. However, this summer, I really want to finish it, though I doubt I will play many of the optional missions - I'll just stick to the main story missions, any maybe play around the edges if I have time.
But the first game on my list this summer is arguably the greatest videogame ever to come out of France: Beyond Good and Evil. The long-awaited sequel's been getting some hype recently from (series designer) Michel Ancel about "needing power" beyond the current hardware generation of today's consoles, which hopefully gives some indication as to the ambition of its design. Previously, I'd played through about half the game (completing the Nutrapils Factory section) and really enjoyed it (even the stealth sections - which I traditionally find frustrating due to my chronic lack of subtlety and patience)
Currently, I'm approaching the end of the game (with only the section on the moon of Hillys to go - once I collect enough pearls for the upgrades) and even eight years after I played it for the first time, the game really stands up well, barring a few issues with the 3D camera, which veers on the side of hateful at times. I probably shouldn't say too much until I've actually finished it, but I've loved replaying the game and reacquianting myself with the excellent world and game design. Jade, Pey'j and Double H are really delightful characters. Pey'j, in particular, could be really tiresome if he'd been handled badly, but he's very well scripted and voice-acted, so ends up being quite endearing - especially in light of what happens to him halfway through the game.
In many ways, Beyond Good and Evil is a family-friendly GTA, in that it includes open-world driving elements, third-person combat and a few mini-games thrown in for good measure. The story is also simple but well-executed and engaging, and also judged for pace - since the game can be completed in under fifteen hours (even if you spend a fair amount of time cocking about in the mini-games), there's not much padding to be found (though some of the stealth sections are a bit brutal - particularly the Alpha Sections HQ and the bits in the Slaughterhouse with the insta-kill sentry guns). Overall, though, I definitely made a good decision to revisit the game - it's a real joy to play something that's had so much thought put into every element of the design - though I'll talk more about that when I've finished the game (hopefully) within the next couple of days. I'm just hoping that the finale isn't quite so anti-climactic as I found Deus Ex's, after a similar wait to finally get around to completing it...
So this summer I want to knock three (less than 1% of my total games collection) games off my "to complete" list. I'm being remarkably self-disciplined, and playing the games in order of priority, with only a bit of cocking about on World of Warcraft to form a distraction. Given that I don't have a very good track record with sticking to targets, I've tried to be realistic by setting a priority that's remotely achieveable for at least two of the games I want to complete, by tackling them in increasing order of length.
Last on the list will be The Witcher 2, which I haven't made much headway with so far - not due to a lack of enthusiasm, but because I can tell it's the kind of game that really requires a lot of singleminded dedication to get through (like its predecessor), and unless I'm on holiday, I don't have a lot of that to spare. Second on my list is a game that ranks in my all-time top 5 games, yet I never quite got around to finishing - Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. In previous playthroughs I've completed about 80% of the game, but like my previous mental block with Deus Ex, I couldn't quite bring myself to finishing the game off - it's one of those games you never quite want to end. However, this summer, I really want to finish it, though I doubt I will play many of the optional missions - I'll just stick to the main story missions, any maybe play around the edges if I have time.
But the first game on my list this summer is arguably the greatest videogame ever to come out of France: Beyond Good and Evil. The long-awaited sequel's been getting some hype recently from (series designer) Michel Ancel about "needing power" beyond the current hardware generation of today's consoles, which hopefully gives some indication as to the ambition of its design. Previously, I'd played through about half the game (completing the Nutrapils Factory section) and really enjoyed it (even the stealth sections - which I traditionally find frustrating due to my chronic lack of subtlety and patience)
Currently, I'm approaching the end of the game (with only the section on the moon of Hillys to go - once I collect enough pearls for the upgrades) and even eight years after I played it for the first time, the game really stands up well, barring a few issues with the 3D camera, which veers on the side of hateful at times. I probably shouldn't say too much until I've actually finished it, but I've loved replaying the game and reacquianting myself with the excellent world and game design. Jade, Pey'j and Double H are really delightful characters. Pey'j, in particular, could be really tiresome if he'd been handled badly, but he's very well scripted and voice-acted, so ends up being quite endearing - especially in light of what happens to him halfway through the game.
In many ways, Beyond Good and Evil is a family-friendly GTA, in that it includes open-world driving elements, third-person combat and a few mini-games thrown in for good measure. The story is also simple but well-executed and engaging, and also judged for pace - since the game can be completed in under fifteen hours (even if you spend a fair amount of time cocking about in the mini-games), there's not much padding to be found (though some of the stealth sections are a bit brutal - particularly the Alpha Sections HQ and the bits in the Slaughterhouse with the insta-kill sentry guns). Overall, though, I definitely made a good decision to revisit the game - it's a real joy to play something that's had so much thought put into every element of the design - though I'll talk more about that when I've finished the game (hopefully) within the next couple of days. I'm just hoping that the finale isn't quite so anti-climactic as I found Deus Ex's, after a similar wait to finally get around to completing it...
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Bark: Need Another Space Administration
Don't get me wrong, NASA have done amazing work over the years, but the decision (forced on NASA by budget cuts) to mothball the Space Shuttle before they even have a next generation replacement capable of putting people is orbit is, in my opinion, a catastrophic backwards step we may later regret.
Look at this and tell me there's nothing we can learn of value from going out into Space. (And bear in mind that the flat screen monitor you're viewing it on was developed directly from technology used by the Space Shuttle programme.)
Look at this and tell me there's nothing we can learn of value from going out into Space. (And bear in mind that the flat screen monitor you're viewing it on was developed directly from technology used by the Space Shuttle programme.)
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Bark: New look
Since I'm hopefully going to start posting a little more frequently around here from now on, I've decided to revitalise the layout and tweak the template of my blog, since I've not changed it since I first started posting on this blog, many, many years ago.
I may give the colour scheme a few more nudges in the direction of spectral frequencies that are less likely to make my (paltry) readership's eyes bleed over the course of the next week or two, but generally I quite like the new look.
I may give the colour scheme a few more nudges in the direction of spectral frequencies that are less likely to make my (paltry) readership's eyes bleed over the course of the next week or two, but generally I quite like the new look.
Friday, July 08, 2011
Bark: Round up
It's been a rather epic couple of weeks since I last posted. In the last ten days or so I have passed my NQT year, been told that I don't actually have Lyme disease (just some other horrible tick-borne bacterial infection), acquired the latest albums by Moby and Mogwai and signed up for two interesting looking practical art courses at Art In Action, which will be kick-starting my summer holiday in a fortnight's time.
It's hard to believe that there are only two weeks of the academic year left - and that it's now over two years since I left IBM. The time has absolutely flown by, and I don't regret the change at all. Sure, the 30% pay cut was and is increasingly painful, given the escalation of living costs at the moment, but I'm feeling much more fulfilled in my job than when I was stuck working home-alone, shunting numbers around spreadsheets for 10 hours a day. And that sense of job satisfaction is easily worth the pay cut, because there's no point being well-paid if you're miserable in your job. The holidays help too, of course. That and the fact that as a science teacher I get paid to blow shit up and play with all sorts of lovely kit and experiments. The only better job I can think of at the moment is being a pyrotechnician in a special effects company (where you get to blow shit up on an industrial scale). The other thing that's surprised me is that for a self-confessed misanthrope and borderline sociopath, I actually really like working with kids. They can be dumb and exasperating as hell sometimes, but they're never dull and they're often funny, inspired and insightful. So while I'm horribly tired and in desperate need of my summer break, I am looking forward to next year, especially since I'll be much more of a known quantity in the school.
Tomorrow I'll be in London looking for a bit of extra inspiration and more ideas to take into the classroom with me, as I'll be visiting the Royal Society Summer Science expo, which I've been looking forward to for a couple of weeks, since one of my colleagues told me about it. I'm told there's a lot of hands-on stuff, plus the opportunity to pick the brains of some of the scientists behind the research. I'm particularly looking forward to having a poke at the aurora and fundamental particles exhibitions. Fingers crossed, I'll be able to pick up a few posters and resources to decorate my lab and use in lessons. I'm guessing that the place will probably be crawling with teachers - it'll be interesting to see if I bump into any of my old PGCE cohort while I'm there...
More blogging later, but first, I need to make the most of my Friday night by doing some gaming... I can't keep my teacher brain turned on this late on a Friday. IT IS NOT PERMITTED.
It's hard to believe that there are only two weeks of the academic year left - and that it's now over two years since I left IBM. The time has absolutely flown by, and I don't regret the change at all. Sure, the 30% pay cut was and is increasingly painful, given the escalation of living costs at the moment, but I'm feeling much more fulfilled in my job than when I was stuck working home-alone, shunting numbers around spreadsheets for 10 hours a day. And that sense of job satisfaction is easily worth the pay cut, because there's no point being well-paid if you're miserable in your job. The holidays help too, of course. That and the fact that as a science teacher I get paid to blow shit up and play with all sorts of lovely kit and experiments. The only better job I can think of at the moment is being a pyrotechnician in a special effects company (where you get to blow shit up on an industrial scale). The other thing that's surprised me is that for a self-confessed misanthrope and borderline sociopath, I actually really like working with kids. They can be dumb and exasperating as hell sometimes, but they're never dull and they're often funny, inspired and insightful. So while I'm horribly tired and in desperate need of my summer break, I am looking forward to next year, especially since I'll be much more of a known quantity in the school.
Tomorrow I'll be in London looking for a bit of extra inspiration and more ideas to take into the classroom with me, as I'll be visiting the Royal Society Summer Science expo, which I've been looking forward to for a couple of weeks, since one of my colleagues told me about it. I'm told there's a lot of hands-on stuff, plus the opportunity to pick the brains of some of the scientists behind the research. I'm particularly looking forward to having a poke at the aurora and fundamental particles exhibitions. Fingers crossed, I'll be able to pick up a few posters and resources to decorate my lab and use in lessons. I'm guessing that the place will probably be crawling with teachers - it'll be interesting to see if I bump into any of my old PGCE cohort while I'm there...
More blogging later, but first, I need to make the most of my Friday night by doing some gaming... I can't keep my teacher brain turned on this late on a Friday. IT IS NOT PERMITTED.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)