From Mother Russia comes "MorphX" -- though you've probably never heard of it. It's a budget-priced action adventure set in a post-apocalyptic Moscow (like the infinitely better "Metro 2033") after a bunch of aliens done took over the world. To be honest, this isn't a terrible game (especially when you factor in the budget price), despite some asshole on a message board's proclamation that "'MorphX' is the Worst Game Ever" that I just happened to glimpse. It's also worth noting, however, that the game acclaimed some sort of award in Russia for its sheer greatness -- funny since the game came out of Russia to begin with, isn't it? Gee, perhaps someone there had a pro-national agenda. (Although if they and everyone else gave "Metro 2033" Game of the Year honors in 2010, also from Russian devs, I'd be in agreement. Just sayin'...)
As per usual, I'm ranting and raving here. Let's just say that it's my feeling, having played "MorphX," that it's a fairly decent diversion if your standards are a little lax and you, like me, can actually find yourself enjoying games that aren't AAA standard. I don't need to play "Gears of War" or "Halo" or "Call of Duty" twenty-four seven to have fun with a controller in my hands, and I don't need bleeding edge graphics and sound, or even a coherent storyline -- although that's definitely something I take into consideration when reviewing a game. But this is a budget game with some neat ideas that handles smoothely and offers a few elements of fun buried deep within its overall mediocrity -- but not awfulness.
First things first. Your character in "MorphX" awakens in an alien breeding ground with no memory of his past, like virtually every other video game protag we've ever seen. But just because amnesia promises moments of self-discovery and plot revelations, don't expect any of that. I dare say beyond the aliens take over the world motif the game puts on display, this game's plot probably doesn't even make sense in its native Russian. One moment you're killing aliens right alongside humans, the next the humans are shooting at YOU for some confounding reason. The plot is moronic at best, poorly acted by its voice-overs, and piss poorly presented aside from an okay rendered cinematic at the beginning of the game. Warning: if you're a plot gamer, avoid this one already. Hell, even "Quantum Theory" (my last reviewed game) told a better tale despite making not a lick of sense just because it was all so blissfully surreal. The plot of "MorphX" doesn't even have that going for it.
It's too bad too, because the basic idea behind "MorphX" is a good one. How much of your humanity would you sacrifice to save the world? That central theme could'a been a contender, but it doesn't play out in any sort of way that's truly interesting. It does make for the game's strongest gameplay conceit, however, in that by collecting 'biomass' you are able to take your character's inevitable mutations in several varying directions that you yourself have a direct hand in. Should you increase your melee damage or increase your character's overall health? These choices and many more await, and represent the game's biggest and brightest feature.
Other than these customization options, this is an old-school third person shooter whose engine bears an uncanny resemblence to the one used in "The Suffering" on last generation consoles. Yeah, the graphics are dated, but colorful. Lighting effects are nice despite an overall darkness that too often makes you rely on your "alien eye" night vision mutation, but I digress. The game doesn't look bad, just behind the times. And if you're expecting it to conform to more modern third-person action game conventions like taking cover and blind-firing at your opponents, drop those expectations now. This is a run-and-gun shooter the likes of which pre-dated "Gears of War" and even "Kill.Switch." And, honestly, I'd prefer that any day of the week to a third-rate ripoff like the aforementioned "Quantum Theory," which, while okay, completely lacked an identity of its own.
But speaking of lacking in identity, "MorphX" unfortunately falls into this trap a few times itself by offering badly designed, generic, and vaguely Giger-esque aliens to kill in droves. One wishes these off-world creatures had more personality, but instead make you long for the diverse group of foes presented in games like "Half-Life," or even the less-than-diverse but still personality-charged gang from "Halo." These baddies aren't scary, they aren't cool, and I really feel like an opportunity was lost to provide them with anything except the most generic video game villain traits, like cloaking and shielding attributes. But hey, at least there's a giant one that's almost cool -- at least until you face it again at the end of the game as a boss and realize it'd be a giant pussy if it didn't have so much backup.
The depth of "MorphX"'s customization options is what really makes the game worthwhile despite very functional but uninspired gameplay mechanics. Mission objectives and puzzle-based elements can be obtuse to a point of annoyance, the music sounds like an 80's Genesis album (listen to that track on the title screen and tell me I'm wrong!), and the third-person action is generally about spamming melee buttons or blazing away at your enemy while standing in the open with no concern for tactics. This game just oozes a retro vibe that I can't honestly say I minded, but by not even trying to keep the pace with more current games it deserves its inevitable place in obscurity.
Final Score: 6.6
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Sunday, November 21, 2010
"Quantum Theory" Review (Xbox 360)
It would be positively silly of me to begin any review of the third-person action game "Quantum Theory" without mentioning "Gears of War." Now, granted, it's my belief that while the "Gears" franchise is just as awesome as everyone says it is, it's NOT as original as many would claim. Some third-person shooters that required tactical use of cover that pre-date "Gears" are "WinBack" and, more importantly, "Kill.Switch." But with "Theory" there can be no doubt -- this game is a blatant knockoff of "Gears of War." From the beefy, gravel-throated men in oversized armor gruffly running around and shooting things on down to the inclusion of the so-called "roadie run," "Theory" is undoubtedly a game that would not exist were it not for "Gears" -- or, more importantly, the success of "Gears."
Naturally, such a lack in originality is already a mark against a game from page one. I mean, the game damn near steals its control scheme from "Gears" on down to the button. Given that the game comes from a developer in Japan, the whole concept seems rather offensive as a Western gamer. I mean, a bunch of Japanese coin counters looked at the Western market, realized "Gears of War" was making an ass ton of money for all involved, and concluded, "Hey, this is what Western gamers want. Let's make that game over again, sell it to Americans who won't know the difference, and it'll be huge!" But, of course, we do know the difference, don't we?
So, that's out of the way. "Quantum Theory," apart from having maybe the worst title ever slapped on the package of an action game (it sounds like a damn science class!), stumbles right out of the gate because of its clone-like nature. That and because it forces you to compare it to "Gears," not only a better game but one that presumably has a much larger budget. The graphics in "Theory" just can't compete, nor can the soundtrack, or even the sound effects. So if this is a problem for anyone who has even remotely considered playing this game -- don't bother. In other words, lets put it like this -- if "Gears of War" is Sylvester Stallone, "Quantum Theory" is his brother Frank.
However, I hasten to add, "Theory" is actually a fairly playable game once you cut through all that "Gears" clone bullshit. While I can't recommend it to avid "Gears" heads who would be much better off playing through either game in that franchise a third, forth, fifth, sixth, or seventh time (or whatever), I would dare suggest that a less diehard "Gears" fanatic with time on their hands between "Gears 2" and "Gears 3" give it a look. It would also be suited to gamers who have never played a "Gears" game before -- but why they would want to start by playing "Theory" instead of copping a used copy of the original "Gears" is beyond me, and another story altogether!
"Theory" casts you as Syd. A scarred, surly muscle man clad in armor that no human being could move in. His single-minded goal in this post-apocalypse setting is to destroy The Tower, a sort of living structure that is unleashing something called Diablosis upon the already ailing world, transforming humans into monsters. Like most Asian games released in the States, something might be lost in translation here, because I couldn't make much sense out of any of it. Suffice it to say, the gameplay has to pick up the storyline's slack -- which is fine, since this is an action game.
Basically, if "Gears" does it, so does "Theory." The controls aren't quite as fluid, but a do an admirable job replicating the feel of "Gears." It's definitely familiar territory right from the go. It's just... not as good. Fortunately, after Syd enters The Tower, the game does finally decide to try to carve out a slight identity of its own. The setting is pretty cool, as The Tower really feels alive. The best moments in "Theory" force you to react to changes in The Tower, like walls that suddenly spring up from the floor, or do the opposite, leaving you naked and in the open when you thought you had a good position on the field. Other cool moments involve gravity-defying shootouts on the back of flying bridges or worm-like creatures. These moments come a bit too late for the game's own good, but they do come, and once they do they are, thankfully, used quite often.
The weapons the game offers are many and capable, but not necessarily standout. I found myself relying on heavy machine guns instead of potentially cooler sounding stuff like a gun that shoots saw-blades. The more inventive weapons are just too difficult to get a drop on your enemy with, usually don't come with enough ammo, and the end result is always the same with any weapon -- killed enemies stumble backward and explode into green or red fountains of grue. Now, I'm as big a fan of body-specific damage as anybody, but I can't say I minded shooting the foes in "Theory" only to see them burst in brightly colored displays of gore. It's a nice change of pace and rather satisfying -- particularly headshots, which are maybe too difficult to pull off, but do come with a slow-mo close-up shot of your enemies' mutated skulls liquifying as your bullet finds its target.
Syd is not alone in battling The Towe, either, as he meets a female companion along the way(scantily clad in the grand video game tradition) that will "aid" him in battle. Now, I use the term "aid" loosely when it comes to her ability to indirectly deal damage to your foes -- but you can summon her at will and throw her -- yes, THROW her -- at your foes. It's a very powerful attack that can see her cleaving even your bigger, stronger opponents in half with one direct shot, and it's a cool, albeit random edition to the "Gears" style gameplay.
The Tower's design is kind of cool, but the graphics can't keep up. Also, the game generically offers doors and openings that Syd cannot enter despite the fact that he blatantly should be able to do so, which is just bloody annoying to me. The game just screams generic all around, point of fact -- especially in the early stages.
"Quantum Theory" is a very difficult game for me to score. I only paid twenty-five bones for it less than a month after its release, something that must be considered, as I did enjoy parts of the game despite myself. It's a solid, playable shooter that just so happens to stand in a long, dark shadow of much better games -- even games that themselves drew inspiration from the same source material (see "Drake's Fortune," "Dark Sector," "Army of Two," and "Kane & Lynch"). Bottom line -- "Theory" has its moments, and if you're bored of playing through "Gears" multiple times and want an almost exact clone of that game with a new campaign and a few additional bells and whistles, "Theory" is worth a look. It's not a terrible game, it just lacks its own identity, which, to many, is more than enough reason to dismiss it outright.
Final Score: 6.4
Naturally, such a lack in originality is already a mark against a game from page one. I mean, the game damn near steals its control scheme from "Gears" on down to the button. Given that the game comes from a developer in Japan, the whole concept seems rather offensive as a Western gamer. I mean, a bunch of Japanese coin counters looked at the Western market, realized "Gears of War" was making an ass ton of money for all involved, and concluded, "Hey, this is what Western gamers want. Let's make that game over again, sell it to Americans who won't know the difference, and it'll be huge!" But, of course, we do know the difference, don't we?
So, that's out of the way. "Quantum Theory," apart from having maybe the worst title ever slapped on the package of an action game (it sounds like a damn science class!), stumbles right out of the gate because of its clone-like nature. That and because it forces you to compare it to "Gears," not only a better game but one that presumably has a much larger budget. The graphics in "Theory" just can't compete, nor can the soundtrack, or even the sound effects. So if this is a problem for anyone who has even remotely considered playing this game -- don't bother. In other words, lets put it like this -- if "Gears of War" is Sylvester Stallone, "Quantum Theory" is his brother Frank.
However, I hasten to add, "Theory" is actually a fairly playable game once you cut through all that "Gears" clone bullshit. While I can't recommend it to avid "Gears" heads who would be much better off playing through either game in that franchise a third, forth, fifth, sixth, or seventh time (or whatever), I would dare suggest that a less diehard "Gears" fanatic with time on their hands between "Gears 2" and "Gears 3" give it a look. It would also be suited to gamers who have never played a "Gears" game before -- but why they would want to start by playing "Theory" instead of copping a used copy of the original "Gears" is beyond me, and another story altogether!
"Theory" casts you as Syd. A scarred, surly muscle man clad in armor that no human being could move in. His single-minded goal in this post-apocalypse setting is to destroy The Tower, a sort of living structure that is unleashing something called Diablosis upon the already ailing world, transforming humans into monsters. Like most Asian games released in the States, something might be lost in translation here, because I couldn't make much sense out of any of it. Suffice it to say, the gameplay has to pick up the storyline's slack -- which is fine, since this is an action game.
Basically, if "Gears" does it, so does "Theory." The controls aren't quite as fluid, but a do an admirable job replicating the feel of "Gears." It's definitely familiar territory right from the go. It's just... not as good. Fortunately, after Syd enters The Tower, the game does finally decide to try to carve out a slight identity of its own. The setting is pretty cool, as The Tower really feels alive. The best moments in "Theory" force you to react to changes in The Tower, like walls that suddenly spring up from the floor, or do the opposite, leaving you naked and in the open when you thought you had a good position on the field. Other cool moments involve gravity-defying shootouts on the back of flying bridges or worm-like creatures. These moments come a bit too late for the game's own good, but they do come, and once they do they are, thankfully, used quite often.
The weapons the game offers are many and capable, but not necessarily standout. I found myself relying on heavy machine guns instead of potentially cooler sounding stuff like a gun that shoots saw-blades. The more inventive weapons are just too difficult to get a drop on your enemy with, usually don't come with enough ammo, and the end result is always the same with any weapon -- killed enemies stumble backward and explode into green or red fountains of grue. Now, I'm as big a fan of body-specific damage as anybody, but I can't say I minded shooting the foes in "Theory" only to see them burst in brightly colored displays of gore. It's a nice change of pace and rather satisfying -- particularly headshots, which are maybe too difficult to pull off, but do come with a slow-mo close-up shot of your enemies' mutated skulls liquifying as your bullet finds its target.
Syd is not alone in battling The Towe, either, as he meets a female companion along the way(scantily clad in the grand video game tradition) that will "aid" him in battle. Now, I use the term "aid" loosely when it comes to her ability to indirectly deal damage to your foes -- but you can summon her at will and throw her -- yes, THROW her -- at your foes. It's a very powerful attack that can see her cleaving even your bigger, stronger opponents in half with one direct shot, and it's a cool, albeit random edition to the "Gears" style gameplay.
The Tower's design is kind of cool, but the graphics can't keep up. Also, the game generically offers doors and openings that Syd cannot enter despite the fact that he blatantly should be able to do so, which is just bloody annoying to me. The game just screams generic all around, point of fact -- especially in the early stages.
"Quantum Theory" is a very difficult game for me to score. I only paid twenty-five bones for it less than a month after its release, something that must be considered, as I did enjoy parts of the game despite myself. It's a solid, playable shooter that just so happens to stand in a long, dark shadow of much better games -- even games that themselves drew inspiration from the same source material (see "Drake's Fortune," "Dark Sector," "Army of Two," and "Kane & Lynch"). Bottom line -- "Theory" has its moments, and if you're bored of playing through "Gears" multiple times and want an almost exact clone of that game with a new campaign and a few additional bells and whistles, "Theory" is worth a look. It's not a terrible game, it just lacks its own identity, which, to many, is more than enough reason to dismiss it outright.
Final Score: 6.4
Thursday, October 28, 2010
"Alan Wake" Review (Xbox 360)
As per usual, in the month of October it is my goal to seek out and play games with a macabre or horror theme in honor of Halloween. This year, I finally got around to "Alan Wake." Having finished it, I can't say I have a clue what happened in the story. All I can say is that I enjoyed the gameplay and the creepy atmosphere quite a bit. "Wake" never blew my mind the way that developer Remedy's first game, a little number called "Max Payne," did... but there's no arguing with a solid, horror-themed shooter.
You, not surprisingly, fill the shoes of novelist Alan Wake. He and his wife are vacationing in a small but vibrant town called Bright Falls, hoping to get away from the hustle and the bustle of New York City. Wake almost immediately comes off like a pompous yuppy with nothing but contempt for his own fans, but he does kinda-sorta grow on you as the game goes on. In any case, soon his wife goes missing and it appears that one of Wake's horror novels is coming to life all around him. Townsfolk, and murders of crows, are being possessed by some kind of darkness, and only the presence of light -- and a few well-placed gunshots -- can stop them. It's all about as compelling as a vivid nightmare, but just like a nightmare it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense once you wake up and think about it. The game really believes its storyline and characters are far more interesting than they actually are, and Remedy even tosses in some self-satisfied references to "Max Payne" and the Norse mythology that permeated that game's backdrop. But "Payne," with its pulpy overtones, never took itself too seriously, while "Wake" by and large does. The dialog is eye-rollingly unconvincing, and some characters that are meant to add comic relief just grate on the nerves. (If you've played it, yes, I'm referring to Wake's agent and best friend Barry.) There's just a smugness to it all that makes it even less charming than it would otherwise be, like a self-satisfied M. Night flick that's nowhere near as accomplished as it wishes it was. But it is nice to play a game where you're not a cop, a soldier, or a badass Spartan covered in the ashes of his dead family. Nope. You're just... a writer. With issues, granted, but your job is to sit on your ass for a living.
Fortunately you never just sit on your ass during the actual game. As soon as his wife vanishes and the residents of Bright Falls brandish axes and meat cleavers and chainsaws in his general direction, Alan is forced to pick up a gun and fight back. But a gun by itself isn't enough, as these shadow-possessed psychos are protected by a shield of darkness that only a flashlight can break, leaving them vulnerable at last to traditional firearms. It's a nice spin on your typical shooter, and adds just the right amount of tension. This game doesn't make you feel like a badass -- it makes you feel like you're fighting tooth and nail for your survival, and that you always have at least five fewer bullets in your gun than you'd like. It doesn't play out like a traditional survival horror game with its linear, story-driven levels and action-focused gameplay, but it's certainly more tense than your typical shooter, which perfectly fits the tone and themes of the game. The possessed (or Taken as they're called) attack when you least expect them to, and with a feral ferocity that's startling.
Enemies do lack variety, however, which hamstrings the action slightly. Once you've faced both large and small shadow-possessed maniacs and flocks of ravens straight out of Hitchcock's "The Birds," you've seen pretty much all that the Darkness can throw at you. Well, short of demonically possessed trash cans, deer floats, and tractor wheels -- which all just come off as sort of silly and disposable. But damn they hurt when they come hurtling at your pretty boy novelist's face! At least a few key sequences featuring shadow-driven bulldozers and such add some much-needed variety.
"Wake" positively drips with atmosphere. Much of the game is spent traipsing through the forested hills that surround Bright Falls by dark of night, and the environments look believable, scenic, and appropriately eerie. Despite this, it's hard to get lost while playing the game, and you never feel an overwhelming sense of being obstructed by false walls either -- even though you are. This is a clear sign of good level design. Though you may tire of the rural roadways and shadowy woods before the end, it's never oppressive and feels appropriate to the story. Best (or worst) of all, there's always some rock or tree for an enemy to pop out from, keeping you always on your toes.
"Alan Wake" is a strange game. Its storyline and characters are only interesting until you deduce they're all headed down a one-way street straight to nowhere, and the gameplay is simple and can be, at times, a little on the repetitive side. But the rich atmosphere, the constant feeling of suspense, and the flashlight-as-weapon feature all make for a very enjoyable romp through the woods on a dark and stormy night. Recommended.
Final Score: 8.0
You, not surprisingly, fill the shoes of novelist Alan Wake. He and his wife are vacationing in a small but vibrant town called Bright Falls, hoping to get away from the hustle and the bustle of New York City. Wake almost immediately comes off like a pompous yuppy with nothing but contempt for his own fans, but he does kinda-sorta grow on you as the game goes on. In any case, soon his wife goes missing and it appears that one of Wake's horror novels is coming to life all around him. Townsfolk, and murders of crows, are being possessed by some kind of darkness, and only the presence of light -- and a few well-placed gunshots -- can stop them. It's all about as compelling as a vivid nightmare, but just like a nightmare it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense once you wake up and think about it. The game really believes its storyline and characters are far more interesting than they actually are, and Remedy even tosses in some self-satisfied references to "Max Payne" and the Norse mythology that permeated that game's backdrop. But "Payne," with its pulpy overtones, never took itself too seriously, while "Wake" by and large does. The dialog is eye-rollingly unconvincing, and some characters that are meant to add comic relief just grate on the nerves. (If you've played it, yes, I'm referring to Wake's agent and best friend Barry.) There's just a smugness to it all that makes it even less charming than it would otherwise be, like a self-satisfied M. Night flick that's nowhere near as accomplished as it wishes it was. But it is nice to play a game where you're not a cop, a soldier, or a badass Spartan covered in the ashes of his dead family. Nope. You're just... a writer. With issues, granted, but your job is to sit on your ass for a living.
Fortunately you never just sit on your ass during the actual game. As soon as his wife vanishes and the residents of Bright Falls brandish axes and meat cleavers and chainsaws in his general direction, Alan is forced to pick up a gun and fight back. But a gun by itself isn't enough, as these shadow-possessed psychos are protected by a shield of darkness that only a flashlight can break, leaving them vulnerable at last to traditional firearms. It's a nice spin on your typical shooter, and adds just the right amount of tension. This game doesn't make you feel like a badass -- it makes you feel like you're fighting tooth and nail for your survival, and that you always have at least five fewer bullets in your gun than you'd like. It doesn't play out like a traditional survival horror game with its linear, story-driven levels and action-focused gameplay, but it's certainly more tense than your typical shooter, which perfectly fits the tone and themes of the game. The possessed (or Taken as they're called) attack when you least expect them to, and with a feral ferocity that's startling.
Enemies do lack variety, however, which hamstrings the action slightly. Once you've faced both large and small shadow-possessed maniacs and flocks of ravens straight out of Hitchcock's "The Birds," you've seen pretty much all that the Darkness can throw at you. Well, short of demonically possessed trash cans, deer floats, and tractor wheels -- which all just come off as sort of silly and disposable. But damn they hurt when they come hurtling at your pretty boy novelist's face! At least a few key sequences featuring shadow-driven bulldozers and such add some much-needed variety.
"Wake" positively drips with atmosphere. Much of the game is spent traipsing through the forested hills that surround Bright Falls by dark of night, and the environments look believable, scenic, and appropriately eerie. Despite this, it's hard to get lost while playing the game, and you never feel an overwhelming sense of being obstructed by false walls either -- even though you are. This is a clear sign of good level design. Though you may tire of the rural roadways and shadowy woods before the end, it's never oppressive and feels appropriate to the story. Best (or worst) of all, there's always some rock or tree for an enemy to pop out from, keeping you always on your toes.
"Alan Wake" is a strange game. Its storyline and characters are only interesting until you deduce they're all headed down a one-way street straight to nowhere, and the gameplay is simple and can be, at times, a little on the repetitive side. But the rich atmosphere, the constant feeling of suspense, and the flashlight-as-weapon feature all make for a very enjoyable romp through the woods on a dark and stormy night. Recommended.
Final Score: 8.0
"Dante's Inferno" Review (PS3)
Wow, what a great idea for a game. Take the classic descent into Hell, ripped from the pages of medeival poet Dante Alighieri's "The Divine Comedy," but just make it all a little more kickass -- for example, instead of Dante the poet as the protagonist, let's make Dante a scythe-wielding crusader with a cross stitched into his bare chest. And do it in the style of the classic action franchise "God of War." Yeah, that's what I'm talkin' 'bout right there! What a concept!
Well, I'd be lying if I said this game wasn't fraught with missed opportunities. But not nearly as many as you've probably heard. Critics were unduly harsh back in early 2010 when "Dante's Inferno" streeted, perhaps because it is undeniably a "God of War" clone and perhaps because the game does admittedly lose some steam near its conclusion. But as for me, I had more fun slashing my way through Hell than I've had in quite some time. Gamespot's score of a 6.5 out of 10, for example, certainly doesn't do this game justice. "Dante's Inferno" may not deliver on all of its many promises, but it comes damn close.
Again, you are cast as Dante, but not the Dante we know from history. This Dante is a deeply flawed individual who manages to earn your affections merely because of his stubborn refusal to accept his fate, or that of his lover Beatrice whose soul is condemned to Hell for having a little too much faith in his virtue. He's a dark, brooding character in much the same vein as Kratos from "God of War" (which is undoubtedly not a coincidence). And like Kratos, he's a real badass. At the beginning of the game rather than die from a should-be fatal wound, he hands the Grim Reaper his ass and steals Death's own scythe, claiming it as his own before heading south toward Hell in an attempt to redeem himself and rescue his beloved Beatrice from the affections of a very horny Lucifer. It's dark but overblown enough to still feel like a video game story instead of a somber meditation on the afterlife. In fact, peeling back the onion that is Dante's character makes for a very compelling story, and the title character is certainly one of the deeper and more interesting video game characters to come along in quite some time -- this side of the Ghost of Sparta, anyway.
It's satisfying as Hell (pun intended) to kill waves upon waves of demons with Dante's stolen scythe. But as scary as that weapon looks, it's Beatrice's crucifix (which literally shoots crosses into his demonic enemies' faces) that really gets the job done. In fact, that cross must be twice-blessed by Jesus Christ Himself, because its mere presence greatly reduces much of the game's challenge factor on lower difficulty settings, as it's a powerful ranged attack that can never be depleted. Combining this with the scythe, some very cool magical attacks, a quite fair number of combo moves, and, best of all, some tight controls makes killing things in this Hell seem like Heaven.
And the design of the game, by and large, is very inspired. Morbidly inspired, granted, but such is the source material. Sure there are a few typical horned demons to contend with as well as some flying creatures that could just about cameo in any action game ever made, but then there are the truly grotesque souls of Lust who, despite a very feminine appearance at first glance, are not shy about thrusting a huge, claw-tipped penis directly at your face. Likewise the mutant souls of Gluttony are gas-filled flesh bags who don't mind using vomit and/or shit as a weapon. Boss encounters are likewise quite memorable, including such baddies as one who rips swords from his own body and throws them at you and one which pits you against the eyeless guardian of the gates of Hell -- the decider, so to speak, of which souls belong in which circle of Hades. It's unfortunate that Lucifer, "Big D" himself, in all three of his guises no less, comes off as just plain silly. First he's a groping shadow-man, then he's a giant laughable beast with bat wings for a goatee, and finally he's your typical horned satyr whose only memorable trait is his giant swinging balls and a member that could make Mr. Ed jealous. After fighting a three-headed beast with mouths for eyes and a demonic Cleopatra with tongues for nipples, Lucifer himself just doesn't get the blood pumping.
But perhaps this boss encounter with the Devil himself best describes the "Dante's Inferno" experience. Early on, the game is amazing -- a true contender to the "God of War" throne with its epic story, cinema-quality production values, and of course its depiction of Hell. Again, you've barely been playing the game for five minutes when you challenge the Grim Reaper himself to a duel. Now that's how you kick off an action game! And despite what you've probably read, the game stays strong up until maybe the 80% completed point. After the tangled forest of Suicide, it's admittedly all downhill, but just getting to this point -- what a ride it's already been.
Unfortunately that's when the real suffering begins, as the devs clearly tried to pad out a somewhat short experience by scrapping solid level design and forcing you into a series of trials that would be better suited as bonus content. For example, you are tasked with killing a series of respawning enemies without using magic at one point, and then killing five creatures while attacking from the air without ever letting them touch the ground. It's silly, it's boring, and it feels like exactly what it is -- padding. Many reviews have mentioned this portion of the game as something of a deal-breaker, but I argue is it any worse than the final portion of "Devil May Cry 3" that forced you (again bearing the name Dante) to repeat several previous boss encounters before you could proceed to the endgame? And that game was quite acclaimed when it came out despite an equally, if not far more annoying buildup to the final confrontation. Those bosses were hard as hell to beat the first time -- fighting them again was just plain infuriating.
All this leads to the aforementioned final battle with the Devil himself, which again fails to fire on all cylinders, but the same is true of many good games. One just wishes "Inferno" didn't feel like two development teams worked on the damn thing -- one, creating 80% of the game, doing a "God of War" worthy job, while the other, responsible for that last 20% not really having much of a clue what makes a good hack-and-slash actioner work. It's this split personality that sadly prevents me from hailing "Dante's Inferno" as a modern classic, but it still comes dangerously close. The music, the voice acting (apart from a silly-sounding Lucifer), the story, the atmosphere, the cinemas, and the gameplay are all excellent. Perhaps the only other flaw that bears mentioning is the annoying 40 second long minigame one must slog through to save the tortured souls of Hell -- it makes the notion of damning them instead and salvaging those 40 seconds of your life, even if you want to redeem Dante's own tortured soul, far too tempting indeed. But virtually everything else in "Dante's Inferno" achieves A-list status, and were it not for such an epic fumble near the finale, what a ride this would be. Hell, even opening doors is fun -- you impale a fat demon with your scythe and pound a button until the stubborn S.O.B. rolls up like an iron curtain and gives you access to the next chamber. Good stuff.
So yeah, it's true that this game has some very tragic flaws. But if you're a fan of hack-and-slash action games like "God of War" or even "Devil May Cry," miss Dante's descent into woe at your own peril. This is very nearly a classic, but, as per usual, the Devil had to go and fuck it up.
Final Score: 8.0
Well, I'd be lying if I said this game wasn't fraught with missed opportunities. But not nearly as many as you've probably heard. Critics were unduly harsh back in early 2010 when "Dante's Inferno" streeted, perhaps because it is undeniably a "God of War" clone and perhaps because the game does admittedly lose some steam near its conclusion. But as for me, I had more fun slashing my way through Hell than I've had in quite some time. Gamespot's score of a 6.5 out of 10, for example, certainly doesn't do this game justice. "Dante's Inferno" may not deliver on all of its many promises, but it comes damn close.
Again, you are cast as Dante, but not the Dante we know from history. This Dante is a deeply flawed individual who manages to earn your affections merely because of his stubborn refusal to accept his fate, or that of his lover Beatrice whose soul is condemned to Hell for having a little too much faith in his virtue. He's a dark, brooding character in much the same vein as Kratos from "God of War" (which is undoubtedly not a coincidence). And like Kratos, he's a real badass. At the beginning of the game rather than die from a should-be fatal wound, he hands the Grim Reaper his ass and steals Death's own scythe, claiming it as his own before heading south toward Hell in an attempt to redeem himself and rescue his beloved Beatrice from the affections of a very horny Lucifer. It's dark but overblown enough to still feel like a video game story instead of a somber meditation on the afterlife. In fact, peeling back the onion that is Dante's character makes for a very compelling story, and the title character is certainly one of the deeper and more interesting video game characters to come along in quite some time -- this side of the Ghost of Sparta, anyway.
It's satisfying as Hell (pun intended) to kill waves upon waves of demons with Dante's stolen scythe. But as scary as that weapon looks, it's Beatrice's crucifix (which literally shoots crosses into his demonic enemies' faces) that really gets the job done. In fact, that cross must be twice-blessed by Jesus Christ Himself, because its mere presence greatly reduces much of the game's challenge factor on lower difficulty settings, as it's a powerful ranged attack that can never be depleted. Combining this with the scythe, some very cool magical attacks, a quite fair number of combo moves, and, best of all, some tight controls makes killing things in this Hell seem like Heaven.
And the design of the game, by and large, is very inspired. Morbidly inspired, granted, but such is the source material. Sure there are a few typical horned demons to contend with as well as some flying creatures that could just about cameo in any action game ever made, but then there are the truly grotesque souls of Lust who, despite a very feminine appearance at first glance, are not shy about thrusting a huge, claw-tipped penis directly at your face. Likewise the mutant souls of Gluttony are gas-filled flesh bags who don't mind using vomit and/or shit as a weapon. Boss encounters are likewise quite memorable, including such baddies as one who rips swords from his own body and throws them at you and one which pits you against the eyeless guardian of the gates of Hell -- the decider, so to speak, of which souls belong in which circle of Hades. It's unfortunate that Lucifer, "Big D" himself, in all three of his guises no less, comes off as just plain silly. First he's a groping shadow-man, then he's a giant laughable beast with bat wings for a goatee, and finally he's your typical horned satyr whose only memorable trait is his giant swinging balls and a member that could make Mr. Ed jealous. After fighting a three-headed beast with mouths for eyes and a demonic Cleopatra with tongues for nipples, Lucifer himself just doesn't get the blood pumping.
But perhaps this boss encounter with the Devil himself best describes the "Dante's Inferno" experience. Early on, the game is amazing -- a true contender to the "God of War" throne with its epic story, cinema-quality production values, and of course its depiction of Hell. Again, you've barely been playing the game for five minutes when you challenge the Grim Reaper himself to a duel. Now that's how you kick off an action game! And despite what you've probably read, the game stays strong up until maybe the 80% completed point. After the tangled forest of Suicide, it's admittedly all downhill, but just getting to this point -- what a ride it's already been.
Unfortunately that's when the real suffering begins, as the devs clearly tried to pad out a somewhat short experience by scrapping solid level design and forcing you into a series of trials that would be better suited as bonus content. For example, you are tasked with killing a series of respawning enemies without using magic at one point, and then killing five creatures while attacking from the air without ever letting them touch the ground. It's silly, it's boring, and it feels like exactly what it is -- padding. Many reviews have mentioned this portion of the game as something of a deal-breaker, but I argue is it any worse than the final portion of "Devil May Cry 3" that forced you (again bearing the name Dante) to repeat several previous boss encounters before you could proceed to the endgame? And that game was quite acclaimed when it came out despite an equally, if not far more annoying buildup to the final confrontation. Those bosses were hard as hell to beat the first time -- fighting them again was just plain infuriating.
All this leads to the aforementioned final battle with the Devil himself, which again fails to fire on all cylinders, but the same is true of many good games. One just wishes "Inferno" didn't feel like two development teams worked on the damn thing -- one, creating 80% of the game, doing a "God of War" worthy job, while the other, responsible for that last 20% not really having much of a clue what makes a good hack-and-slash actioner work. It's this split personality that sadly prevents me from hailing "Dante's Inferno" as a modern classic, but it still comes dangerously close. The music, the voice acting (apart from a silly-sounding Lucifer), the story, the atmosphere, the cinemas, and the gameplay are all excellent. Perhaps the only other flaw that bears mentioning is the annoying 40 second long minigame one must slog through to save the tortured souls of Hell -- it makes the notion of damning them instead and salvaging those 40 seconds of your life, even if you want to redeem Dante's own tortured soul, far too tempting indeed. But virtually everything else in "Dante's Inferno" achieves A-list status, and were it not for such an epic fumble near the finale, what a ride this would be. Hell, even opening doors is fun -- you impale a fat demon with your scythe and pound a button until the stubborn S.O.B. rolls up like an iron curtain and gives you access to the next chamber. Good stuff.
So yeah, it's true that this game has some very tragic flaws. But if you're a fan of hack-and-slash action games like "God of War" or even "Devil May Cry," miss Dante's descent into woe at your own peril. This is very nearly a classic, but, as per usual, the Devil had to go and fuck it up.
Final Score: 8.0
Thursday, September 23, 2010
FYI: How I Score Video Games
As a video game reviewer, I do have an admittedly strange way of scoring the games I have reviewed. For instance, I take one rather unusual thing into account -- the purchase price of said game when I bought it, not its actual release price. So if I pay 10 bucks for "Rogue Warrior," an admittedly so-bad-it's-almost-good game, I'm much more likely to enjoy it than I would have had I paid full retail, thus allowing me to give it a score of 5 out of 10, which it otherwise wouldn't warrant. The same goes for games like "Bioshock 2" that I forked over sixty bones for -- I rate it according to my degree of personal disappointment vs. cost. It doesn't mean, if I give it a 6 out of 10, that I think it's just one number higher than "Rogue Warrior," for example. Hopefully this should shed some light on how my stupid brain works...
"Singularity" Review (PS3)
Russian mutants are a current and "totally in right now" fashion statement in video games. If you don't believe it, look at the "S.T.A.L.K.E.R." series, the awesome "Metro 2033," the upcoming budget title "MorphX," and, of course, "Singularity." Strangely, both "Singularity" and "Metro 2033" are my current favorites in 2010 -- although there's a lot out there that I've yet to play, I strongly suspect they will remain very near the top of that list. Sadly, both FPS games seem to have fallen by the wayside in the wake of powerhouse releases in the "Halo," "Modern Warfare," "Bioshock," and "Battlefield: Bad Company" franchises. This is probably to be expected of any new I.P., and it's too damn bad, because these are some damn fine games that I'll remember for a very long time.
In "Singularity," forged by a little known company called Raven Software (sarcasm), you are an elite U.S. soldier named Nate Renko who, like most FPS leads never speaks even when being directly spoken to, making him seem either deaf, moronic, pricky, or all of the above. "Hey, buddy, I just asked you a question!" Still, he's got a slight problem because his chopper just crashed on Katorga-12, a former Soviet facility during the Cold War that pulled a "Wolfenstein" with the Reds taking over for the Nazis by dabbling in some seriously forbidden science. This resulted in a "Half-Life" Black Mesa-sized "Oops!," unleashing hideous mutant freaks with a taste for flesh and all kinds of time and space craziness -- that, naturally, you'll get to dabble in yourself.
Well, I don't know what it is about Russian mutants, but they're starting to look a whole lot scarier than the rest of the world's mutants, because even the first of them that you'll face in "Singularity" might have you tinkling in your pants just a wee bit (no pun intended). Some scripted moments, in particular, made the first "F.E.A.R." look like amateur hour in terms of startling the shit out of me -- and many of these were in the first twenty minutes of gameplay. In fact, the earliest creatures you'll face are perhaps the scariest in the entire game, if not the most challenging. But one thing is certain -- there are some memorable baddies in "Singularity." Not "Metro 2033" memorable, but memorable all the same. (One blind creature with exceptional hearing is worth mentioning.) And "Singularity" has something "Metro" certainly does not -- this is an old school shooter and a damn good one. Despite a few jolts, it's not a survival horror game, but a straightforward actioner where even battling non-mutated foes is good, gory fun. In fact, it's gernerally preferable, which one might say makes it the polar opposite of the aforementioned title.
Your arsenal of weaponry is one of the best in recent years, delivering the down and dirty goods. The FPS action just feels right. The guns bark in mostly the right ways, and enemies react with gushing blood and sometimes severed limbs. One prototype weapon even allows you to follow your bullets into their targets as they explode into satisfying dismembered chunks. Raven proves yet again it can deliver in the action department here, and this is only aided by your ability to upgrade your weapons and make them steadily more potent, much like in 2009's "Wolfenstein" (no coincidence since Raven also developed that gem as well).
Also like that "Wolfenstein" redux, your ability to cause destruction is not limited to your firearms. As the game progresses, you will be able to manipulate time in ways that may age your human enemies to the point where you literally watch them turn to dust before your very eyes, or slow down time to give you a leg up on the competition. When it comes to the game's environmental puzzles, these abilities (also upgradable, btw) can sometimes come across as gimmicky, but there are clever moments too. One just wishes that the game allowed you to think outside the box a little. You are too limited to what the game wants you to do, meaning to progress you might not be able to turn that locked metal door in front of you into a rusted pile of debris, but that other one to your left that the game has designated sure as hell can be.
So, yes, the game is very, very linear. But this gives it a brisk, action-packed pace that scarcely ever relents, unlike its cousin "Wolfenstein." It also packs in some challenge, even on its easier settings. Its environments look suitably desolate and bleak in the present, but reflect an entirely different atmosphere in the past (which you visit frequently). The graphics, overall, are quite good, the frame rate is liquid smooth, and the soundtrack befitting the tone of the material. Complete with a decent storyline and several endings -- one which resulted in some delicious moral ambiguity -- this results in a great single player package. (Multiplayer is said to be good too, but I wouldn't know.)
In closing, "Singularity" is another awesome notch in Raven Software's belt that goes all the way back to its "Doom" engine antics with "Heretic." Russian mutants sure are fun to kill, and I recommend any FPS fan who has had his fill of "Halo" and "Modern Warfare" to give this new I.P. a look see. You won't regret it.
Final Score: 8.8 (Exceptional)
In "Singularity," forged by a little known company called Raven Software (sarcasm), you are an elite U.S. soldier named Nate Renko who, like most FPS leads never speaks even when being directly spoken to, making him seem either deaf, moronic, pricky, or all of the above. "Hey, buddy, I just asked you a question!" Still, he's got a slight problem because his chopper just crashed on Katorga-12, a former Soviet facility during the Cold War that pulled a "Wolfenstein" with the Reds taking over for the Nazis by dabbling in some seriously forbidden science. This resulted in a "Half-Life" Black Mesa-sized "Oops!," unleashing hideous mutant freaks with a taste for flesh and all kinds of time and space craziness -- that, naturally, you'll get to dabble in yourself.
Well, I don't know what it is about Russian mutants, but they're starting to look a whole lot scarier than the rest of the world's mutants, because even the first of them that you'll face in "Singularity" might have you tinkling in your pants just a wee bit (no pun intended). Some scripted moments, in particular, made the first "F.E.A.R." look like amateur hour in terms of startling the shit out of me -- and many of these were in the first twenty minutes of gameplay. In fact, the earliest creatures you'll face are perhaps the scariest in the entire game, if not the most challenging. But one thing is certain -- there are some memorable baddies in "Singularity." Not "Metro 2033" memorable, but memorable all the same. (One blind creature with exceptional hearing is worth mentioning.) And "Singularity" has something "Metro" certainly does not -- this is an old school shooter and a damn good one. Despite a few jolts, it's not a survival horror game, but a straightforward actioner where even battling non-mutated foes is good, gory fun. In fact, it's gernerally preferable, which one might say makes it the polar opposite of the aforementioned title.
Your arsenal of weaponry is one of the best in recent years, delivering the down and dirty goods. The FPS action just feels right. The guns bark in mostly the right ways, and enemies react with gushing blood and sometimes severed limbs. One prototype weapon even allows you to follow your bullets into their targets as they explode into satisfying dismembered chunks. Raven proves yet again it can deliver in the action department here, and this is only aided by your ability to upgrade your weapons and make them steadily more potent, much like in 2009's "Wolfenstein" (no coincidence since Raven also developed that gem as well).
Also like that "Wolfenstein" redux, your ability to cause destruction is not limited to your firearms. As the game progresses, you will be able to manipulate time in ways that may age your human enemies to the point where you literally watch them turn to dust before your very eyes, or slow down time to give you a leg up on the competition. When it comes to the game's environmental puzzles, these abilities (also upgradable, btw) can sometimes come across as gimmicky, but there are clever moments too. One just wishes that the game allowed you to think outside the box a little. You are too limited to what the game wants you to do, meaning to progress you might not be able to turn that locked metal door in front of you into a rusted pile of debris, but that other one to your left that the game has designated sure as hell can be.
So, yes, the game is very, very linear. But this gives it a brisk, action-packed pace that scarcely ever relents, unlike its cousin "Wolfenstein." It also packs in some challenge, even on its easier settings. Its environments look suitably desolate and bleak in the present, but reflect an entirely different atmosphere in the past (which you visit frequently). The graphics, overall, are quite good, the frame rate is liquid smooth, and the soundtrack befitting the tone of the material. Complete with a decent storyline and several endings -- one which resulted in some delicious moral ambiguity -- this results in a great single player package. (Multiplayer is said to be good too, but I wouldn't know.)
In closing, "Singularity" is another awesome notch in Raven Software's belt that goes all the way back to its "Doom" engine antics with "Heretic." Russian mutants sure are fun to kill, and I recommend any FPS fan who has had his fill of "Halo" and "Modern Warfare" to give this new I.P. a look see. You won't regret it.
Final Score: 8.8 (Exceptional)
"Prince of Persia" 2008 Review (PS3)
I loved the last-gen trilogy of "Prince of Persia" games, and have quite fond memories of the original game as well. But the annoyingly titled just "Prince of Persia" (somebody couldn't think of a damn subtitle or what?!) circa 2008 should take its place beside 1999's "Prince of Persia 3D" as one of the series' biggest disappointments. It seems that both Hollywood and the game's publisher are now in agreement, as the 2010 movie version is based on "The Sands of Time," more or less, and gaming turned its back on 2008's Prince and went crawling back to the one who came before him in the aforementioned trilogy, begging for "just one more chance" like a regretful ex-flame until he finally relented and okayed a fourth.
Again I differ from the gaming press in my opinion, but normally I differ in the other direction, as is the case most popularly (according to Youtube hits) with games like the original "Kane & Lynch" or "Dark Messiah of Might & Magic." Not because I'm a contrarian just to be a contrarian -- generally speaking video game reviewers and myself aren't divided by that huge of a gulf of opinion. But I expected more from a "Prince of Persia" game. This one just felt like the devs went off the deep end. My single greatest complaint with "Bioshock 2" was that it felt too much like a watered down "Bioshock" one. 2008's "PoP" went the other way by changing far too much and completely alienating me as a longtime fan.
But let's talk turkey. In "PoP," neither a remake or a sequel, you play as a new, claw-handed Prince who really, really wants to come off like a likable rogue but instead just lacks in personality. His quest allies him with Elika, who also plays a major role in the gameplay itself, as the two seek to imprison an evil god released into the world and bent on its destruction... You know the drill, which is fine. But don't expect anything as good as what the now-dubbed "Sands of Time Trilogy" offered in terms of story. This one may be more charming than "The Warrior Within," the first trilogy's only slight stumble with its lack of a tonally incoherent Godsmack tune, but that's not high praise.
But none of this is the problem. The problem is that the game literally almost feels like it doesn't need a gamer to actually play it. It goes beyond easy -- a lot of the time it feels like it plays itself! This would be a slight problem if this were a brand new I.P. called "Arabian Nights" or some such, but it wouldn't be unenjoyable per se as it sometimes recalls the "Sonic the Hedgehog" days of olde. But as a "PoP" game, it just doesn't feel right. The original game was known for its devious difficulty, while the "Sands of Time Trilogy" required your reflexes to be at their keenest, and were it not for a certain dagger that rewinds time, it too would have been merciless on the player. Not so with 2008's entry. Without said dagger, it's up to Elika to drop in for a convenient save if you miss your step and fall toward your demise -- which she does, as often as you like, the only penalty being you have to start a pre-ordained point a few seconds away at worst from where you made your last mistake. In essence, you'll never die. Ever.
The emphasis is, as always, on platforming and parkour-like moves that will take you from Point A to Point B. That was true of all the games in the series, but here combat plays an even smaller role than ever before -- and thank the gaming gods for that. Squaring off with opponents in this game is boring and sometimes frustrating. It almost feels like a mini-game where you pound buttons and hope to break through your enemy's defenses, but not a very good one. Even though the rest of the game is too forgiving and sometimes feels like it's running on rails, these action moments, moments which should provide a nice change of pace, are tedious and annoying.
The graphics and the level desgins, at least, all show off some quality. And it really isn't a bad game. The problem is that the designers thought they should fix something that was never actually broken to begin with. It quite simply doesn't feel like a "Prince of Persia" game, hence my disappointment. Others may feel differently if they are joining the series for the first time, but the game's overall lack of challenge should suit the casual gamer best.
Final Score: 6.9 (Fair)
Again I differ from the gaming press in my opinion, but normally I differ in the other direction, as is the case most popularly (according to Youtube hits) with games like the original "Kane & Lynch" or "Dark Messiah of Might & Magic." Not because I'm a contrarian just to be a contrarian -- generally speaking video game reviewers and myself aren't divided by that huge of a gulf of opinion. But I expected more from a "Prince of Persia" game. This one just felt like the devs went off the deep end. My single greatest complaint with "Bioshock 2" was that it felt too much like a watered down "Bioshock" one. 2008's "PoP" went the other way by changing far too much and completely alienating me as a longtime fan.
But let's talk turkey. In "PoP," neither a remake or a sequel, you play as a new, claw-handed Prince who really, really wants to come off like a likable rogue but instead just lacks in personality. His quest allies him with Elika, who also plays a major role in the gameplay itself, as the two seek to imprison an evil god released into the world and bent on its destruction... You know the drill, which is fine. But don't expect anything as good as what the now-dubbed "Sands of Time Trilogy" offered in terms of story. This one may be more charming than "The Warrior Within," the first trilogy's only slight stumble with its lack of a tonally incoherent Godsmack tune, but that's not high praise.
But none of this is the problem. The problem is that the game literally almost feels like it doesn't need a gamer to actually play it. It goes beyond easy -- a lot of the time it feels like it plays itself! This would be a slight problem if this were a brand new I.P. called "Arabian Nights" or some such, but it wouldn't be unenjoyable per se as it sometimes recalls the "Sonic the Hedgehog" days of olde. But as a "PoP" game, it just doesn't feel right. The original game was known for its devious difficulty, while the "Sands of Time Trilogy" required your reflexes to be at their keenest, and were it not for a certain dagger that rewinds time, it too would have been merciless on the player. Not so with 2008's entry. Without said dagger, it's up to Elika to drop in for a convenient save if you miss your step and fall toward your demise -- which she does, as often as you like, the only penalty being you have to start a pre-ordained point a few seconds away at worst from where you made your last mistake. In essence, you'll never die. Ever.
The emphasis is, as always, on platforming and parkour-like moves that will take you from Point A to Point B. That was true of all the games in the series, but here combat plays an even smaller role than ever before -- and thank the gaming gods for that. Squaring off with opponents in this game is boring and sometimes frustrating. It almost feels like a mini-game where you pound buttons and hope to break through your enemy's defenses, but not a very good one. Even though the rest of the game is too forgiving and sometimes feels like it's running on rails, these action moments, moments which should provide a nice change of pace, are tedious and annoying.
The graphics and the level desgins, at least, all show off some quality. And it really isn't a bad game. The problem is that the designers thought they should fix something that was never actually broken to begin with. It quite simply doesn't feel like a "Prince of Persia" game, hence my disappointment. Others may feel differently if they are joining the series for the first time, but the game's overall lack of challenge should suit the casual gamer best.
Final Score: 6.9 (Fair)
"Bioshock 2" Review (Xbox 360)
Dinner last night may have been great, but it's not so great when you heat up the leftovers for supper the next evening. Maybe it's soggy now. Or lukewarm. It just doesn't taste the same, despite consisting of all the same ingredients. Which brings me to "Bioshock 2." I loved the original. It was one of the greatest, most original and atmospheric games ever released. It may have been the spiritual successor of the equally amazing "System Shock" series, but it was entirely its own thing. As for its sequel, well... I liked Neil Marshall's horror flick "Descent" too, but that didn't mean they should have made "Descent Part II," a pointless, unoriginal retread that had very little new to offer, and what was new wasn't very good and reflected negatively on the original. I feel exactly the same way about "Bioshock 2."
I never saw the need for a sequel to begin with, in all honesty, as the first "Bioshock" wrapped itself up quite well. Now, "Bioshock Infinite" is in the works, almost acknowledging that a straight "Bioshock" sequel was always a bad idea in much the same way as the "Prince of Persia" franchise decided to go back to what worked with "The Forgotten Sands" after that next-gen reboot that might as well have played itself. Granted, "Infinite" is trading an underwater city for a flying city (very imaginative), but it's DIFFERENT. It has the potential to do what "Bioshock" did the first time around -- take what we love about that game but make it fresh again. Basically, everything that, I feel, "Bioshock 2" failed to do.
In "Bioshock 2," you get to play as a Big Daddy out to rescue his abducted Little Sister, and that's about as far as the game goes toward forging its own identity. You still tool around in Rapture, which looks almost exactly the same as it did when you last left it. You still scavange everything you can find while squaring off with those Adam-addicted freaks. The gameplay is identical in almost every way, but with one difference -- we've already done this, and there's no compelling reason to do it again when you could just as easily pop your far superior copy of the original "Bioshock" in and give it another playthrough. Even the game's most tauted feature, playing as a Big Daddy, is weakly executed. You feel every bit as fragile as you did in the first game, and aside from your armored hands filling the screen, it's hard to tell you're not the same protagonist from game one except for the fact that you can now march around with a Little Sister riding on your shoulder and directing you toward the next source of Adam.
I think critics put on the kiddie gloves when this game stepped into the ring earlier this year. My admiration for the first "Bioshock" doesn't cloud my judgment though when it concerns the sequel -- in fact, quite the opposite. The overwhelming feeling of sameness just kept creeping in on me during my time with "Bioshock 2," like I'd done all of this before only better. The first game's story was far superior on top of it -- especially the "Would you kindly?" revelation near the end, perhaps gaming's best ever "Gotcha!" moment. There are no such moments here, although the chance to see things from an entirely different and very eerie perspective near the game's conclusion is certainly the best moment in "Bioshock 2." But it can't hold a candle to learning the truth about your supposed benefactor in the original game.
And that's the problem. There's just not enough that's new here, and what is new just can't compete with what came before. Even the whole playing as a Big Daddy angle, were it executed better, still wouldn't be all that fresh since something similar essentially happens at the end of the first game. Basically, there are two camps of people who "Bioshock 2" is for -- those who missed the first one (Why?!), and those who played the first one several times and still can't get their fill of Rapture. On those grounds, this glorified expansion pack is certainly worth its weight in gold. But if you loved the first game, and let's face it you probably did, but expected much more out of a proper sequel, you'll probably be just as disappointed by this return to Rapture as I was. This makes it a hard game for me to actually score, but let me put it this way -- I was playing this and "Metro 2033" at around the same time, and constantly found myself being wooed away to the mutant-haunted tunnels of Moscow and turning my back on the undersea mess that was Andrew Ryan's supposed utopia...
Final Score: 6.9 (Fair)
I never saw the need for a sequel to begin with, in all honesty, as the first "Bioshock" wrapped itself up quite well. Now, "Bioshock Infinite" is in the works, almost acknowledging that a straight "Bioshock" sequel was always a bad idea in much the same way as the "Prince of Persia" franchise decided to go back to what worked with "The Forgotten Sands" after that next-gen reboot that might as well have played itself. Granted, "Infinite" is trading an underwater city for a flying city (very imaginative), but it's DIFFERENT. It has the potential to do what "Bioshock" did the first time around -- take what we love about that game but make it fresh again. Basically, everything that, I feel, "Bioshock 2" failed to do.
In "Bioshock 2," you get to play as a Big Daddy out to rescue his abducted Little Sister, and that's about as far as the game goes toward forging its own identity. You still tool around in Rapture, which looks almost exactly the same as it did when you last left it. You still scavange everything you can find while squaring off with those Adam-addicted freaks. The gameplay is identical in almost every way, but with one difference -- we've already done this, and there's no compelling reason to do it again when you could just as easily pop your far superior copy of the original "Bioshock" in and give it another playthrough. Even the game's most tauted feature, playing as a Big Daddy, is weakly executed. You feel every bit as fragile as you did in the first game, and aside from your armored hands filling the screen, it's hard to tell you're not the same protagonist from game one except for the fact that you can now march around with a Little Sister riding on your shoulder and directing you toward the next source of Adam.
I think critics put on the kiddie gloves when this game stepped into the ring earlier this year. My admiration for the first "Bioshock" doesn't cloud my judgment though when it concerns the sequel -- in fact, quite the opposite. The overwhelming feeling of sameness just kept creeping in on me during my time with "Bioshock 2," like I'd done all of this before only better. The first game's story was far superior on top of it -- especially the "Would you kindly?" revelation near the end, perhaps gaming's best ever "Gotcha!" moment. There are no such moments here, although the chance to see things from an entirely different and very eerie perspective near the game's conclusion is certainly the best moment in "Bioshock 2." But it can't hold a candle to learning the truth about your supposed benefactor in the original game.
And that's the problem. There's just not enough that's new here, and what is new just can't compete with what came before. Even the whole playing as a Big Daddy angle, were it executed better, still wouldn't be all that fresh since something similar essentially happens at the end of the first game. Basically, there are two camps of people who "Bioshock 2" is for -- those who missed the first one (Why?!), and those who played the first one several times and still can't get their fill of Rapture. On those grounds, this glorified expansion pack is certainly worth its weight in gold. But if you loved the first game, and let's face it you probably did, but expected much more out of a proper sequel, you'll probably be just as disappointed by this return to Rapture as I was. This makes it a hard game for me to actually score, but let me put it this way -- I was playing this and "Metro 2033" at around the same time, and constantly found myself being wooed away to the mutant-haunted tunnels of Moscow and turning my back on the undersea mess that was Andrew Ryan's supposed utopia...
Final Score: 6.9 (Fair)
"Metro 2033" Review (Xbox 360)
I hate that I'm so late in reviewing this game, which I purchased and completed months ago. But I would be remiss if I didn't put my opinion out there to whoever listens to some amateur video game reviewer like me in the first place. Bottom line: in my opinion, "Metro 2033" is easily one of the best games I've played in 2010. As much as I expected to love "Bioshock 2," that's how much I hadn't even heard of "Metro 2033" until its release. And, when it's all said and done, "Metro" filled the void that, in my opinion, "Bioshock 2" so thoroughly didn't manage to. This game, like the aforementioned original "Bioshock," presented a unique setting, an interesting story, creepy atmosphere, and rock solid gameplay. I found myself playing "Metro" instead of "Bioshock 2" at every opportunity. This wasn't a retread and an unnecessary sequel -- this was fresh.
You fill the post-Armageddon shoes of a young Russian survivor named Artyom living beneath Moscow in its network of tunnels. These tunnels house what's left of humanity as nuclear winter and mutant beings reign aboveground, connecting small communities of survivors known as "stations." In this dark, gritty environment, your job is to scout beyond the safety of these stations and unravel a new and sinister threat that is rearing its head.
In this game, atmosphere is King. The graphics engine may be a bit clunky, but it is more than apologized for by the unique setting, moody lighting, and excellent design. The oppressive darkness belowground is a character in and of itself, as is the feeling of isolation and claustrophobia. The weight of these sensations that the game creates is intentional and highly effective. Even when you do finally make your way to the surface and visit what's left of Moscow, these feelings remain, and in fact add urgency because you will be confined to your gas mask -- unless you want to die of radiation poisoning, that is. And to make matters worse, you will need to replace your gas mask and/or filter regularly, as each one will be spent in a matter of minutes. The sound of Artyom's gasps for air tell you in no uncertain terms how close you are to losing your final reserves of oxygen, and add a frantic quality to these outdoor segments that few games ever offer. Another nice touch that you will nonetheless not appreciate at all in your attemps to survive the game's dangers is the fact that enemy attacks can even leave marks in your mask that make visibility more difficult. Some players may find these kinds of things annoying -- but I embraced them in the spirit that the game intended.
"Metro" wants to play with your nerves. It wants to unsettle you. It wants to rattle you. And it wants to scare you. And if I drew up a list of the Top 10 Scariest Video Games of All Time According to Me, "2033" would be near the top of it. The mutant creatures in this game are truly inspired. They look fearsome, and they attack suddenly, lunging out of the darkness when they don't offer you the courtesy of a distant, terrifying howl that is sure to set your nerves on edge. One breed of ape-like mutant late in the game is particularly memorable, as they are somewhat passive so long as you are making direct eye contact with them -- but if you turn your back, they will be all over you like stink on a monkey. These are some of the most memorable beasts ever seen in a game. Human foes crop up on occassion, but are thankfully rare as they aren't very much fun to contend with and come complete with some truly clunky A.I.. If this game weren't built around its mutant creatures, to be honest, it wouldn't make for a very effective actioner. At all. But thankfully it knows its strengths and plays to them 90% of the time.
Speaking of the game's FPS elements, shooting the game's enemies isn't really fun, it's a relief. You're just glad you killed that mutant before it killed you. The weapons aren't especially memorable, and the shooting mechanics are a bit clunky -- but this game is really not about that. It's about exploring a world that is unique and immersive, and occassionally pulling the trigger just to stay alive. This is why the game's segments featuring human foes fare as poorly as they do.
The game promotes such feelings of isolation amidst the dark that the few times you join up with a human comrade, you feel genuine relief. Friendlies between stations are an exception to the rule, and they are only so helpful in watching your back, but you welcome them nonetheless. You will also take to scavaging quite quickly, much like in the aforementioned "Bioshock" games. Everything you come across lying in the tunnels or in the desolate streets of Moscow, you will probably if not certainly need. All those corpses lying around may be ominous, but it's always nice when you can rob one for some useful items or much-needed ammo.
The game offers two endings, but neither is as satisfying as it should be. The storyline kind of ambles and stumbles around late in the game too, which is disappointing since it's been so interesting up until this point. That and the game's at-times clunky shooting mechanics might put off some, as well as those Russian accents (too many characters sound EXACTLY the same as others you've met before), but rest assured, if you want to play an eerie, tense, and downright scary ass game, "Metro 2033" is about as good as it gets.
Final Score: 9.0 (Greatness)
You fill the post-Armageddon shoes of a young Russian survivor named Artyom living beneath Moscow in its network of tunnels. These tunnels house what's left of humanity as nuclear winter and mutant beings reign aboveground, connecting small communities of survivors known as "stations." In this dark, gritty environment, your job is to scout beyond the safety of these stations and unravel a new and sinister threat that is rearing its head.
In this game, atmosphere is King. The graphics engine may be a bit clunky, but it is more than apologized for by the unique setting, moody lighting, and excellent design. The oppressive darkness belowground is a character in and of itself, as is the feeling of isolation and claustrophobia. The weight of these sensations that the game creates is intentional and highly effective. Even when you do finally make your way to the surface and visit what's left of Moscow, these feelings remain, and in fact add urgency because you will be confined to your gas mask -- unless you want to die of radiation poisoning, that is. And to make matters worse, you will need to replace your gas mask and/or filter regularly, as each one will be spent in a matter of minutes. The sound of Artyom's gasps for air tell you in no uncertain terms how close you are to losing your final reserves of oxygen, and add a frantic quality to these outdoor segments that few games ever offer. Another nice touch that you will nonetheless not appreciate at all in your attemps to survive the game's dangers is the fact that enemy attacks can even leave marks in your mask that make visibility more difficult. Some players may find these kinds of things annoying -- but I embraced them in the spirit that the game intended.
"Metro" wants to play with your nerves. It wants to unsettle you. It wants to rattle you. And it wants to scare you. And if I drew up a list of the Top 10 Scariest Video Games of All Time According to Me, "2033" would be near the top of it. The mutant creatures in this game are truly inspired. They look fearsome, and they attack suddenly, lunging out of the darkness when they don't offer you the courtesy of a distant, terrifying howl that is sure to set your nerves on edge. One breed of ape-like mutant late in the game is particularly memorable, as they are somewhat passive so long as you are making direct eye contact with them -- but if you turn your back, they will be all over you like stink on a monkey. These are some of the most memorable beasts ever seen in a game. Human foes crop up on occassion, but are thankfully rare as they aren't very much fun to contend with and come complete with some truly clunky A.I.. If this game weren't built around its mutant creatures, to be honest, it wouldn't make for a very effective actioner. At all. But thankfully it knows its strengths and plays to them 90% of the time.
Speaking of the game's FPS elements, shooting the game's enemies isn't really fun, it's a relief. You're just glad you killed that mutant before it killed you. The weapons aren't especially memorable, and the shooting mechanics are a bit clunky -- but this game is really not about that. It's about exploring a world that is unique and immersive, and occassionally pulling the trigger just to stay alive. This is why the game's segments featuring human foes fare as poorly as they do.
The game promotes such feelings of isolation amidst the dark that the few times you join up with a human comrade, you feel genuine relief. Friendlies between stations are an exception to the rule, and they are only so helpful in watching your back, but you welcome them nonetheless. You will also take to scavaging quite quickly, much like in the aforementioned "Bioshock" games. Everything you come across lying in the tunnels or in the desolate streets of Moscow, you will probably if not certainly need. All those corpses lying around may be ominous, but it's always nice when you can rob one for some useful items or much-needed ammo.
The game offers two endings, but neither is as satisfying as it should be. The storyline kind of ambles and stumbles around late in the game too, which is disappointing since it's been so interesting up until this point. That and the game's at-times clunky shooting mechanics might put off some, as well as those Russian accents (too many characters sound EXACTLY the same as others you've met before), but rest assured, if you want to play an eerie, tense, and downright scary ass game, "Metro 2033" is about as good as it gets.
Final Score: 9.0 (Greatness)
In Retro: "Dead Rising" (Xbox 360)
Just in time for the sequel, I would like to make a confession to all you gaming priests out there. I don't like the original "Dead Rising." I'm weird like this, because I have often defended games that some would argue weren't worth defending -- "Damnation" springs to mind. And yet I've never met anyone who would dare say that Capcom's attempt at George Romero, complete with a mall setting, was, in fact, a bad game. And you know, maybe calling it a "bad game" is me being overly critical in an attempt to offer a contrary opinion when much of the gaming press leapt on the "'Dead Rising' is great" bandwagon. But I have to go with my gut, and my gut is quite blunt about one thing -- I just don't like this game.
The opening sequence starts off with a bang as you, or rather you in the guise of freelance photographer Frank West, snap photos of the carnage that is taking place beneath your chopper as you fly over a zombie-infected Colorado town. The beginning is unique, immersive, and even a little chilling. You can't help but feel a little grimy as you snap shots of zombies trying to invade a school bus without trying to lend a hand and possibly save the kids inside. A doomed woman on a rooftop even gestures your way in much-deserved disgust as zombies swarm around her, eventually causing her to plunge to her doom. As far as intros go, it's killer.
In my opinion, it's all downhill from there. From the crap storyline with its goofy characters on down to the ticking clock that ultimately ruins the entire experience for me, I just don't share the opinions of so many that this game is actually, well, good. I'm a rabid zombie fan and love George Romero's original trilogy of films, and the mall setting really captures the mood and feel of the original "Dawn of the Dead," so believe me when I say I truly wanted to like this game. So much so that I actually purchased it twice, the second time to give it another chance at winning me over. But no dice.
The worst part about it is, were it not for the save system and the real-time countdown, there's a hell of a promising zombie-slaying sandbox in here somewhere. The fact that you can make dead the undead in so many gory, ridiculous, and over-the-top ways is great (and again pays homage to the biker gang's gleeful zombie slayings in "Dawn"). But the sense of urgency you feel is not a good thing in this case. You can't just cut loose and play around with the threat of the game's end looming when time runs out, and this kills the sense of fun that game tries so hard to create. Why bash those walking corpses to death with a shopping cart when I should run past them and get to my destination as soon as humanly possible? This damn game makes me feel like that frickin' bunny in "Alice in Wonderland." Although, the one good thing about time running out for Frank West is that he's a dispicable protagonist, and he deserves to die in that mall.
I also loathe the game's brain-dead escort missions and, in particular, its human boss battles. How can it be easier to kill the undead than it is to kill one human being? Realism is not normally a concern of mine in gaming, but this just nags at me. These living bullet sponges take the focus away from where it belongs -- killing zombies. And killing zombies is already thwarted somewhat by that damn countdown and limited save function.
So yes, I admit it. I don't like "Dead Rising." I truly hope that "Dead Rising 2" addresses my problems with the first game, because I would love another badass zombie game this side of the unbelievably awesome "Left 4 Dead" series, and even the first one offers hints of what the game could be... But time will tell if it's more of the same, or a refinement on what should have been the first time around.
As a friend of mine and fellow hardcore gamer is known to say, I end this retrospective quoting him... "Fuckin' Capcom."
Final Score: N/A
The opening sequence starts off with a bang as you, or rather you in the guise of freelance photographer Frank West, snap photos of the carnage that is taking place beneath your chopper as you fly over a zombie-infected Colorado town. The beginning is unique, immersive, and even a little chilling. You can't help but feel a little grimy as you snap shots of zombies trying to invade a school bus without trying to lend a hand and possibly save the kids inside. A doomed woman on a rooftop even gestures your way in much-deserved disgust as zombies swarm around her, eventually causing her to plunge to her doom. As far as intros go, it's killer.
In my opinion, it's all downhill from there. From the crap storyline with its goofy characters on down to the ticking clock that ultimately ruins the entire experience for me, I just don't share the opinions of so many that this game is actually, well, good. I'm a rabid zombie fan and love George Romero's original trilogy of films, and the mall setting really captures the mood and feel of the original "Dawn of the Dead," so believe me when I say I truly wanted to like this game. So much so that I actually purchased it twice, the second time to give it another chance at winning me over. But no dice.
The worst part about it is, were it not for the save system and the real-time countdown, there's a hell of a promising zombie-slaying sandbox in here somewhere. The fact that you can make dead the undead in so many gory, ridiculous, and over-the-top ways is great (and again pays homage to the biker gang's gleeful zombie slayings in "Dawn"). But the sense of urgency you feel is not a good thing in this case. You can't just cut loose and play around with the threat of the game's end looming when time runs out, and this kills the sense of fun that game tries so hard to create. Why bash those walking corpses to death with a shopping cart when I should run past them and get to my destination as soon as humanly possible? This damn game makes me feel like that frickin' bunny in "Alice in Wonderland." Although, the one good thing about time running out for Frank West is that he's a dispicable protagonist, and he deserves to die in that mall.
I also loathe the game's brain-dead escort missions and, in particular, its human boss battles. How can it be easier to kill the undead than it is to kill one human being? Realism is not normally a concern of mine in gaming, but this just nags at me. These living bullet sponges take the focus away from where it belongs -- killing zombies. And killing zombies is already thwarted somewhat by that damn countdown and limited save function.
So yes, I admit it. I don't like "Dead Rising." I truly hope that "Dead Rising 2" addresses my problems with the first game, because I would love another badass zombie game this side of the unbelievably awesome "Left 4 Dead" series, and even the first one offers hints of what the game could be... But time will tell if it's more of the same, or a refinement on what should have been the first time around.
As a friend of mine and fellow hardcore gamer is known to say, I end this retrospective quoting him... "Fuckin' Capcom."
Final Score: N/A
"Wet" Review (PS3)
"Wet" is undoubtedly like some guy you knew in high school who tried so hard to be cool he just came across like a dumb ass. This game is nowhere near as "awesome" as it thinks it is, let's just get that out of the way. Everything from its grindhouse-style presentation (which really just serves to thinly mask its outdated graphics) to its soundtrack (sometimes enjoyable but mostly grating) reeks of its devs just trying WAY. TOO. HARD. Still, as for the gameplay itself... Not half bad. Repetitive? Sure. But pretty enjoyable in short bursts.
You take on the role of Rubi Malone, some kind of sword-wielding slash gunslinging bounty hunter who drops as many F-bombs as she can in a desperate attempt to impress you with her badass-ness. Though the game wants you to know that actress Eliza Dushku is voicing its protag, I would personally much rather be LOOKING at the real thing than listening, if you follow me. Besides, it's not like the character ever has anything even remotely interesting to say in a storyline that involves, eventually, being betrayed by one of her employers and setting out on a quest of vengeance. The plot is stylized, yes, but takes too long to get to the point and is ultimately forgettable.
But this is an action game. Is it fun? Yes. Rubi's acrobatic abilities and tight control make her come across like the love child of video game legends Lara Croft and Max Payne -- with a dab of The Bride from "Kill Bill" just to add some flavor. She leaps and bounds, slowing down the world around her as her enemies fall in bloody displays. Guns akimbo, it's cool that when Rubi dives in slo-mo, one of her weapons auto-targets while you the player take control of the other's aim. And slashing your foes to bits with a sword is pretty satisfying too, a welcome melee relief amidst so many bullets. Complete with upgradable abilities, there's a solid action game to be found here.
Too bad that apart from its annoying personality, the game looks pretty bad. All the visual filters in the world can't hide the fact that there are actually games on the Wii that look better than this one does. On top of which, the game slows to a crawl whenever you enter a locked down area, where Rubi must race to destroy several enemy spawning doorways and kill every last foe in the area if she is to move on. In a game that features such cool setpieces as a freeway shootout and a crashing airplane, these segments, which occur throughout, come across as filler. And the game's decision to play (and re-play, again and again) tracks from various musicians instead of score here just makes it worse. Mandatory training sequences time you while you run an obstacle course at various points as well, further slowing what would otherwise be a breakneck pace. It's just frustrating.
All in all, though, "Wet" definitely lives up to its title (which is short for "wetwork," as in getting your hands bloody), and when it works, it works well. It's just too bad the game tries so hard to be cool, and walks when it should be sprinting. Recommended for arcade-minded action fans who can get past its attempts at stylized hipness... and find it a lower price. There's good stuff in here, but sometimes you have to dig through shit to find it.
Final Score: 6.9 (Fair)
You take on the role of Rubi Malone, some kind of sword-wielding slash gunslinging bounty hunter who drops as many F-bombs as she can in a desperate attempt to impress you with her badass-ness. Though the game wants you to know that actress Eliza Dushku is voicing its protag, I would personally much rather be LOOKING at the real thing than listening, if you follow me. Besides, it's not like the character ever has anything even remotely interesting to say in a storyline that involves, eventually, being betrayed by one of her employers and setting out on a quest of vengeance. The plot is stylized, yes, but takes too long to get to the point and is ultimately forgettable.
But this is an action game. Is it fun? Yes. Rubi's acrobatic abilities and tight control make her come across like the love child of video game legends Lara Croft and Max Payne -- with a dab of The Bride from "Kill Bill" just to add some flavor. She leaps and bounds, slowing down the world around her as her enemies fall in bloody displays. Guns akimbo, it's cool that when Rubi dives in slo-mo, one of her weapons auto-targets while you the player take control of the other's aim. And slashing your foes to bits with a sword is pretty satisfying too, a welcome melee relief amidst so many bullets. Complete with upgradable abilities, there's a solid action game to be found here.
Too bad that apart from its annoying personality, the game looks pretty bad. All the visual filters in the world can't hide the fact that there are actually games on the Wii that look better than this one does. On top of which, the game slows to a crawl whenever you enter a locked down area, where Rubi must race to destroy several enemy spawning doorways and kill every last foe in the area if she is to move on. In a game that features such cool setpieces as a freeway shootout and a crashing airplane, these segments, which occur throughout, come across as filler. And the game's decision to play (and re-play, again and again) tracks from various musicians instead of score here just makes it worse. Mandatory training sequences time you while you run an obstacle course at various points as well, further slowing what would otherwise be a breakneck pace. It's just frustrating.
All in all, though, "Wet" definitely lives up to its title (which is short for "wetwork," as in getting your hands bloody), and when it works, it works well. It's just too bad the game tries so hard to be cool, and walks when it should be sprinting. Recommended for arcade-minded action fans who can get past its attempts at stylized hipness... and find it a lower price. There's good stuff in here, but sometimes you have to dig through shit to find it.
Final Score: 6.9 (Fair)
"Wolfenstein" 2009 Review (PS3)
The 2009 redux and/or sequel, confusingly named just "Wolfenstein" despite the fact that Castle Wolfenstein plays absolutely no role in the story and it's not really a remake of the first game, is nonetheless a triumphant return to the world of Nazi occultism and the exploits of B.J. Blazkowicz (best character name EVER!), and, I feel, one of last year's most underrated shooters despite a few admittedly hard to overlook issues.
The game lacks in storytelling, there's no doubt about that. You're B.J., and you're assigned by your superiors to infiltrate a European town during the second World War to find out just what evil the Nazis are up to now... and put a stop to it. The series has never been known for its storytelling chops (despite "Return to Castle Wolfenstein," was had a decent backdrop with its undead Vikings and such), so this isn't really a problem despite the fact that the game merely seems to end with little to no fanfare. By the time I had reached the finale, I had no idea that I was fighting the final boss battle, let alone that when the boss was defeated the credits would just sort of... well, roll. This kind of thing always bugs me. Last impressions count too, game devs! Still, it's the gameplay that counts, and this is where "Wolfenstein" shines.
Unlike past entries in the series, "Wolfenstein" offers a hub-based world for you to explore that is not entirely linear. There are optional missions to undertake, and if you feel like simply roaming about town shooting Nazis whenever you find them or looking for treasure, you can certainly do so. But although some story missions can be completed in the order you choose, most of the time they can't be. Still, all of this helps immerse you in the game's setting, and were it not for the annoyance of backtracking when you'd rather be busting caps in a Nazi's face "Inglorious Basterds" style, or the fact that transitioning between areas comes with a load time that's just long enough to make you impatient, this system works quite well, and gives the game a different feel than most other current shooters.
When you're not exploring the game's world, you're shooting Nazis... and undead Nazis... and mutant Nazis... and Nazi experiments gone terribly wrong. All to be expected in a game called "Wolfenstein." (It's just a pity there's no Mecha-Hitler to throw down against!) And shooting Nazis in this game is just plain fun. An arsenal of upgradable weapons that is probably the most satisfying and diverse in years and enemies that generally react believably to being shot by them make this game's action a cut above. Even early in the game the combat is brutal and satisfying, but near the end, when you've buffed your tools of destruction, it's just badass. Blowing an unsuspecting Nazi's head clean off with a sniper rifle never, and I mean NEVER, gets old.
B.J. is also armed with some occult abilities this time around, allowing him to enter a parallel realm called The Veil and summon its powers to battle his German adversaries. There are some cool and very useful options here, like being able to slow down time or create a shield around you that prevents bullets from ruining B.J.'s brand new leather jacket. The Veil ties in to the storyline as well this time around, as it represents the Nazis' convoluted attempt at world domination in some way or another that I never really bothered to understand.
The game's environments are immersive and believable, as well as graphically pleasing, while character models are less so but still look good. But the game's greatest strength is an arsenal of satisfying, upgradable weapons, some cool Veil powers, and a satisfying array of enemies to use them against. Some of the game should feel more... well, epic than it does (think "Call of Duty" or "Medal of Honor"), but this really is some of the finest FPS action out there. I just wish this great gameplay merged with a satisfying conclusion and didn't force me to backtrack so much, because these issues are really all that stand between "Wolfenstein" 2009 and me calling it a modern classic. As it is, though, I recommend this game to any FPS fan, provided they are patient enough for the game's quite deliberate pacing.
Before I end this review, however, I would just like to point out the title of this game yet again and state for the record that, well, I frickin' hate it. They would literally have been better off calling this game "Wolfenstein '09" than just calling it "Wolfenstein," which, during a conversation, can be pretty confusing. Am I talking about the first game that sparked off the FPS genre, or the 2009 sequel? It's like that rogue "Prince of Persia" game from a couple of years ago. Give it a damn subtitle like the earlier three games to avoid confusion! Or, better yet, don't talk about that addition to the franchise to start with, as it would have been just plain forgettable in my opinion had it not been so entirely disappointing. Thank God for "The Forgotten Sands" for going back to what worked. But anyway, I digress...
Final Score: 8.5 (Exceptional)
The game lacks in storytelling, there's no doubt about that. You're B.J., and you're assigned by your superiors to infiltrate a European town during the second World War to find out just what evil the Nazis are up to now... and put a stop to it. The series has never been known for its storytelling chops (despite "Return to Castle Wolfenstein," was had a decent backdrop with its undead Vikings and such), so this isn't really a problem despite the fact that the game merely seems to end with little to no fanfare. By the time I had reached the finale, I had no idea that I was fighting the final boss battle, let alone that when the boss was defeated the credits would just sort of... well, roll. This kind of thing always bugs me. Last impressions count too, game devs! Still, it's the gameplay that counts, and this is where "Wolfenstein" shines.
Unlike past entries in the series, "Wolfenstein" offers a hub-based world for you to explore that is not entirely linear. There are optional missions to undertake, and if you feel like simply roaming about town shooting Nazis whenever you find them or looking for treasure, you can certainly do so. But although some story missions can be completed in the order you choose, most of the time they can't be. Still, all of this helps immerse you in the game's setting, and were it not for the annoyance of backtracking when you'd rather be busting caps in a Nazi's face "Inglorious Basterds" style, or the fact that transitioning between areas comes with a load time that's just long enough to make you impatient, this system works quite well, and gives the game a different feel than most other current shooters.
When you're not exploring the game's world, you're shooting Nazis... and undead Nazis... and mutant Nazis... and Nazi experiments gone terribly wrong. All to be expected in a game called "Wolfenstein." (It's just a pity there's no Mecha-Hitler to throw down against!) And shooting Nazis in this game is just plain fun. An arsenal of upgradable weapons that is probably the most satisfying and diverse in years and enemies that generally react believably to being shot by them make this game's action a cut above. Even early in the game the combat is brutal and satisfying, but near the end, when you've buffed your tools of destruction, it's just badass. Blowing an unsuspecting Nazi's head clean off with a sniper rifle never, and I mean NEVER, gets old.
B.J. is also armed with some occult abilities this time around, allowing him to enter a parallel realm called The Veil and summon its powers to battle his German adversaries. There are some cool and very useful options here, like being able to slow down time or create a shield around you that prevents bullets from ruining B.J.'s brand new leather jacket. The Veil ties in to the storyline as well this time around, as it represents the Nazis' convoluted attempt at world domination in some way or another that I never really bothered to understand.
The game's environments are immersive and believable, as well as graphically pleasing, while character models are less so but still look good. But the game's greatest strength is an arsenal of satisfying, upgradable weapons, some cool Veil powers, and a satisfying array of enemies to use them against. Some of the game should feel more... well, epic than it does (think "Call of Duty" or "Medal of Honor"), but this really is some of the finest FPS action out there. I just wish this great gameplay merged with a satisfying conclusion and didn't force me to backtrack so much, because these issues are really all that stand between "Wolfenstein" 2009 and me calling it a modern classic. As it is, though, I recommend this game to any FPS fan, provided they are patient enough for the game's quite deliberate pacing.
Before I end this review, however, I would just like to point out the title of this game yet again and state for the record that, well, I frickin' hate it. They would literally have been better off calling this game "Wolfenstein '09" than just calling it "Wolfenstein," which, during a conversation, can be pretty confusing. Am I talking about the first game that sparked off the FPS genre, or the 2009 sequel? It's like that rogue "Prince of Persia" game from a couple of years ago. Give it a damn subtitle like the earlier three games to avoid confusion! Or, better yet, don't talk about that addition to the franchise to start with, as it would have been just plain forgettable in my opinion had it not been so entirely disappointing. Thank God for "The Forgotten Sands" for going back to what worked. But anyway, I digress...
Final Score: 8.5 (Exceptional)
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
In Retro: "Run Like Hell" Review (Xbox)
A review of "Run Like Hell," or "RLH," from my backlog...
* * *
Since its release in 2002, “Run Like Hell” has been given a fairly undeserved bad wrap. Sure, the game seems lost somewhere between mediocre action and less-than-terrifying survival horror, devoid at all turns of anything that so much as resembles atmosphere, and this coupled with some less than stellar visuals, but there’s a certain charm to its “Star Trek” meets “Alien” storyline and all that… running like hell.
Speaking of the plot, it’s definitely more Paul Anderson than James Cameron or Ridley Scott – that is to say it’s cheesy, but enjoyably so more often than not. You’re captain Nicholas Connor, and your ship has suddenly become infested with aliens. Aliens of the not-so-friendly sort, that is, since there are extraterrestrial crew members aboard as well, like Dag’rek, of a warrior-like race and Nick’s bosom buddy when things get serious. It would seem that Nick’s fiancé, Samantha, is in distress somewhere on board the besieged vessel, and with everybody else pretty much dead or dying, it’s up to Nick and Dag and a few others to swoop in and rescue her. Well, mainly Nick. This is the basic premise of “Run Like Hell.”
They say every story has already been told, and it’s all in how it’s told that makes it special. Well, “Run Like Hell” is derivative from the word go, complete with generic riffs on H.R. Giger’s xenomorph design and the generally drab layout of the beleaguered spaceship. Everything is generic, like an exclusive movie that premiers on the Sci-Fi channel sometime after dark. That said, it’s still intriguing, thanks in large part to some generally good voice work by veteran actors such as Lance Henriksen (as Nick), Clancy Brown, Michael Ironside, and Brad Dourif. With the help of an unusually solid cast this side of “Grand Theft Auto,” you do sort of become attached to the characters they portray. Also, the nature of the alien menace is, as you would expect, doled out only gradually, and if you’re into this sort of thing you’ll feel right at home, and while you certainly won’t be wowed “System Shock” style (to understate), you may still be pleasantly enmeshed in the familiarity of it all.
In terms of gameplay, “ Strafe Like Hell” may have been a more appropriate moniker, as that’s really the only winning strategy when it comes down to combat – and there’s a lot of combat to be had here. Targeting your enemies at random is no problem, but selecting the gravest threat in the midst of a thick fray is sometimes nearly impossible. At least it’s easy to know which enemy is in your sights, thanks to a huge (and I mean huge) blue ring that encircles said opponent. The game can be forgiving during these situations, however, thanks to some pretty stupid artificial intelligence and Nick’s ability to, as mentioned, strafe outside of harm’s way while emptying his clips. Sooner or later you’ll hit what you were aiming at. The developers attempt to negate their stupid baddies on occasion by cheaply surrounding you, however, which is as irritating as it sounds. Still, laying out the gunfire while back or sidestepping to avoid the incoming danger lends it all that sense of desperation that it really should have. Your enemies are mean, and you don’t want them getting too close to you, et cetera, et cetera.
“Run Like Hell,” as a survival horror game, is not very scary, however. This is due in large part to the graphics engine on display, which seemingly couldn’t render a moody, tensely atmospheric sequence if it tried. The lighting throughout “RLH” is generally garish and bright, point of fact, and this outlines the failings of the graphics themselves, which are a little on the blocky side. That said, the principle characters are rendered with enough personality that they seem to overcome their ample limitations. This is not true of the aliens themselves, though, thanks to uninspired design.
Unlike other games of this ilk, at least it’s hard to get lost in “Run Like Hell.” To some, its fairly linear structure may be detrimental to the package, but I found it refreshing that I could navigate the ship’s similar-looking halls and corridors without feeling overwhelmed by not knowing where to go or what to do. The game makes this pretty clear by breaking itself into contained chapters, and keeping certain sections of the ship locked down when they’re not yet necessary. Even so, there is still room for some exploration, but if you prefer free reign then you’ll probably be disappointed by this aspect of “RLH” as well.
There’s much to frown about in this game, it’s true – and this is a fact that’s been touched on harshly by many of its critics. Regardless, there is a charm to it that is less touted, thanks to the delightfully hokey storyline, its participating characters, and gameplay that, as a whole, isn’t nearly as bad as you might think, even based on the aforementioned issues it suffers from. While some of its parts don’t function properly on their own, together they do at least conjoin into something decent and by no means unplayable (as some would have you believe). Not the most glaring praise for a video game, certainly, but there’s nothing to condemn here either. Think of “Run Like Hell” as a guilty pleasure, like that ridiculous “Mansquito” movie that aired on Sci-Fi, and you watched it despite your better judgment. Hours of your life you’ll never get back, sure, but if you’re a fan of the genre, complete with all its stereotypes, you could do worse than this.
FINAL SCORE: 6.8 (Fair)
* * *
Since its release in 2002, “Run Like Hell” has been given a fairly undeserved bad wrap. Sure, the game seems lost somewhere between mediocre action and less-than-terrifying survival horror, devoid at all turns of anything that so much as resembles atmosphere, and this coupled with some less than stellar visuals, but there’s a certain charm to its “Star Trek” meets “Alien” storyline and all that… running like hell.
Speaking of the plot, it’s definitely more Paul Anderson than James Cameron or Ridley Scott – that is to say it’s cheesy, but enjoyably so more often than not. You’re captain Nicholas Connor, and your ship has suddenly become infested with aliens. Aliens of the not-so-friendly sort, that is, since there are extraterrestrial crew members aboard as well, like Dag’rek, of a warrior-like race and Nick’s bosom buddy when things get serious. It would seem that Nick’s fiancé, Samantha, is in distress somewhere on board the besieged vessel, and with everybody else pretty much dead or dying, it’s up to Nick and Dag and a few others to swoop in and rescue her. Well, mainly Nick. This is the basic premise of “Run Like Hell.”
They say every story has already been told, and it’s all in how it’s told that makes it special. Well, “Run Like Hell” is derivative from the word go, complete with generic riffs on H.R. Giger’s xenomorph design and the generally drab layout of the beleaguered spaceship. Everything is generic, like an exclusive movie that premiers on the Sci-Fi channel sometime after dark. That said, it’s still intriguing, thanks in large part to some generally good voice work by veteran actors such as Lance Henriksen (as Nick), Clancy Brown, Michael Ironside, and Brad Dourif. With the help of an unusually solid cast this side of “Grand Theft Auto,” you do sort of become attached to the characters they portray. Also, the nature of the alien menace is, as you would expect, doled out only gradually, and if you’re into this sort of thing you’ll feel right at home, and while you certainly won’t be wowed “System Shock” style (to understate), you may still be pleasantly enmeshed in the familiarity of it all.
In terms of gameplay, “ Strafe Like Hell” may have been a more appropriate moniker, as that’s really the only winning strategy when it comes down to combat – and there’s a lot of combat to be had here. Targeting your enemies at random is no problem, but selecting the gravest threat in the midst of a thick fray is sometimes nearly impossible. At least it’s easy to know which enemy is in your sights, thanks to a huge (and I mean huge) blue ring that encircles said opponent. The game can be forgiving during these situations, however, thanks to some pretty stupid artificial intelligence and Nick’s ability to, as mentioned, strafe outside of harm’s way while emptying his clips. Sooner or later you’ll hit what you were aiming at. The developers attempt to negate their stupid baddies on occasion by cheaply surrounding you, however, which is as irritating as it sounds. Still, laying out the gunfire while back or sidestepping to avoid the incoming danger lends it all that sense of desperation that it really should have. Your enemies are mean, and you don’t want them getting too close to you, et cetera, et cetera.
“Run Like Hell,” as a survival horror game, is not very scary, however. This is due in large part to the graphics engine on display, which seemingly couldn’t render a moody, tensely atmospheric sequence if it tried. The lighting throughout “RLH” is generally garish and bright, point of fact, and this outlines the failings of the graphics themselves, which are a little on the blocky side. That said, the principle characters are rendered with enough personality that they seem to overcome their ample limitations. This is not true of the aliens themselves, though, thanks to uninspired design.
Unlike other games of this ilk, at least it’s hard to get lost in “Run Like Hell.” To some, its fairly linear structure may be detrimental to the package, but I found it refreshing that I could navigate the ship’s similar-looking halls and corridors without feeling overwhelmed by not knowing where to go or what to do. The game makes this pretty clear by breaking itself into contained chapters, and keeping certain sections of the ship locked down when they’re not yet necessary. Even so, there is still room for some exploration, but if you prefer free reign then you’ll probably be disappointed by this aspect of “RLH” as well.
There’s much to frown about in this game, it’s true – and this is a fact that’s been touched on harshly by many of its critics. Regardless, there is a charm to it that is less touted, thanks to the delightfully hokey storyline, its participating characters, and gameplay that, as a whole, isn’t nearly as bad as you might think, even based on the aforementioned issues it suffers from. While some of its parts don’t function properly on their own, together they do at least conjoin into something decent and by no means unplayable (as some would have you believe). Not the most glaring praise for a video game, certainly, but there’s nothing to condemn here either. Think of “Run Like Hell” as a guilty pleasure, like that ridiculous “Mansquito” movie that aired on Sci-Fi, and you watched it despite your better judgment. Hours of your life you’ll never get back, sure, but if you’re a fan of the genre, complete with all its stereotypes, you could do worse than this.
FINAL SCORE: 6.8 (Fair)
In Retro: "Red Dead Revolver" Review (Xbox)
With "Red Dead Redemption" on the way, it seems like a good enough time to post this, my review of the first game in the "Red Dead" series circa 2004...
* * *
If you're an avid fan of the western and a gamer to boot, then "Red Dead Revolver" is the only game in town that should get a tip of your hat. Western-themed games are rare to say the least, and good ones are rarer still. This is the latter kind, and its mature themes make it even more remarkable - it's as close as you'll ever get to playing through an old Clint Eastwood film.
You're cast as Red, a bounty hunter who's seeking to avenge the murder of his parents. His quest takes him through many bizarre locations and pits him against a wide variety of murderous outlaws. It's his job to shoot first and ask questions later... then again, he doesn't really ask questions, he just shoots people and leaves it at that.
The game's levels are usually brief affairs that revolve around one particular set piece or another and are jam-packed full of people to kill. Fortunately, all that killing is mighty satisfying. There's hardly a wide variety of weapons to help you along despite the designers' best efforts to bring variety to the period setting, but the weapons that exist are cool enough to compensate. Area specific damage and gouts of blood and gore keep things visceral and compelling. Red can fire from cover if things get too hectic, but it's generally not an essential tactic - even if it is a welcome option. He's also got a Max Payne-like ability called "Dead Eye," which allows him to slow time and take steady aim at his opponents.
You don't only play as Red during the course of the game. There are several other characters and storylines to delve into, and while they sometimes steer the focus of the game's story in the wrong direction, it's generally a welcome change of pace. Red's native cousin, Shadow Wolf, enjoys a particularly entertaining mission that encourages stealth and a fair aim with a bow and arrow. Some of the other character missions feel tacked on, though - such as the Buffalo Soldier's wagon ride back to town.
What's a western-themed action game without the occasional duel? Drawing on opponents is handled like a sort of mini-game that generally fits well into the scheme of things. Unfortunately, it's too frustrating, particularly later in the game. It's more a matter of a luck than skill, and certainly could have been handled with more flair.
It's far from perfect, but "Red Dead Revolver" should provide hours of fairly mindless but addictive fun. With the lack of competition, it easily earns its place as the best western-themed game ever released. If this kind of thing rubs you the right way, go grab a copy.
FINAL SCORE: 7.9 (Good)
* * *
If you're an avid fan of the western and a gamer to boot, then "Red Dead Revolver" is the only game in town that should get a tip of your hat. Western-themed games are rare to say the least, and good ones are rarer still. This is the latter kind, and its mature themes make it even more remarkable - it's as close as you'll ever get to playing through an old Clint Eastwood film.
You're cast as Red, a bounty hunter who's seeking to avenge the murder of his parents. His quest takes him through many bizarre locations and pits him against a wide variety of murderous outlaws. It's his job to shoot first and ask questions later... then again, he doesn't really ask questions, he just shoots people and leaves it at that.
The game's levels are usually brief affairs that revolve around one particular set piece or another and are jam-packed full of people to kill. Fortunately, all that killing is mighty satisfying. There's hardly a wide variety of weapons to help you along despite the designers' best efforts to bring variety to the period setting, but the weapons that exist are cool enough to compensate. Area specific damage and gouts of blood and gore keep things visceral and compelling. Red can fire from cover if things get too hectic, but it's generally not an essential tactic - even if it is a welcome option. He's also got a Max Payne-like ability called "Dead Eye," which allows him to slow time and take steady aim at his opponents.
You don't only play as Red during the course of the game. There are several other characters and storylines to delve into, and while they sometimes steer the focus of the game's story in the wrong direction, it's generally a welcome change of pace. Red's native cousin, Shadow Wolf, enjoys a particularly entertaining mission that encourages stealth and a fair aim with a bow and arrow. Some of the other character missions feel tacked on, though - such as the Buffalo Soldier's wagon ride back to town.
What's a western-themed action game without the occasional duel? Drawing on opponents is handled like a sort of mini-game that generally fits well into the scheme of things. Unfortunately, it's too frustrating, particularly later in the game. It's more a matter of a luck than skill, and certainly could have been handled with more flair.
It's far from perfect, but "Red Dead Revolver" should provide hours of fairly mindless but addictive fun. With the lack of competition, it easily earns its place as the best western-themed game ever released. If this kind of thing rubs you the right way, go grab a copy.
FINAL SCORE: 7.9 (Good)
In Retro: "Raze's Hell" Review (Xbox)
Another old written review, one I wrote upon completing the game when it was still fairly new...
* * *
Even as a full-priced game, “Raze’s Hell” would offer something of worth to fans of third person action games. It’s got a clever premise, an original setting, a handful of unique weapons and character abilities, challenging combat, and bloody, over-the-top action in spades. When you factor in the game’s budget price tag, it’s difficult not to recommend it to fans of this genre despite its otherwise apparent faults.
In the game, you’re cast as Raze, a sort of monstrous reject from the “Starcraft” or “Warcraft” series (more like a mixture of both). His people have been ethnically cleansed by a race of unbearably cute and cuddlies that revel in their own righteous quest to purge the world of ugliness. The game’s designers take ample opportunity to criticize real world politics within the confines of this setup, and chuckles abound. Despite its “Mature” rating and some blood and carnage, however, “Raze’s Hell” knows better than to take itself too seriously. It essentially boils down to a quest for vengeance, Raze seizing every opportunity he has to off some of the most (intentionally) annoying bad guys ever seen in a video game.
Raze has at his disposal several unique means of defending himself. Early on, the most important of these is perhaps the sword blade attached to his arm, which he can use to slice and dice his adorable opponents into quivering globs of flesh. It’s not long, however, before “firearms” become essential to survival. Though only four types of ammunition can be carried at once, most of these weapons are remarkable in some way – some stand in as the game’s machine guns, flamethrowers, and shotguns, while others are completely unique and allow you to fill your foes full of helium and send them skyward. In truth these weapons are some alien form of plant life that only Raze can harness in battle. Ammunition is acquired by hacking said plants and then sucking up the glowing lights that pop out of them, and it fits in perfectly with the game’s wacky tone. Likewise, Raze can restore his health by gibbing his adversaries and then sucking up their bloody bits to restore himself.
Perhaps the coolest of Raze’s abilities, however, is his capacity to roll up into a ball “Metroid” style and race across the game’s environments. This not only alleviates traipsing to and fro in the typical third-person fashion, it also provides some of the most amusing means of killing your enemies. With good momentum going for you, you can literally roll right over them, which generally provides a hilarious image of said foe smashing against the camera like a bug splatting against a car windshield. Very nice.
Melee combat is a simple, monotonous matter of tapping the attack button and watching Raze slash his foes to bits. Ranged attacks are thankfully much more interesting to play around with, though the single player campaign hosts an unfortunate lack of diversity in terms of these weapons. Too often you’ll use very basic and very specific types of attacks because of their abundant ammunitions, even as gems like the flamethrower and others crop up far too rarely. This adds a sense of monotony to combat that is otherwise pretty frenetic and surprisingly challenging even on the easiest difficulty setting.
In fact, the game’s single greatest flaw is its repetitive nature. Each level, though complete with varying objectives, ultimately plays like the one before it, similar in layout and design. The lack of variety in terms of weapons, and enemies that you’ll soon grow accustomed to, really give this one a “fun in short spurts” kind of vibe. That said, when you keep in mind the asking price, these issues are much, much easier to forgive when you consider how fun this kind of razing hell can be in strategic doses.
“Raze’s Hell” is kind enough to pack in some pretty graphics – nothing amazing per se, but certainly colorful and adept at conveying the tone of the experience. Likewise, the music and sound effects get the job done, and some funny yet appropriately obnoxious quips from the bad guys make them pretty fun to kill on a fairly regular basis.
In the end, this is a unique and enjoyable action game that shouldn’t be overlooked despite its sometimes monotonous gameplay. Factor in the price, and that’s doubly true.
FINAL SCORE: 7.4 (Good)
* * *
Even as a full-priced game, “Raze’s Hell” would offer something of worth to fans of third person action games. It’s got a clever premise, an original setting, a handful of unique weapons and character abilities, challenging combat, and bloody, over-the-top action in spades. When you factor in the game’s budget price tag, it’s difficult not to recommend it to fans of this genre despite its otherwise apparent faults.
In the game, you’re cast as Raze, a sort of monstrous reject from the “Starcraft” or “Warcraft” series (more like a mixture of both). His people have been ethnically cleansed by a race of unbearably cute and cuddlies that revel in their own righteous quest to purge the world of ugliness. The game’s designers take ample opportunity to criticize real world politics within the confines of this setup, and chuckles abound. Despite its “Mature” rating and some blood and carnage, however, “Raze’s Hell” knows better than to take itself too seriously. It essentially boils down to a quest for vengeance, Raze seizing every opportunity he has to off some of the most (intentionally) annoying bad guys ever seen in a video game.
Raze has at his disposal several unique means of defending himself. Early on, the most important of these is perhaps the sword blade attached to his arm, which he can use to slice and dice his adorable opponents into quivering globs of flesh. It’s not long, however, before “firearms” become essential to survival. Though only four types of ammunition can be carried at once, most of these weapons are remarkable in some way – some stand in as the game’s machine guns, flamethrowers, and shotguns, while others are completely unique and allow you to fill your foes full of helium and send them skyward. In truth these weapons are some alien form of plant life that only Raze can harness in battle. Ammunition is acquired by hacking said plants and then sucking up the glowing lights that pop out of them, and it fits in perfectly with the game’s wacky tone. Likewise, Raze can restore his health by gibbing his adversaries and then sucking up their bloody bits to restore himself.
Perhaps the coolest of Raze’s abilities, however, is his capacity to roll up into a ball “Metroid” style and race across the game’s environments. This not only alleviates traipsing to and fro in the typical third-person fashion, it also provides some of the most amusing means of killing your enemies. With good momentum going for you, you can literally roll right over them, which generally provides a hilarious image of said foe smashing against the camera like a bug splatting against a car windshield. Very nice.
Melee combat is a simple, monotonous matter of tapping the attack button and watching Raze slash his foes to bits. Ranged attacks are thankfully much more interesting to play around with, though the single player campaign hosts an unfortunate lack of diversity in terms of these weapons. Too often you’ll use very basic and very specific types of attacks because of their abundant ammunitions, even as gems like the flamethrower and others crop up far too rarely. This adds a sense of monotony to combat that is otherwise pretty frenetic and surprisingly challenging even on the easiest difficulty setting.
In fact, the game’s single greatest flaw is its repetitive nature. Each level, though complete with varying objectives, ultimately plays like the one before it, similar in layout and design. The lack of variety in terms of weapons, and enemies that you’ll soon grow accustomed to, really give this one a “fun in short spurts” kind of vibe. That said, when you keep in mind the asking price, these issues are much, much easier to forgive when you consider how fun this kind of razing hell can be in strategic doses.
“Raze’s Hell” is kind enough to pack in some pretty graphics – nothing amazing per se, but certainly colorful and adept at conveying the tone of the experience. Likewise, the music and sound effects get the job done, and some funny yet appropriately obnoxious quips from the bad guys make them pretty fun to kill on a fairly regular basis.
In the end, this is a unique and enjoyable action game that shouldn’t be overlooked despite its sometimes monotonous gameplay. Factor in the price, and that’s doubly true.
FINAL SCORE: 7.4 (Good)
In Retro: "Psi-Ops" Review (Xbox)
My review of a cool and very underlooked action title circa 2004 -- that, coincidentally, had a lot in common with another similarly-themed (and likewise cool) title called "Second Sight." Just a little FYI...
* * *
Right off, let me say that “Psi-Ops” is one of those rare action games that’s so gleefully compelling you’ll be hard-pressed to put it away even when life’s responsibilities come calling. Because of that, and also in spite of that, it’s a relatively short ride. That and a few other minor issues come into play to keep it from being an instant classic, but if you think Max Payne could benefit from some Jedi-like superpowers, then “Psi-Ops” is absolutely, positively, definitely for you.
You’re cast as ex-psi-operative Nick Scryer. Like many video games heroes of late, he’s having a hard time remembering who and what he is, and why so many people would like to see him dead. The conspiracy never amounts to anything serious, but ultimately reveals our man’s heroic edge – he’s gifted with the ability to use his mind to manipulate and, ultimately, to destroy. As per usual, he’s all that stands between a madman and said madman’s bid to rule the world.
“Psi-Ops” initially plays like a standard third person shooter (think “Dead to Rights” or “Kill.switch”) and its shooter elements do the job nicely even if you surgically remove all the other elements from the game. But what ultimately keeps this one from becoming just another face in the crowd are Scryer’s psionic superpowers, which allow him to immolate, possess, and otherwise hurl his opponents around like so much paper in the wind. Many of your powers can work in unison with the game’s various firearms, but your trigger finger won’t see the same level of taxation as your in-game persona’s very effective brain. No, you as the player will only have to juggle some light puzzle-solving, but Nick’s got to use his head to get the edge on the competition.
Thankfully, “Psi-Ops” is a game that doesn’t dictate how you play it, for the most part. You might see a sniper in the distance and use your gift of telekinesis to hurl him from his perch and to the ground so many feet below, or instead you might invade his mind, turn around, shoot his comrade, and then force him into a suicidal leap even as you return to your physical body. Or maybe you could pick up that explosive barrel and lob it at him and watch the delicious explosion that ensues. Your death-dealing options are plentiful, and though you’ll probably pick a favorite firearm early on (you can only carry a pistol and one larger weapon at any given time) and lean toward a favorite special power (telekinesis, anyone?), it just never gets old. And that’s despite a few of the game’s own limitations, which force you to clash with the same types of enemies over and over again.
“Psi-Ops” isn’t perfect, though, as any avid gamer might expect. The level designs are sometimes cryptic, and too often you’ll battle your way through high tech facilities that emit an unmistakable “been there, done that” quality. Again, enemy types are few, and boss encounters, while engaging, take place in a semi-predictable fashion. Even so, the game’s only serious flaw is its length. I felt like I’d only just begun when the credits started to roll. The anti-climactic finale doesn’t serve to help matters either, it goes without saying. There are unlockable extras and even bonus missions, but a longer game would have been nice. Even so, it demands a few run-throughs.
“Psi-Ops,” like many recent games, only narrowly escapes greatness, and instead settles with being extraordinarily good. It’s just too bad the game didn’t offer a few more missions to keep you up early into the morning. Even so, it comes highly recommended, and here’s hoping the sequel promised at its conclusion lives up to its full potential.
FINAL SCORE: 7.9 (Good)
* * *
Right off, let me say that “Psi-Ops” is one of those rare action games that’s so gleefully compelling you’ll be hard-pressed to put it away even when life’s responsibilities come calling. Because of that, and also in spite of that, it’s a relatively short ride. That and a few other minor issues come into play to keep it from being an instant classic, but if you think Max Payne could benefit from some Jedi-like superpowers, then “Psi-Ops” is absolutely, positively, definitely for you.
You’re cast as ex-psi-operative Nick Scryer. Like many video games heroes of late, he’s having a hard time remembering who and what he is, and why so many people would like to see him dead. The conspiracy never amounts to anything serious, but ultimately reveals our man’s heroic edge – he’s gifted with the ability to use his mind to manipulate and, ultimately, to destroy. As per usual, he’s all that stands between a madman and said madman’s bid to rule the world.
“Psi-Ops” initially plays like a standard third person shooter (think “Dead to Rights” or “Kill.switch”) and its shooter elements do the job nicely even if you surgically remove all the other elements from the game. But what ultimately keeps this one from becoming just another face in the crowd are Scryer’s psionic superpowers, which allow him to immolate, possess, and otherwise hurl his opponents around like so much paper in the wind. Many of your powers can work in unison with the game’s various firearms, but your trigger finger won’t see the same level of taxation as your in-game persona’s very effective brain. No, you as the player will only have to juggle some light puzzle-solving, but Nick’s got to use his head to get the edge on the competition.
Thankfully, “Psi-Ops” is a game that doesn’t dictate how you play it, for the most part. You might see a sniper in the distance and use your gift of telekinesis to hurl him from his perch and to the ground so many feet below, or instead you might invade his mind, turn around, shoot his comrade, and then force him into a suicidal leap even as you return to your physical body. Or maybe you could pick up that explosive barrel and lob it at him and watch the delicious explosion that ensues. Your death-dealing options are plentiful, and though you’ll probably pick a favorite firearm early on (you can only carry a pistol and one larger weapon at any given time) and lean toward a favorite special power (telekinesis, anyone?), it just never gets old. And that’s despite a few of the game’s own limitations, which force you to clash with the same types of enemies over and over again.
“Psi-Ops” isn’t perfect, though, as any avid gamer might expect. The level designs are sometimes cryptic, and too often you’ll battle your way through high tech facilities that emit an unmistakable “been there, done that” quality. Again, enemy types are few, and boss encounters, while engaging, take place in a semi-predictable fashion. Even so, the game’s only serious flaw is its length. I felt like I’d only just begun when the credits started to roll. The anti-climactic finale doesn’t serve to help matters either, it goes without saying. There are unlockable extras and even bonus missions, but a longer game would have been nice. Even so, it demands a few run-throughs.
“Psi-Ops,” like many recent games, only narrowly escapes greatness, and instead settles with being extraordinarily good. It’s just too bad the game didn’t offer a few more missions to keep you up early into the morning. Even so, it comes highly recommended, and here’s hoping the sequel promised at its conclusion lives up to its full potential.
FINAL SCORE: 7.9 (Good)
In Retro: "Obscure" Review (Xbox)
My review of this fresh (and budget-friendly!) take on the survival horror genre circa 2005...
* * *
“Obscure” is a slick, enjoyable survival horror game that compensates for its flaws with budget appeal and a high school setting that, while trite by now in the realm of Hollywood feature films, is virgin territory for a video game. Whether or not the setting and characters suit your tastes as a gamer is entirely another matter. Even so, most fans of the survival horror experience will find something to enjoy in “Obscure.”
The storyline is a bit contrived and convoluted, ultimately boiling down to the usual illegal genetic experimentation. Predictably, this work results in horrific mutations and zombies that stalk the living. Oh well, at least the fact that all of this takes place within the confines of a high school sets it apart from all the other games recycling that premise. And like 1998’s The Faculty, it’s ultimately up to a ragtag band of grade schoolers to step up and save the day. Yes, definitely keep The Faculty in mind and see if you can’t spot the similarities – the resemblance of the hoodlum character to said feature’s Josh Hartnett being almost criminal. Despite the fact that the game’s developers are French, the depiction of American high school students is not as offensive as it could have been save for a few misfires here and there, primarily each and every character’s obsession with basketball.
Each of the five different characters represents a sort of high school archetype, such as the aforementioned hoodlum (easily the most likable of the gang), the jock (not as bad as it sounds), and the nerd (so irritating it’s hard to convince yourself to take on his mantle). They have their own personal strengths and weaknesses, most of which make sense given the nature of their characters. For instance, the jock is the strongest of the bunch while the hoodlum can pick locks. When it comes down to gunplay, however, each and every one of the five is, perhaps disturbingly, quite adapt with a firearm to the point where it’s hard to tell if any one is more qualified than another.
When all five characters are available, you can choose to play as one while a second computer-controlled companion joins you – switching back and forth between them is a snap. Unfortunately the rest of the game’s interface is a chore. Switching between weapons in times of desperate need is maddening, as is using that first aid kit before you take a final, killer blow. Compensating for this, however, is a game that’s fairly merciful in terms of its difficulty on the normal settings.
The game’s environments are quite well done, if not very subtle. You’ve never seen a high school like this one – it looks more like an insane asylum that’s been shut down for years than a place of study. Each room and location still has a functionality to it, though. None of them feel like they were designed by guys making a video game so much as guys trying to create a fairly convincing high school setting that just happens to serve as the backdrop for a video game, complete with horrific overtones. All in all, the ambience is perhaps the game’s strongest quality.
The monsters in “Obscure” are the usual sort, for the most part, but a few of them do stand out (particularly the nasties that appear later on, very H.P. Lovecraft in appearance). In any case killing them is more interesting than it might have been thanks to some satisfying weapons and, more importantly, the use of real or artificial light. Light actually harms these creatures, so taping a high-powered torch to your pump action shotgun is a good way to even the odds. Each monster comes complete with its own shadowy field, however, and only the strongest beams can break through it, making said creatures particularly vulnerable to physical attacks for a short period of time. This element gives combat a little extra something.
The puzzles in “Obscure” are boilerplate for the genre – nothing really special or mind-bending is on display here. On top of this, the game is a fairly brief affair, so gamers looking for more to sink their teeth into may want to look elsewhere. However, one of the best features of “Obscure” is its budget price. Though it would have been a decent game at normal cost, the added bonus of paying less here equals getting more, and must be factored in to any review. In other words, “Obscure” doesn’t break the mold, but it does what it does pretty well, complete with some impressive production values – and at this price, it’s hard to go wrong if you’ve even a passing interest in the material.
FINAL SCORE: 7.9 (Good)
* * *
I have since played through this game in co-op mode with a like-minded gamer friend, and, I must say, it just further sweetened the deal for me. I never played the PS2 and Wii-based sequel, but I can say, I definitely recommend this one to anyone who missed it.
* * *
“Obscure” is a slick, enjoyable survival horror game that compensates for its flaws with budget appeal and a high school setting that, while trite by now in the realm of Hollywood feature films, is virgin territory for a video game. Whether or not the setting and characters suit your tastes as a gamer is entirely another matter. Even so, most fans of the survival horror experience will find something to enjoy in “Obscure.”
The storyline is a bit contrived and convoluted, ultimately boiling down to the usual illegal genetic experimentation. Predictably, this work results in horrific mutations and zombies that stalk the living. Oh well, at least the fact that all of this takes place within the confines of a high school sets it apart from all the other games recycling that premise. And like 1998’s The Faculty, it’s ultimately up to a ragtag band of grade schoolers to step up and save the day. Yes, definitely keep The Faculty in mind and see if you can’t spot the similarities – the resemblance of the hoodlum character to said feature’s Josh Hartnett being almost criminal. Despite the fact that the game’s developers are French, the depiction of American high school students is not as offensive as it could have been save for a few misfires here and there, primarily each and every character’s obsession with basketball.
Each of the five different characters represents a sort of high school archetype, such as the aforementioned hoodlum (easily the most likable of the gang), the jock (not as bad as it sounds), and the nerd (so irritating it’s hard to convince yourself to take on his mantle). They have their own personal strengths and weaknesses, most of which make sense given the nature of their characters. For instance, the jock is the strongest of the bunch while the hoodlum can pick locks. When it comes down to gunplay, however, each and every one of the five is, perhaps disturbingly, quite adapt with a firearm to the point where it’s hard to tell if any one is more qualified than another.
When all five characters are available, you can choose to play as one while a second computer-controlled companion joins you – switching back and forth between them is a snap. Unfortunately the rest of the game’s interface is a chore. Switching between weapons in times of desperate need is maddening, as is using that first aid kit before you take a final, killer blow. Compensating for this, however, is a game that’s fairly merciful in terms of its difficulty on the normal settings.
The game’s environments are quite well done, if not very subtle. You’ve never seen a high school like this one – it looks more like an insane asylum that’s been shut down for years than a place of study. Each room and location still has a functionality to it, though. None of them feel like they were designed by guys making a video game so much as guys trying to create a fairly convincing high school setting that just happens to serve as the backdrop for a video game, complete with horrific overtones. All in all, the ambience is perhaps the game’s strongest quality.
The monsters in “Obscure” are the usual sort, for the most part, but a few of them do stand out (particularly the nasties that appear later on, very H.P. Lovecraft in appearance). In any case killing them is more interesting than it might have been thanks to some satisfying weapons and, more importantly, the use of real or artificial light. Light actually harms these creatures, so taping a high-powered torch to your pump action shotgun is a good way to even the odds. Each monster comes complete with its own shadowy field, however, and only the strongest beams can break through it, making said creatures particularly vulnerable to physical attacks for a short period of time. This element gives combat a little extra something.
The puzzles in “Obscure” are boilerplate for the genre – nothing really special or mind-bending is on display here. On top of this, the game is a fairly brief affair, so gamers looking for more to sink their teeth into may want to look elsewhere. However, one of the best features of “Obscure” is its budget price. Though it would have been a decent game at normal cost, the added bonus of paying less here equals getting more, and must be factored in to any review. In other words, “Obscure” doesn’t break the mold, but it does what it does pretty well, complete with some impressive production values – and at this price, it’s hard to go wrong if you’ve even a passing interest in the material.
FINAL SCORE: 7.9 (Good)
* * *
I have since played through this game in co-op mode with a like-minded gamer friend, and, I must say, it just further sweetened the deal for me. I never played the PS2 and Wii-based sequel, but I can say, I definitely recommend this one to anyone who missed it.
In Retro: "Nano Breaker" Review (PS2)
My review of said game circa 2005...
* * *
Produced by the man behind “Castlevania: Lament of Innocence,” “Nano Breaker” successfully takes that game’s formula and carries it over into more absurd science fiction territory, complete with all of its parent game’s problems and a few extra ones as well.
The story is more of the usual anime-style fluff that you’re probably well accustomed to. It involves a cyborg named Jake, a rival cyborg called Keith, a crazy old scientist and his hot blonde of a daughter, genetic engineering, and military corruption – the usual, in other words, but done with less charm than other stories of this ilk. If the plotline is a deal-breaker, then consider this one broken. It’s completely predictable in every way and lacks interesting characters that might have rescued it from mediocrity. At least the rendered cut-scenes are of splendid quality, and here and there offer some entertainment value (primarily the gory opening and the amusing but tonally inconsistent finale). At any rate, the catastrophe that forces you to kill countless monsters is your basic “Resident Evil” with nanomachines (instead of the usual viruses and plagues), and that’s as creative as this one gets.
The game itself, however, does offer some repetitive fun of the hack-and-slash variety. Jake is armed with a powerful, shape-shifting plasma blade that, while generally in the guise of a broad sword, can, with the appropriate combos, transform into a scythe, an axe, or even a whip-like extension that can jerk enemies into the fray. Only the whip is ever truly useful, however, as attempting the more complex combos in the thick of things can lead to certain death – swift strokes or thrusts with the sword get the job done. Although the game hopes to encourage the player to really go full-bore with these combos (even allowing a combo upgrade system), it’s never necessary to do so, and is sometimes even detrimental.
Fortunately, the combat is relatively fun, if not overly complex. Much of this is owed to the copious amounts of blood that gush from wounded and slain monsters, making the red geysers in “Kill Bill” seem realistic by comparison. Control over Jake is sharp and responsive, and it can be cathartic to hack your enemies to bits. Of course, at several points in the game you don’t even have to do this, as you can simply run past your slow, dim-witted opponents and make for the next corridor or room without a backward glance. This was also true in “Lament of Innocence,” and it’s an inherent flaw in both games’ design. There are points where melee is unavoidable thanks to barriers that dissipate only when all the area’s monsters have been slain, but these circumstances are fewer and further between.
In “Lament of Innocence,” lots of needless backtracking and enemy respawning crept up to detract from the experience, and these issues remain in “Nano Breaker,” and, in fact, are amplified. The layout of the game is far more confusing than in the aforementioned, and there are several points where you’ll have to run from point A all the way to point B without encountering anything new that wasn’t there the first time – a recipe for tedium, as always.
“Nano Breaker” is, in a word, unremarkable. There’s absolutely nothing about its design or presentation that makes it stand out (save perhaps the gallons of blood). Still, the hacking and slashing and overall goofiness of the concept keep it more entertaining than it probably should be, and there are the usual impressive Konami bosses to break things up and keep the game challenging – but can it be recommended wholeheartedly? Like “Lament of Innocence,” absolutely not.
FINAL SCORE: 6.3 (Fair)
* * *
Produced by the man behind “Castlevania: Lament of Innocence,” “Nano Breaker” successfully takes that game’s formula and carries it over into more absurd science fiction territory, complete with all of its parent game’s problems and a few extra ones as well.
The story is more of the usual anime-style fluff that you’re probably well accustomed to. It involves a cyborg named Jake, a rival cyborg called Keith, a crazy old scientist and his hot blonde of a daughter, genetic engineering, and military corruption – the usual, in other words, but done with less charm than other stories of this ilk. If the plotline is a deal-breaker, then consider this one broken. It’s completely predictable in every way and lacks interesting characters that might have rescued it from mediocrity. At least the rendered cut-scenes are of splendid quality, and here and there offer some entertainment value (primarily the gory opening and the amusing but tonally inconsistent finale). At any rate, the catastrophe that forces you to kill countless monsters is your basic “Resident Evil” with nanomachines (instead of the usual viruses and plagues), and that’s as creative as this one gets.
The game itself, however, does offer some repetitive fun of the hack-and-slash variety. Jake is armed with a powerful, shape-shifting plasma blade that, while generally in the guise of a broad sword, can, with the appropriate combos, transform into a scythe, an axe, or even a whip-like extension that can jerk enemies into the fray. Only the whip is ever truly useful, however, as attempting the more complex combos in the thick of things can lead to certain death – swift strokes or thrusts with the sword get the job done. Although the game hopes to encourage the player to really go full-bore with these combos (even allowing a combo upgrade system), it’s never necessary to do so, and is sometimes even detrimental.
Fortunately, the combat is relatively fun, if not overly complex. Much of this is owed to the copious amounts of blood that gush from wounded and slain monsters, making the red geysers in “Kill Bill” seem realistic by comparison. Control over Jake is sharp and responsive, and it can be cathartic to hack your enemies to bits. Of course, at several points in the game you don’t even have to do this, as you can simply run past your slow, dim-witted opponents and make for the next corridor or room without a backward glance. This was also true in “Lament of Innocence,” and it’s an inherent flaw in both games’ design. There are points where melee is unavoidable thanks to barriers that dissipate only when all the area’s monsters have been slain, but these circumstances are fewer and further between.
In “Lament of Innocence,” lots of needless backtracking and enemy respawning crept up to detract from the experience, and these issues remain in “Nano Breaker,” and, in fact, are amplified. The layout of the game is far more confusing than in the aforementioned, and there are several points where you’ll have to run from point A all the way to point B without encountering anything new that wasn’t there the first time – a recipe for tedium, as always.
“Nano Breaker” is, in a word, unremarkable. There’s absolutely nothing about its design or presentation that makes it stand out (save perhaps the gallons of blood). Still, the hacking and slashing and overall goofiness of the concept keep it more entertaining than it probably should be, and there are the usual impressive Konami bosses to break things up and keep the game challenging – but can it be recommended wholeheartedly? Like “Lament of Innocence,” absolutely not.
FINAL SCORE: 6.3 (Fair)
"Terminator: Salvation" Review (PS3)
"Terminator." Is there a better science fiction franchise out there? Not in my book. Since the original flick when I was a mere tot, I've been wildly, madly in love with this series. And then came 2009's "Terminator: Salvation," which couldn't quite destroy the franchise despite a script that lacked common sense and failed to touch upon the humanity of the first two films (or even the third). Having said that, I was not excited about the video game adaptation that was forthcoming. But I suffered through those horrible games based on "Terminator 3" back in the day, so I figured, "What the hell? I'll give it a shot."
I was surprised. Why, you ask? Because despite its shortcomings, "Salvation" is a pretty damn decent action game. Hell, it's better than the movie upon which it's based (which I liked okay, for the record, but didn't love), as it serves as a sort of prequel pitting John Connor and company against an army of machines (what else?) as they try to pull off a near-impossible rescue of their comrades trapped behind enemy lines. The plot is simple and to the point, but just good enough to work for an action game. I'm just glad the devs didn't try to shoehorn the film's plot into the video game format, something that rarely if ever works.
Gameplay wise, this is a definite "Gears of War" clone. But hey, it's a good one. The controls are tight and well executed, the weapons do what they're supposed to do in a rather satisfying way, and, best of all, the tone of the films is presented quite well. And when I say films, I don't mean merely the latest installment -- the game manages to feel truer to its roots than that movie for many reasons. For one, it focuses, as it should, on the exploits of John Connor. More importantly, it captures the gritty desperation of a world in which the nuclear bombs have dropped and the last traces of humanity vie for control over a post-apocalyptic Los Angeles, fighting tooth and nail against the machines for dominance. As an added bonus, this longtime "Terminator" fan was thrilled that most of the game's soundtrack seemed truer to the scores in the original films rather than the bastardized music presented in parts 3 and 4.
Okay, sorry, I'm geeking out a bit too much. If you're not a "Terminator" fan to begin with, though, why even consider playing this game, or even reading this review? The point is, the game manages to feel like the source material, and that's no small fete when it comes to lisenced tie-ins.
The single player campaign can be played solo, or co-op with a friend (again, just like "Gears"). One major complaint that can be leveled against it is its lack of enemy variety. Too often you'll find yourself battling the same ole spider bots and Aerostadts (bee-like flying machines). Granted, the spiders at least force you to use some very interesting flanking tactics, as they can only be damaged by small arms fire if their backs are turned, but it would have been nice to see more T-600's (think Arnold with his skin flayed off). Also, while the T-600's certainly qualify as being hard to kill, it would have been nice if they absorbed even more damage before giving up the ghost (so to speak). After all, we all remember how hard these bastards were to bring down in the movies! But hey, I'm geeking out again, and that's just a nitpick.
For my money, the game's only serious flaw as a "Terminator" fanboy is its length -- which, I have to admit, is criminally short if you're intent on paying sixty bones (which I believe was the price point upon the game's initial release in the summer of '09.) Well, that and the fact that John Connor looks nothing like either actors Nick Stahl nor Christian Bale, and instead does for the character with that generic replacement of Matt Damon did for Jason Bourne in his most recent video game adaptation ("The Bourne Conspiracy"). But hey, we're just splitting hairs now.
The question is, are you a fan of the movies? Yes? Okay, so can you find a used copy of this game for about $25? Good. Do yourself a favor and buy it. Just don't expect the experience to last as long as it should have.
FINAL SCORE: 7.1 (Good)
I was surprised. Why, you ask? Because despite its shortcomings, "Salvation" is a pretty damn decent action game. Hell, it's better than the movie upon which it's based (which I liked okay, for the record, but didn't love), as it serves as a sort of prequel pitting John Connor and company against an army of machines (what else?) as they try to pull off a near-impossible rescue of their comrades trapped behind enemy lines. The plot is simple and to the point, but just good enough to work for an action game. I'm just glad the devs didn't try to shoehorn the film's plot into the video game format, something that rarely if ever works.
Gameplay wise, this is a definite "Gears of War" clone. But hey, it's a good one. The controls are tight and well executed, the weapons do what they're supposed to do in a rather satisfying way, and, best of all, the tone of the films is presented quite well. And when I say films, I don't mean merely the latest installment -- the game manages to feel truer to its roots than that movie for many reasons. For one, it focuses, as it should, on the exploits of John Connor. More importantly, it captures the gritty desperation of a world in which the nuclear bombs have dropped and the last traces of humanity vie for control over a post-apocalyptic Los Angeles, fighting tooth and nail against the machines for dominance. As an added bonus, this longtime "Terminator" fan was thrilled that most of the game's soundtrack seemed truer to the scores in the original films rather than the bastardized music presented in parts 3 and 4.
Okay, sorry, I'm geeking out a bit too much. If you're not a "Terminator" fan to begin with, though, why even consider playing this game, or even reading this review? The point is, the game manages to feel like the source material, and that's no small fete when it comes to lisenced tie-ins.
The single player campaign can be played solo, or co-op with a friend (again, just like "Gears"). One major complaint that can be leveled against it is its lack of enemy variety. Too often you'll find yourself battling the same ole spider bots and Aerostadts (bee-like flying machines). Granted, the spiders at least force you to use some very interesting flanking tactics, as they can only be damaged by small arms fire if their backs are turned, but it would have been nice to see more T-600's (think Arnold with his skin flayed off). Also, while the T-600's certainly qualify as being hard to kill, it would have been nice if they absorbed even more damage before giving up the ghost (so to speak). After all, we all remember how hard these bastards were to bring down in the movies! But hey, I'm geeking out again, and that's just a nitpick.
For my money, the game's only serious flaw as a "Terminator" fanboy is its length -- which, I have to admit, is criminally short if you're intent on paying sixty bones (which I believe was the price point upon the game's initial release in the summer of '09.) Well, that and the fact that John Connor looks nothing like either actors Nick Stahl nor Christian Bale, and instead does for the character with that generic replacement of Matt Damon did for Jason Bourne in his most recent video game adaptation ("The Bourne Conspiracy"). But hey, we're just splitting hairs now.
The question is, are you a fan of the movies? Yes? Okay, so can you find a used copy of this game for about $25? Good. Do yourself a favor and buy it. Just don't expect the experience to last as long as it should have.
FINAL SCORE: 7.1 (Good)
In Retro: "Gladiator: Sword of Vengeance" Review (PS2)
My review of this blood-soaked action game circa 2003...
* * *
Ancient Rome and its barbaric gladiatorial arenas have intrigued scholars of history and laymen alike for countless years. Films like “Sparticus,” “Ben Hur,” and the more recent “Gladiator” have captured this period, and the phenomenon of Roman gladiators, in exciting form, but video games have only just begun to jump on the bandwagon – which is strange, since the setting lends itself so incredibly well to the medium. Unfortunately, most of those games have been disappointing, or just plain bad. “Gladiator: Sword of Vengeance” breaks the mold by delivering a solid, action-oriented take on the material.
The game owes more than a passing debt to Ridley Scott’s year 2000 epic, the aforementioned “Gladiator,” from which it borrows its visual style and much of its storyline. However, “Sword of Vengeance” includes elements of the mythic and supernatural, which will pit you, as the gladiator Invictus Thrax, against titans, deathless warriors, even gods. The story is a little thin, but it’s still compelling and provides sufficient incentive.
First, let me just say that “Sword of Vengeance” is a real looker. The graphics are splendid. In fact, the game features unusually solid production values all around. Even the voice acting is excellent, thanks in no small part to Sean Pertwee, the professional actor who voices Thrax. The game’s musical accompaniment is all quite good for the most part, and so are the sound effects that accompany the action.
Now that the superficialities are out of the way, it’s time to get into the gameplay. In many ways, “Sword of Vengeance” is a sort of cutting edge ancestor to classic beat-‘em-up games like “Double Dragon” or “Final Fight.” You’re forced down a fairly linear path from which you can scarcely deviate, and during that time you must pummel virtually everything that moves. Enemy gladiators, animated skeletons, and other creatures will attack in waves, and they will die in waves. Thankfully, combat, the very engine that drives the game, is quite satisfying. It is all melee-based, and it’s suitably brutal (in keeping with the game’s theme). Thrax will eventually be able to pick from three distinct weapons (sword, axe, or gauntlet blades), and each is significantly different than the other. The axe, for example, is slower than the sword but more powerful, and the gauntlet blades are faster but less damaging than the sword or axe. Three weapons may not seem like a lot, but you will frequently find upgrades to each weapon type that will increase that weapon’s potency. Besides that, Thrax builds skill with experience. For example, if you favor the sword, it will become more powerful in Thrax’s hands. If you neglect the axe, it will become harder to wield as the game progresses. Some magical powers also step in to spice up the combat, and do a fairly good job of it.
Unfortunately, the game’s targeting system is flawed. It is far too difficult to lock onto and engage a particular opponent in the midst of a crowded melee, and sometimes, for whatever reason, the game forces you to strike immobile objects during the fray, which is often a needlessly frustrating exorcise. Worse, it draws attention to the faulty targeting system. It’s also worth noting that while Thrax can employ some very devastating and satisfying combos, it’s often easier, and smarter, to just rap the square button, as it seems to provoke the swiftest, most powerful assault. That means the combat can become very repetitive, especially since there’s so much of it.
“Sword of Vengeance” also suffers from some lopsided level design. The game begins and ends in the Roman coliseum, complete with cheering crowds and flesh-and-blood gladiators, and it’s very stirring stuff. Strangely, most of the game takes place outside of the hustle and bustle of Rome, and most of the enemies you face are not human. I found human opponents and a public arena far preferable to the game’s middle portion, which sends you traipsing through half-deserted, same-looking wastelands killing monsters and skeletons. That’s not to say the middle section of the game is bad, but it pales in comparison to the epic gladiatorial conflicts that fall on either side of it.
Boss encounters in the game are a not-so-welcome diversion from the kind of fighting you would rather be doing. What’s more, there are really only two boss characters in the game, and both of them require similar, repetitive tactics to defeat. The endgame confrontation was a complete letdown as well.
All in all, though, “Gladiator: Sword of Vengeance” is a slick-looking action game that is well worth playing, especially if you’re a hack-and-slash/beat-‘em-up fan, but it doesn’t quite live up to its potential. The setting, when utilized, is wonderful, but is ultimately underplayed. Still, it was a good romp, and I enjoyed most of it.
FINAL SCORE: 7.7 (Good)
* * *
Ancient Rome and its barbaric gladiatorial arenas have intrigued scholars of history and laymen alike for countless years. Films like “Sparticus,” “Ben Hur,” and the more recent “Gladiator” have captured this period, and the phenomenon of Roman gladiators, in exciting form, but video games have only just begun to jump on the bandwagon – which is strange, since the setting lends itself so incredibly well to the medium. Unfortunately, most of those games have been disappointing, or just plain bad. “Gladiator: Sword of Vengeance” breaks the mold by delivering a solid, action-oriented take on the material.
The game owes more than a passing debt to Ridley Scott’s year 2000 epic, the aforementioned “Gladiator,” from which it borrows its visual style and much of its storyline. However, “Sword of Vengeance” includes elements of the mythic and supernatural, which will pit you, as the gladiator Invictus Thrax, against titans, deathless warriors, even gods. The story is a little thin, but it’s still compelling and provides sufficient incentive.
First, let me just say that “Sword of Vengeance” is a real looker. The graphics are splendid. In fact, the game features unusually solid production values all around. Even the voice acting is excellent, thanks in no small part to Sean Pertwee, the professional actor who voices Thrax. The game’s musical accompaniment is all quite good for the most part, and so are the sound effects that accompany the action.
Now that the superficialities are out of the way, it’s time to get into the gameplay. In many ways, “Sword of Vengeance” is a sort of cutting edge ancestor to classic beat-‘em-up games like “Double Dragon” or “Final Fight.” You’re forced down a fairly linear path from which you can scarcely deviate, and during that time you must pummel virtually everything that moves. Enemy gladiators, animated skeletons, and other creatures will attack in waves, and they will die in waves. Thankfully, combat, the very engine that drives the game, is quite satisfying. It is all melee-based, and it’s suitably brutal (in keeping with the game’s theme). Thrax will eventually be able to pick from three distinct weapons (sword, axe, or gauntlet blades), and each is significantly different than the other. The axe, for example, is slower than the sword but more powerful, and the gauntlet blades are faster but less damaging than the sword or axe. Three weapons may not seem like a lot, but you will frequently find upgrades to each weapon type that will increase that weapon’s potency. Besides that, Thrax builds skill with experience. For example, if you favor the sword, it will become more powerful in Thrax’s hands. If you neglect the axe, it will become harder to wield as the game progresses. Some magical powers also step in to spice up the combat, and do a fairly good job of it.
Unfortunately, the game’s targeting system is flawed. It is far too difficult to lock onto and engage a particular opponent in the midst of a crowded melee, and sometimes, for whatever reason, the game forces you to strike immobile objects during the fray, which is often a needlessly frustrating exorcise. Worse, it draws attention to the faulty targeting system. It’s also worth noting that while Thrax can employ some very devastating and satisfying combos, it’s often easier, and smarter, to just rap the square button, as it seems to provoke the swiftest, most powerful assault. That means the combat can become very repetitive, especially since there’s so much of it.
“Sword of Vengeance” also suffers from some lopsided level design. The game begins and ends in the Roman coliseum, complete with cheering crowds and flesh-and-blood gladiators, and it’s very stirring stuff. Strangely, most of the game takes place outside of the hustle and bustle of Rome, and most of the enemies you face are not human. I found human opponents and a public arena far preferable to the game’s middle portion, which sends you traipsing through half-deserted, same-looking wastelands killing monsters and skeletons. That’s not to say the middle section of the game is bad, but it pales in comparison to the epic gladiatorial conflicts that fall on either side of it.
Boss encounters in the game are a not-so-welcome diversion from the kind of fighting you would rather be doing. What’s more, there are really only two boss characters in the game, and both of them require similar, repetitive tactics to defeat. The endgame confrontation was a complete letdown as well.
All in all, though, “Gladiator: Sword of Vengeance” is a slick-looking action game that is well worth playing, especially if you’re a hack-and-slash/beat-‘em-up fan, but it doesn’t quite live up to its potential. The setting, when utilized, is wonderful, but is ultimately underplayed. Still, it was a good romp, and I enjoyed most of it.
FINAL SCORE: 7.7 (Good)
In Retro: "Genji: Dawn of the Samurai" Review (PS2)
Though I have played the PS3 exclusive "Genji: Days of the Blade," I must say, it certainly earned its reputation as being a not-great launch title for the aforementioned system. A thoroughly disappointing sequel to "Dawn of the Samurai," a game which, I must confess, I was quite fond of when I reviewed it in 2005...
* * *
"Genji: Dawn of the Samurai" takes a cue or two from the "Onimusha" playbook, though it actually exceeds the two latest entries in that series. Yes, it's another samurai hack and slash on a PS2 full of 'em, but it's easily one of the best. If you are at all a fan of such action games, or just action games in general, you would be remiss if you skipped "Genji."
The storyline centers around a young samurai and his hulking sidekick as they embark on a mission to collect power-granting magic orbs and defeat the bad guys who would use said orbs to gain ultimate power and bring fuedal Japan to the brink of chaos. This too is standard stuff on the surface, but one peek beneath and there's actually something far more interesting going on. The plot, though ultimately disposable and perhaps a little too long-winded for its own good, is solid and lacks the hyper melodrama found in most games in the genre -- and that's a blessing in its own right!
"Genji" grants you the option of playing as either the aforementioned young samurai, who is speed and finesse incarnate, or his gigantic companion, who makes up for what he lacks in both speed and finesse with titanic strength. The combat in the game is responsive and satisfying, especially when you factor in the special focus mode that allows you, if you're reflexes are sharp enough, to instantly kill several opponents with one good stroke. It's good stuff, to be sure.
The graphics on display are crisp and stylish, even if they do portray a fantastic, slightly anime style ancient Japan that we've already seen before countless times. The sounds effects do their job admirably as well, accompanied by some music that fits the themes of the game perfectly. Excellent cinematics further round out the impressive production values.
The game's primary weakness is its length. This one doesn't last all that long. And, again, the samurai hack-and-slash is a derivative action sub-genre that holds very few surprises. That said, if you're a fan of these types of games, don't miss this one. It delivers where most falter and languish in mediocrity.
FINAL SCORE: 7.9 (Good)
* * *
"Genji: Dawn of the Samurai" takes a cue or two from the "Onimusha" playbook, though it actually exceeds the two latest entries in that series. Yes, it's another samurai hack and slash on a PS2 full of 'em, but it's easily one of the best. If you are at all a fan of such action games, or just action games in general, you would be remiss if you skipped "Genji."
The storyline centers around a young samurai and his hulking sidekick as they embark on a mission to collect power-granting magic orbs and defeat the bad guys who would use said orbs to gain ultimate power and bring fuedal Japan to the brink of chaos. This too is standard stuff on the surface, but one peek beneath and there's actually something far more interesting going on. The plot, though ultimately disposable and perhaps a little too long-winded for its own good, is solid and lacks the hyper melodrama found in most games in the genre -- and that's a blessing in its own right!
"Genji" grants you the option of playing as either the aforementioned young samurai, who is speed and finesse incarnate, or his gigantic companion, who makes up for what he lacks in both speed and finesse with titanic strength. The combat in the game is responsive and satisfying, especially when you factor in the special focus mode that allows you, if you're reflexes are sharp enough, to instantly kill several opponents with one good stroke. It's good stuff, to be sure.
The graphics on display are crisp and stylish, even if they do portray a fantastic, slightly anime style ancient Japan that we've already seen before countless times. The sounds effects do their job admirably as well, accompanied by some music that fits the themes of the game perfectly. Excellent cinematics further round out the impressive production values.
The game's primary weakness is its length. This one doesn't last all that long. And, again, the samurai hack-and-slash is a derivative action sub-genre that holds very few surprises. That said, if you're a fan of these types of games, don't miss this one. It delivers where most falter and languish in mediocrity.
FINAL SCORE: 7.9 (Good)
In Retro: "Dungeons & Dragons: Heroes" Review (Xbox)
My review of said game circa 2003...
* * *
“Baldur’s Gate: Dark Alliance,” despite bearing the “Baldur’s Gate” name, was more of a hack-and-slash game in the “Gauntlet” vein than anything as grand or complex as its Dungeons & Dragons heritage might have suggested. Even so, it made for a very fine game, and a quite successful one to boot. Well, all successful games have their imitators, and so “Dungeons & Dragons: Heroes” was born. If “Dark Alliance” was thin on roleplaying, then “Heroes” is downright skeletal. It bears even more of a resemblance to “Gauntlet” than its predecessor… but it’s actually a solid game, despite its flaws.
You get to pick from four different hero types at the beginning of the game (fighter, wizard, rogue, or cleric), you give that character a name, and you’re on your way into the realm of Bael, where an evil wizard is rising to overthrow all that is good and just in the world. A familiar setup, to be sure – yet it gets the job done, particularly since the storyline is clearly not much of an emphasis in the game. Even so, the game’s animated cutscenes are quite well rendered, and convey that tiny sliver of story in an entertaining fashion. The rest of the time, you roam the world in a way that’s highly reminiscent of “Gauntlet” or the aforementioned “Dark Alliance,” except now you have complete control over the game’s camera. You can rotate your view or zoom in or out to your heart’s content. Even so, it tends to be a bit of a hassle, particularly in the cooperative mode. It doesn’t help that playing from the furthest zoom makes you and your enemies so tiny you can barely see what’s happening, or that at the closest zoom the walls and other bits of scenery can completely obscure your vision in the midst of a brutal fight.
Camera niggles aside, the action is well-handled for a game of this type. There are a thousand monsters waiting to throw themselves at your sword, and hacking, slashing, and casting your way through them can be quite enjoyable. The enemies are many and varied, and in later levels become rather challenging (despite the game’s overall simplicity, I mean, but more on that in a second). Each area of the game comes complete with a nasty boss monster as well, and even though they’re exactly what you would expect from a D&D game (beholder, dragon, lich, etc.), they make for some exciting battles. Even so, I never once failed to destroy one of these end level baddies on my first attempt. In fact, I never died only to find myself having to restart from my last saved game, and that’s because the game is so generous with gold that you can literally build a surplus of health potions and continues (or special items that allow you to resurrect on the spot). So despite the swarming opponents you’ll face, you’ll never feel all that threatened. That can be good or bad, I suppose, depending on how you look at it, but because the game is so easy it also feels very short.
The whole thing gets off to a bad start. The first cavernous area you’re forced to explore is the very definition of bland. The next area, which comprises the forest just outside of Castle Bael, is a little better, but not by much, and the aforementioned fortress stronghold isn’t anything to write home about either. Even so, things do start to get a whole lot better as you progress. Even though it’s more than a little contrived, you’ll eventually wander through an ice-encrusted snowscape, a fiery ironworks, and a pyramid-spattered jungle. The variety is nice and makes you forget just how boring the first few episodes actually were.
In the end, I liked “Dungeons & Dragons: Heroes.” If you’re a fan of “Dark Alliance,” this is a good way to spend your time until “Dark Alliance II” comes out. “Gauntlet” fans should also take notice. Still, it has its share of problems, and does not match the quality of either game previously mentioned.
FINAL SCORE: 7.2 (Good)
* * *
“Baldur’s Gate: Dark Alliance,” despite bearing the “Baldur’s Gate” name, was more of a hack-and-slash game in the “Gauntlet” vein than anything as grand or complex as its Dungeons & Dragons heritage might have suggested. Even so, it made for a very fine game, and a quite successful one to boot. Well, all successful games have their imitators, and so “Dungeons & Dragons: Heroes” was born. If “Dark Alliance” was thin on roleplaying, then “Heroes” is downright skeletal. It bears even more of a resemblance to “Gauntlet” than its predecessor… but it’s actually a solid game, despite its flaws.
You get to pick from four different hero types at the beginning of the game (fighter, wizard, rogue, or cleric), you give that character a name, and you’re on your way into the realm of Bael, where an evil wizard is rising to overthrow all that is good and just in the world. A familiar setup, to be sure – yet it gets the job done, particularly since the storyline is clearly not much of an emphasis in the game. Even so, the game’s animated cutscenes are quite well rendered, and convey that tiny sliver of story in an entertaining fashion. The rest of the time, you roam the world in a way that’s highly reminiscent of “Gauntlet” or the aforementioned “Dark Alliance,” except now you have complete control over the game’s camera. You can rotate your view or zoom in or out to your heart’s content. Even so, it tends to be a bit of a hassle, particularly in the cooperative mode. It doesn’t help that playing from the furthest zoom makes you and your enemies so tiny you can barely see what’s happening, or that at the closest zoom the walls and other bits of scenery can completely obscure your vision in the midst of a brutal fight.
Camera niggles aside, the action is well-handled for a game of this type. There are a thousand monsters waiting to throw themselves at your sword, and hacking, slashing, and casting your way through them can be quite enjoyable. The enemies are many and varied, and in later levels become rather challenging (despite the game’s overall simplicity, I mean, but more on that in a second). Each area of the game comes complete with a nasty boss monster as well, and even though they’re exactly what you would expect from a D&D game (beholder, dragon, lich, etc.), they make for some exciting battles. Even so, I never once failed to destroy one of these end level baddies on my first attempt. In fact, I never died only to find myself having to restart from my last saved game, and that’s because the game is so generous with gold that you can literally build a surplus of health potions and continues (or special items that allow you to resurrect on the spot). So despite the swarming opponents you’ll face, you’ll never feel all that threatened. That can be good or bad, I suppose, depending on how you look at it, but because the game is so easy it also feels very short.
The whole thing gets off to a bad start. The first cavernous area you’re forced to explore is the very definition of bland. The next area, which comprises the forest just outside of Castle Bael, is a little better, but not by much, and the aforementioned fortress stronghold isn’t anything to write home about either. Even so, things do start to get a whole lot better as you progress. Even though it’s more than a little contrived, you’ll eventually wander through an ice-encrusted snowscape, a fiery ironworks, and a pyramid-spattered jungle. The variety is nice and makes you forget just how boring the first few episodes actually were.
In the end, I liked “Dungeons & Dragons: Heroes.” If you’re a fan of “Dark Alliance,” this is a good way to spend your time until “Dark Alliance II” comes out. “Gauntlet” fans should also take notice. Still, it has its share of problems, and does not match the quality of either game previously mentioned.
FINAL SCORE: 7.2 (Good)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)