With my newly made preorder of Dead Space 2 came this rather interesting little downloadable title. Taking place right before Dead Space 2, Ignition is for the most part a series of 3 different types of minigames with motion comics as cutscenes in-between. There are also 4 different "paths" for you to follow through the game depending on some choices you make about where to take your character.
The story follows Franco, an engineer, and your trusty cop companion Sarah across the Sprawl right before the events of Dead Space 2. As an engineer you are tasked with performing various types of hacks to repair things that have started falling apart, apparently by sabotage. Soon enough the Necros start popping up and it's up to you to hack your way through doors and other various helpful things while Sarah holds off the Necros.
It's about as boring as it sounds.
There's a kind of 2D race/obstacle game where you guide a constantly forward moving red dot past obstacles which slow you down while avoiding other dots that can knock you to the sides, impede your way, or even reverse the controls on you. You have some tools at your disposal too, including boosting along with the things the other dots do to you. Basically you run the course and hope to get to the end before the other dots.
Then there's the least difficult one, which is kind of like being at the opposite end of a tower defense game. You are given several types of viruses which you must then send out to try to destroy everything in your path and destroy this green terminal at the end. Especially later on once you've got the super virus which turns turrets against other turrets this game becomes more about just pumping out viruses and waiting until they reach the end than anything else. Technically there's a limit to the amount you can release at any one time, but they get destroyed at such a fast rate (and even if they don't your energy replenishes quite quickly) that it will never hinder you.
The one I had the most trouble with were the hardware hacks, which are essentially laser redirection puzzles. You're given a certain amount of reflectors that you have to place in a certain way so as to point the green light into the green receptacles, the red light into red, and eventually combine green and red light to make yellow go into yellow. It's more complicated than it looks, and eventually I just resorted to walkthroughs because it really wasn't worth it.
Okay, you may say, so the puzzles are real bad. Is the story at least worth the playthrough?
Nope. For one, the motion comic style might have been cool, but the animation, especially the motion part of the animation, is so poorly drawn that I often found my eyes drifting away and just listening to the dialogue because it was so bad. On top of that, the ending comes out of the blue, and while I'm sure it will set the stage for Dead Space 2, the rest of the game provides absolutely no explanation for why it happens. You spend practically the entire game running away from Necros. Depending on which path you choose there are some interesting variations on how you get to that end point, but the why of how you get there remains completely elusive. **SPOILER...KIND OF** Franco is fairly obviously a follower of the church of unitology, which looks to the Necros as what prophecy foretells as the path to immortality. So he gets these cryptic messages throughout the game from someone mysterious, which eventually set him towards the psychiatric ward of a medical building (Sarah has died along the way) where none other than Isaac Clarke resides in what appears to be a stasis pod. Franco hacks into the terminal and starts the sequence to set Isaac free, and then the game ends. Whoopdedoo. It is almost assuredly in this series of stasis pods that the Dead Space 2 demo begins. **END SPOILER**
So basically, if you preorder Dead Space 2, you might as well play this and get what little kicks you can out of it. There are some leaderboards if you care enough about these minigames to do anything about it. But under no circumstances should you pay the $5 retail price. It's worth the free pricetag, but no more. It's quite sad because this could've been an interesting way to set up Dead Space 2 and build excitement for it, like what I hear Case West did for Dead Rising 2. Instead it's a lackluster mess that barely earns its name as a prequel.
Dead Space Ignition gets a 3/10.
Monday, December 27, 2010
A slew of demos
So on a whim I decided to download some newly released and some older demos to see if I wanted to spend my new found Christmas money on them. First up:
Castlevania: Lords of Shadow. I already kind of figured from the look of this game, and the fact that I had never played a Castlevania game before, that it wouldn't be for me, yet it was getting good reviews so I figured I'd take a shot and give it a look over. Now, I understand demos are almost always poor representations of the full game, but frankly it seemed like just another mindless hack and slash, though admittedly the controls were tight. Still, looked fairly boring.
Star Wars: Force Unleashed 2. Oddly enough, playing this demo felt eerily familiar to playing the first Force Unleashed's demo. Hordes of stormtroopers who are simply fodder for your force powers, some bigger baddies who require a little more thought, and a shoddy control mechanic that took away what little fun there was to be had. It felt like just another hack and slash which looked flashy, but had no real substance. Pass on this one, it appears the developers didn't learn from their mistakes like they assured us they did.
Maijin and the Forgotten Kingdom. Boy did this one lose me on practically all counts. The graphics were poor, the voice acting/dialogue was beyond childish, and the fighting vs. stealth mechanic was beyond rudimentary. The only interesting bit to this demo was the strategic element it introduced with, say, setting up the Maijin to throw a wall down while you jump down below and lure the enemies over to where it would crash. Held some interesting possibilities, but I'd doubt from the way the demo played out they made much use of it in the regular game. Big disappointment.
Costume Quest. I'm a fan of Tim Schafer. I understand the man has some brilliant and hilarious ideas. The main problem is he just doesn't know how to craft the game from there. Now, unfortunately I haven't played Psychonauts, which according to critics is the best most underappreciated game of all time, nor have I played any of his earlier work which everyone seems to agree were awesome games. Still, I played Brutal Legend. I saw what should've been an awesome game in there, but just never came together. So when he announced he was planning on doing smaller, more kind of indie downloadable games I was all for it thinking it would be a better space for him to simply present his vision. So I pick up the demo for Costume Quest...and am underwhelmed. Yes, the humor is there. Yes, his unique vision is there. Yes, it seems like it should be an awesome game. And then you get to the game itself, which has the most simplified combat system I've ever seen. It's highly based on exploration, yet there's no map, no way to pinpoint which houses you might have missed besides running all over the town until you spot the one that was hiding from you. You can change costumes, and each has a specific function in and out of combat, but they don't seem to make much of a difference besides opening up new areas to explore. It's just sad to me because even in this smaller downloadable space, just like Brutal Legend the great ideas are there, they're just really poorly implemented. Costume Quest feels like it should be a lot of fun, but then the actual game gets in the way of that. We'll just have to wait and see what happens with his next downloadable title, and hope the trend finally breaks.
Split/Second. I'm not a big fan of racing games, mostly because I'm no good at them, but my favorite series that I've played was the Burnout franchise. There was something so lovable and enjoyable about crashing anywhere you please and causing as much mayhem and destruction along the way as you could that I couldn't put it down. Split/Second is essentially Burnout's bastard child, fathered back in it's heyday on the PS2 before it moved on to the (in my opinion less fun) open world of Paradise. It works on much the same mechanics, except where in Burnout you did certain actions to raise your speed boost, in Split/Second you do certain things to fill a meter that allows you to make "Power Plays" which cause explosions to rain down from the sky, sometimes even amusingly completely rearranging the course, to knock down your opponents. There was unfortunately very very little to play, but what there was seemed fun enough. Might be worth a look.
Little Big Planet 2. This game made the best case for getting a 3D TV that I've seen. Not just for the eye popping effects, but because it appears it can be a vital part of gameplay. There were several points in the first level where I couldn't tell what I was supposed to do next because I was actually meant to go towards myself or away from myself. If there had been 3D, I'm sure that depth issue wouldn't be a problem. However, will this heavy investment in 3D detract from the game? I doubt it. It was still fun, and while I'm not particularly interested in creating my own stuff for this game, I cannot wait to see what other people do with it. This game looks to have infinite potential.
Mass Effect 2. I've already played this game on my PC when it came out at the beginning of the year (though not since all the DLC has come out), but I still wanted to take a look and see if the graphical upgrade would be worth a new purchase since my poor PC can't handle anything close to max graphics settings. And I have to say, I'm considering it. Definitely not at the new game price point of $60, I mean...come on. It's a year old, and I understand the developers put a lot of effort into it, and it really does look VERY good now, but seriously? It's selling for less than $20 just about everywhere, and while all of the DLC you get for free on PS3 totals up to $32, $32+$20=less than $60. This is not a new game, don't try to sell it like one. Anyways, the demo is quite extensive, leading you through both the initial escape from the lab complex and the mission to find Mordin Solus. The graphics have received an obvious boost (you can find comparison videos between PS3 and Xbox), though I still noticed significant frame rate drops during cutscenes and screen tearing. It wasn't that bad, but the obvious improvements elsewhere made them stick out all the more. Basically, if you've never played Mass Effect 2 before, pick it up now because this will be the best version out there. However, if you've already got Mass Effect 2 and the DLC, the graphics aren't really enough to say go out and spend that money all over again.
Dead Space 2. This game has had me the most excited since it was announced and showcased at E3. And so, I would like to present to you my thoughts while playing the demo:
"Wait...this part wasn't shown at E3...........why is nothing attacking me yet....why is there nothiOHCRAP...WHAT...THE...HELL?......Okay, first new necromorph pukes at me, lovely...man it takes a lot more damage than the old onesNOWTHEREAREFOUROFTHEMOHGODWHY...Okay, this part was at E3, shouldn't be too shocking...doing okay, doing okay, doing....okay...damn it...DAMN...BABIES....EVERYWHERE...CLAWING MY FACE.....NECROS EVERYWHEEEEEEEEEERE.......Phew, made it....preorder, done."
It was real freakin impressive. I had seen a great deal of the demo played already several times over at E3, and it STILL managed to freak me out. And with what I'm sure will be a really fun Aliens vs. Predator type multiplayer to back it up, look out for this one to pull a Mass Effect 2 and be a game of the year released in January. Though admittedly its competition is stiff (see "2011 is going to take all of our money"). But boy oh boy am I excited for this game. It looks to surpass the first game, which I gave a 10/10, by a healthy margin. CAN NOT WAIT.
Castlevania: Lords of Shadow. I already kind of figured from the look of this game, and the fact that I had never played a Castlevania game before, that it wouldn't be for me, yet it was getting good reviews so I figured I'd take a shot and give it a look over. Now, I understand demos are almost always poor representations of the full game, but frankly it seemed like just another mindless hack and slash, though admittedly the controls were tight. Still, looked fairly boring.
Star Wars: Force Unleashed 2. Oddly enough, playing this demo felt eerily familiar to playing the first Force Unleashed's demo. Hordes of stormtroopers who are simply fodder for your force powers, some bigger baddies who require a little more thought, and a shoddy control mechanic that took away what little fun there was to be had. It felt like just another hack and slash which looked flashy, but had no real substance. Pass on this one, it appears the developers didn't learn from their mistakes like they assured us they did.
Maijin and the Forgotten Kingdom. Boy did this one lose me on practically all counts. The graphics were poor, the voice acting/dialogue was beyond childish, and the fighting vs. stealth mechanic was beyond rudimentary. The only interesting bit to this demo was the strategic element it introduced with, say, setting up the Maijin to throw a wall down while you jump down below and lure the enemies over to where it would crash. Held some interesting possibilities, but I'd doubt from the way the demo played out they made much use of it in the regular game. Big disappointment.
Costume Quest. I'm a fan of Tim Schafer. I understand the man has some brilliant and hilarious ideas. The main problem is he just doesn't know how to craft the game from there. Now, unfortunately I haven't played Psychonauts, which according to critics is the best most underappreciated game of all time, nor have I played any of his earlier work which everyone seems to agree were awesome games. Still, I played Brutal Legend. I saw what should've been an awesome game in there, but just never came together. So when he announced he was planning on doing smaller, more kind of indie downloadable games I was all for it thinking it would be a better space for him to simply present his vision. So I pick up the demo for Costume Quest...and am underwhelmed. Yes, the humor is there. Yes, his unique vision is there. Yes, it seems like it should be an awesome game. And then you get to the game itself, which has the most simplified combat system I've ever seen. It's highly based on exploration, yet there's no map, no way to pinpoint which houses you might have missed besides running all over the town until you spot the one that was hiding from you. You can change costumes, and each has a specific function in and out of combat, but they don't seem to make much of a difference besides opening up new areas to explore. It's just sad to me because even in this smaller downloadable space, just like Brutal Legend the great ideas are there, they're just really poorly implemented. Costume Quest feels like it should be a lot of fun, but then the actual game gets in the way of that. We'll just have to wait and see what happens with his next downloadable title, and hope the trend finally breaks.
Split/Second. I'm not a big fan of racing games, mostly because I'm no good at them, but my favorite series that I've played was the Burnout franchise. There was something so lovable and enjoyable about crashing anywhere you please and causing as much mayhem and destruction along the way as you could that I couldn't put it down. Split/Second is essentially Burnout's bastard child, fathered back in it's heyday on the PS2 before it moved on to the (in my opinion less fun) open world of Paradise. It works on much the same mechanics, except where in Burnout you did certain actions to raise your speed boost, in Split/Second you do certain things to fill a meter that allows you to make "Power Plays" which cause explosions to rain down from the sky, sometimes even amusingly completely rearranging the course, to knock down your opponents. There was unfortunately very very little to play, but what there was seemed fun enough. Might be worth a look.
Little Big Planet 2. This game made the best case for getting a 3D TV that I've seen. Not just for the eye popping effects, but because it appears it can be a vital part of gameplay. There were several points in the first level where I couldn't tell what I was supposed to do next because I was actually meant to go towards myself or away from myself. If there had been 3D, I'm sure that depth issue wouldn't be a problem. However, will this heavy investment in 3D detract from the game? I doubt it. It was still fun, and while I'm not particularly interested in creating my own stuff for this game, I cannot wait to see what other people do with it. This game looks to have infinite potential.
Mass Effect 2. I've already played this game on my PC when it came out at the beginning of the year (though not since all the DLC has come out), but I still wanted to take a look and see if the graphical upgrade would be worth a new purchase since my poor PC can't handle anything close to max graphics settings. And I have to say, I'm considering it. Definitely not at the new game price point of $60, I mean...come on. It's a year old, and I understand the developers put a lot of effort into it, and it really does look VERY good now, but seriously? It's selling for less than $20 just about everywhere, and while all of the DLC you get for free on PS3 totals up to $32, $32+$20=less than $60. This is not a new game, don't try to sell it like one. Anyways, the demo is quite extensive, leading you through both the initial escape from the lab complex and the mission to find Mordin Solus. The graphics have received an obvious boost (you can find comparison videos between PS3 and Xbox), though I still noticed significant frame rate drops during cutscenes and screen tearing. It wasn't that bad, but the obvious improvements elsewhere made them stick out all the more. Basically, if you've never played Mass Effect 2 before, pick it up now because this will be the best version out there. However, if you've already got Mass Effect 2 and the DLC, the graphics aren't really enough to say go out and spend that money all over again.
Dead Space 2. This game has had me the most excited since it was announced and showcased at E3. And so, I would like to present to you my thoughts while playing the demo:
"Wait...this part wasn't shown at E3...........why is nothing attacking me yet....why is there nothiOHCRAP...WHAT...THE...HELL?......Okay, first new necromorph pukes at me, lovely...man it takes a lot more damage than the old onesNOWTHEREAREFOUROFTHEMOHGODWHY...Okay, this part was at E3, shouldn't be too shocking...doing okay, doing okay, doing....okay...damn it...DAMN...BABIES....EVERYWHERE...CLAWING MY FACE.....NECROS EVERYWHEEEEEEEEEERE.......Phew, made it....preorder, done."
It was real freakin impressive. I had seen a great deal of the demo played already several times over at E3, and it STILL managed to freak me out. And with what I'm sure will be a really fun Aliens vs. Predator type multiplayer to back it up, look out for this one to pull a Mass Effect 2 and be a game of the year released in January. Though admittedly its competition is stiff (see "2011 is going to take all of our money"). But boy oh boy am I excited for this game. It looks to surpass the first game, which I gave a 10/10, by a healthy margin. CAN NOT WAIT.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Fallout: New Vegas
Fallout 3 was, like many others, my first foray into the Fallout universe and boy was it fun. Quest after quest, character after character was so entertaining it was hard to put it down. I've actually only finished the main storyline once (and haven't finished the Broken Steel expansion) because it was always such an adventure to see that open tick on your compass and go exploring only to find something completely unexpected. Tack on the many expansions and you've got a game that can easily eat away hundreds of hours of your time.
And now comes New Vegas, a game that seems to fall in much the same vein of Assassin's Creed Brotherhood in not being a full on sequel, but is still another iteration. Unfortunately, unlike Brotherhood instead of there being big improvements across the board, there are several rather annoying steps backwards.
This game is essentially Fallout 3 in terms of game mechanics. You still have a pip-boy, the same 7 SPECIAL stats (Strength, Intelligence, etc), many of the same perks, and VATS (the targeting system). Practically everything is the same, just with some added new items, new types of crafting stations, new weapons, and the sometimes appreciated iron sights mode where you actually look down the sights on your weapon when aiming. Only sometimes appreciated since some weapons' sights are just plain really poorly designed. These things I have no problem with. After all, besides having to press Tab to open the pip boy for every single menu instead of just pressing I for inventory and such, I really had no problem with the mechanics of Fallout 3 and New Vegas only adds to them.
So why is New Vegas such a worse experience than Fallout 3? Let me count the ways...
Just to get this out of the way, the glitches. I understand they were bad at first in Fallout 3 and will most assuredly get fixed in the future. I had some big problems, mostly with characters getting stuck in the environment, but I'm sure they'll be fixed in time and weren't really a big deal to me.
Perks are now gained every two levels instead of every level. While some may appreciate this for making perk choice more strategic, which I'm sure was what they were aiming for, you end up missing out on some that add to the enjoyment of the game like Terrifying Presence where you get the dialogue option to make crowds flee before you, or Miss Fortune who randomly shows up in VATS and does something I don't know about since I had other more important perks to get. Becoming a terrifying powerhouse of destruction was part of what made Fallout 3 so fun, and I'm sad to see that go.
Radiating entire areas of the game does not make sense. Supposedly New Vegas got hit much less by the nukes, and so should be less irradiated. WRONG. Entire sections of this game require you to be constantly exposed. There are two situations this creates. If you don't have enough rad-x, it then becomes a mad dash to rush through the area before you accrue too much radiation and die, forcing you to ignore possibly important sections in said area and completely rendering useless any stealth character (like I like to play). If you do have enough rad-x, then the radiation is simply an annoyance and serves no purpose besides forcing you out of the experience as you have to constantly make sure your levels don't get too high. In any case, it was a very bad design choice.
In Fallout 3 each waypoint usually indicated something interesting or unique. In New Vegas there are a great deal that are simply placeholders. Like a shack. Is it important in any way? No, but it's a quick travel location in case you need it. And speaking of locations, the Mojave is unfortunately a lot less varied and interesting in simple landscapes than Washington DC. Everything is either in a dark cave, on a mountainside, or in the open desert with very little variation even within those categories. While everything may carry a more lifelike brownish/yellowish hue instead of the odd greenish tinge of everything in Fallout 3, it doesn't really matter because none of it is interesting to look at.
New Vegas is a much much more political game than its predecessor. You carry reputations with certain factions that you increase as you do quests for them or demolish as you kill their members or support rival factions. Depending on how they view you they may give you discounts, extra support, or attack you on sight. This can sometimes be avoided by wearing the armor of a certain faction, which identifies you as one of them and makes anyone below a high ranking member automatically think you're a friend. Of course, if you accidentally keep that armor on when you enter a rival faction's town, get ready to reload from a checkpoint because they immediately attack you and make you gain infamy with that group. As you go on you also start to lose out on certain quests with opposing factions depending on who you support, but honestly I never noticed a big difference besides a kind of no-turning-back point in the story. While some may appreciate this change, I thought it felt more like a tacked on system with an interesting premise and poor execution.
What this political turn also means is that a great deal of the quests revolve around talking and traveling to talk to someone. I once was surprised after about an hour when I suddenly realized I hadn't had to draw my weapon in that long because all I was doing was fast traveling between areas as one talking quest lead me to another. The quests themselves seem very tuned down from before, with only three or four really funny or surprising ones sticking in my brain as opposed to the countless fascinating turns held in Fallout 3.
Possibly the most disappointing part of New Vegas was that after a short time I never felt interested in going to explore the Mojave, because there was never any reason to. In Fallout 3 each new quest takes you to a new and different part of the Wasteland with all its own surprises and curiosities. In New Vegas, quests are either isolated experiences in one area that don't require much venturing out, or point towards the Strip where the main story mostly plays out. Before I knew it I had finished the disappointing main quest line, leaving a great deal of the Mojave unexplored despite several forays out into the wild just to see what was there (the answer was a whole lot of nothing). You could tell from the memorable parts that there was still some great humor and ingenuity in this game (like everything at the Super Mutant camp), but besides a few shining gems everything else just felt flat and uninteresting.
New Vegas certainly has some things going for it, but the numerous things it does wrong far outweigh the underlying things it does right, most of which are from Fallout 3 anyway. If you've played Fallout 3 and are thinking about getting New Vegas, go back and play Fallout 3 again. You'll have a better time swimming through those familiar waters than dipping your toes in the shallower water of New Vegas. If you haven't played Fallout 3 before and are thinking about getting this game, go back and get Fallout 3. If you really just want to play this game...then play it. Other reviewers seem to have had a more positive experience than I did, so maybe I'm missing something. I'm going to give this game one more shot, forcing myself to explore more of the Mojave where supposedly all the best parts of this game reside. But for now, New Vegas just feels like a poor substitute for DC.
Fallout New Vegas gets a 5/10.
And now comes New Vegas, a game that seems to fall in much the same vein of Assassin's Creed Brotherhood in not being a full on sequel, but is still another iteration. Unfortunately, unlike Brotherhood instead of there being big improvements across the board, there are several rather annoying steps backwards.
This game is essentially Fallout 3 in terms of game mechanics. You still have a pip-boy, the same 7 SPECIAL stats (Strength, Intelligence, etc), many of the same perks, and VATS (the targeting system). Practically everything is the same, just with some added new items, new types of crafting stations, new weapons, and the sometimes appreciated iron sights mode where you actually look down the sights on your weapon when aiming. Only sometimes appreciated since some weapons' sights are just plain really poorly designed. These things I have no problem with. After all, besides having to press Tab to open the pip boy for every single menu instead of just pressing I for inventory and such, I really had no problem with the mechanics of Fallout 3 and New Vegas only adds to them.
So why is New Vegas such a worse experience than Fallout 3? Let me count the ways...
Just to get this out of the way, the glitches. I understand they were bad at first in Fallout 3 and will most assuredly get fixed in the future. I had some big problems, mostly with characters getting stuck in the environment, but I'm sure they'll be fixed in time and weren't really a big deal to me.
Perks are now gained every two levels instead of every level. While some may appreciate this for making perk choice more strategic, which I'm sure was what they were aiming for, you end up missing out on some that add to the enjoyment of the game like Terrifying Presence where you get the dialogue option to make crowds flee before you, or Miss Fortune who randomly shows up in VATS and does something I don't know about since I had other more important perks to get. Becoming a terrifying powerhouse of destruction was part of what made Fallout 3 so fun, and I'm sad to see that go.
Radiating entire areas of the game does not make sense. Supposedly New Vegas got hit much less by the nukes, and so should be less irradiated. WRONG. Entire sections of this game require you to be constantly exposed. There are two situations this creates. If you don't have enough rad-x, it then becomes a mad dash to rush through the area before you accrue too much radiation and die, forcing you to ignore possibly important sections in said area and completely rendering useless any stealth character (like I like to play). If you do have enough rad-x, then the radiation is simply an annoyance and serves no purpose besides forcing you out of the experience as you have to constantly make sure your levels don't get too high. In any case, it was a very bad design choice.
In Fallout 3 each waypoint usually indicated something interesting or unique. In New Vegas there are a great deal that are simply placeholders. Like a shack. Is it important in any way? No, but it's a quick travel location in case you need it. And speaking of locations, the Mojave is unfortunately a lot less varied and interesting in simple landscapes than Washington DC. Everything is either in a dark cave, on a mountainside, or in the open desert with very little variation even within those categories. While everything may carry a more lifelike brownish/yellowish hue instead of the odd greenish tinge of everything in Fallout 3, it doesn't really matter because none of it is interesting to look at.
New Vegas is a much much more political game than its predecessor. You carry reputations with certain factions that you increase as you do quests for them or demolish as you kill their members or support rival factions. Depending on how they view you they may give you discounts, extra support, or attack you on sight. This can sometimes be avoided by wearing the armor of a certain faction, which identifies you as one of them and makes anyone below a high ranking member automatically think you're a friend. Of course, if you accidentally keep that armor on when you enter a rival faction's town, get ready to reload from a checkpoint because they immediately attack you and make you gain infamy with that group. As you go on you also start to lose out on certain quests with opposing factions depending on who you support, but honestly I never noticed a big difference besides a kind of no-turning-back point in the story. While some may appreciate this change, I thought it felt more like a tacked on system with an interesting premise and poor execution.
What this political turn also means is that a great deal of the quests revolve around talking and traveling to talk to someone. I once was surprised after about an hour when I suddenly realized I hadn't had to draw my weapon in that long because all I was doing was fast traveling between areas as one talking quest lead me to another. The quests themselves seem very tuned down from before, with only three or four really funny or surprising ones sticking in my brain as opposed to the countless fascinating turns held in Fallout 3.
Possibly the most disappointing part of New Vegas was that after a short time I never felt interested in going to explore the Mojave, because there was never any reason to. In Fallout 3 each new quest takes you to a new and different part of the Wasteland with all its own surprises and curiosities. In New Vegas, quests are either isolated experiences in one area that don't require much venturing out, or point towards the Strip where the main story mostly plays out. Before I knew it I had finished the disappointing main quest line, leaving a great deal of the Mojave unexplored despite several forays out into the wild just to see what was there (the answer was a whole lot of nothing). You could tell from the memorable parts that there was still some great humor and ingenuity in this game (like everything at the Super Mutant camp), but besides a few shining gems everything else just felt flat and uninteresting.
New Vegas certainly has some things going for it, but the numerous things it does wrong far outweigh the underlying things it does right, most of which are from Fallout 3 anyway. If you've played Fallout 3 and are thinking about getting New Vegas, go back and play Fallout 3 again. You'll have a better time swimming through those familiar waters than dipping your toes in the shallower water of New Vegas. If you haven't played Fallout 3 before and are thinking about getting this game, go back and get Fallout 3. If you really just want to play this game...then play it. Other reviewers seem to have had a more positive experience than I did, so maybe I'm missing something. I'm going to give this game one more shot, forcing myself to explore more of the Mojave where supposedly all the best parts of this game reside. But for now, New Vegas just feels like a poor substitute for DC.
Fallout New Vegas gets a 5/10.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Neuromancer
Honestly I don't know if I can really write a review for this book, mostly because I didn't have a speck of understanding as to what the hell was going on for most of it. There were vague glimmers of comprehension sometimes, but for the most part I can only describe the feeling of what I read. As such, I'm going to try to hash this out as best I can without a score at the end because I can't really give an accurate one.
The novel revolves around a young formerly adept hacker named Case. Case's job used to be to jack into cyberspace kind of Matrix style, break through a company's "ice" (security), and steal the information within. However, after having been caught by his former employers trying to steal from them, he's injected with a mycotoxin (fungal) that damaged the receptors in his brain in such a way that he can no longer access cyberspace. Without access to the wonders of the net, he becomes trapped in the pleasures of his flesh, constantly looking for a new high while living in the slum-like Chiba City in Japan.
After some very trippy and confusing sequences involving misunderstandings with a drug lord, a shuriken in a shop window, and his girlfriend, Case is rescued by a mysterious woman named Molly with several augmentations including retractable razors in her fingers and opaque glass covering her eyes. She reveals that she has been sent by a man named Armitage, who will cure Case and allow him to jack back into cyberspace in exchange for him completing a hacking job. After some hesitation, Case goes through with the procedure, and finds out afterwords that there are more conditions attached. Along with his nerves being repaired, his liver and pancreas were replaced and modified so he could no longer get high. Also, sacks of the same mycotoxin that crippled him are wafting around in his blood, and will dissolve after a certain period of time. Get the job done, and the sacs go away. Take too long, and he goes back to his own personal hell.
From there it's a long confusing mass of conspiracies, cyberspace heists, hallucinations, and weird characters all trying to figure out who Armitage is, what he actually wants Case to do, and why every time he and Molly dig deeper there's one word that keeps popping up: Wintermute.
The best way I've found to describe this book is as a mix between Blade Runner, The Matrix, and Requiem for a Dream. The state of the reader follows much the same state as Case. He starts off high and paranoid and completely confused about everything but knows it must all be happening for a reason so he goes with it to get what he wants, and then just when he sobers up and things start to get a little clearer, more confusing crap gets thrown his way to keep him off balance. I think too part of the problem for me in reading this book is that I'm a very visual reader, by which I mean I like to try to visualize/imagine what's going on, and a lot of the imagery is so abstract that I could never really get a handle on what was supposed to be going on.
So was it a good book? I think so. Did I at least take a positive experience away from it? Kind of. Would I recommend it to others? Maybe.
If nothing else Neuromancer is a great example of some classic sci-fi that no doubt gave inspiration to many after it came out. Supposedly it even started the entire cyberpunk movement. Basically, if this madly complex, highly surreal and mind bending story sounds interesting to you, I would recommend picking it up. If, like me, you prefer a slightly more straightforward read, then pass it by. As for myself, I'm in both camps on this one and remain confused as ever.
So with that, Neuromancer gets an undetermined score.
The novel revolves around a young formerly adept hacker named Case. Case's job used to be to jack into cyberspace kind of Matrix style, break through a company's "ice" (security), and steal the information within. However, after having been caught by his former employers trying to steal from them, he's injected with a mycotoxin (fungal) that damaged the receptors in his brain in such a way that he can no longer access cyberspace. Without access to the wonders of the net, he becomes trapped in the pleasures of his flesh, constantly looking for a new high while living in the slum-like Chiba City in Japan.
After some very trippy and confusing sequences involving misunderstandings with a drug lord, a shuriken in a shop window, and his girlfriend, Case is rescued by a mysterious woman named Molly with several augmentations including retractable razors in her fingers and opaque glass covering her eyes. She reveals that she has been sent by a man named Armitage, who will cure Case and allow him to jack back into cyberspace in exchange for him completing a hacking job. After some hesitation, Case goes through with the procedure, and finds out afterwords that there are more conditions attached. Along with his nerves being repaired, his liver and pancreas were replaced and modified so he could no longer get high. Also, sacks of the same mycotoxin that crippled him are wafting around in his blood, and will dissolve after a certain period of time. Get the job done, and the sacs go away. Take too long, and he goes back to his own personal hell.
From there it's a long confusing mass of conspiracies, cyberspace heists, hallucinations, and weird characters all trying to figure out who Armitage is, what he actually wants Case to do, and why every time he and Molly dig deeper there's one word that keeps popping up: Wintermute.
The best way I've found to describe this book is as a mix between Blade Runner, The Matrix, and Requiem for a Dream. The state of the reader follows much the same state as Case. He starts off high and paranoid and completely confused about everything but knows it must all be happening for a reason so he goes with it to get what he wants, and then just when he sobers up and things start to get a little clearer, more confusing crap gets thrown his way to keep him off balance. I think too part of the problem for me in reading this book is that I'm a very visual reader, by which I mean I like to try to visualize/imagine what's going on, and a lot of the imagery is so abstract that I could never really get a handle on what was supposed to be going on.
So was it a good book? I think so. Did I at least take a positive experience away from it? Kind of. Would I recommend it to others? Maybe.
If nothing else Neuromancer is a great example of some classic sci-fi that no doubt gave inspiration to many after it came out. Supposedly it even started the entire cyberpunk movement. Basically, if this madly complex, highly surreal and mind bending story sounds interesting to you, I would recommend picking it up. If, like me, you prefer a slightly more straightforward read, then pass it by. As for myself, I'm in both camps on this one and remain confused as ever.
So with that, Neuromancer gets an undetermined score.
Saturday, December 11, 2010
2011 is going to take all of our money
As 2010 nears to a close, and thoughts of Christmas gifts loom on the horizon, everybody and their mother starts to come out with lists of the best games and movies of the year to try and sum up for people what they should be buying in case they missed it. But as I look back on 2010 I notice something odd. There really weren't that many big name games that I just had to get. Sure there were the big ones like Mass Effect 2, Assassin's Creed Brotherhood, Red Dead Redemption, God of War 3, and, I think the surprise of the year, Heavy Rain. And there were several exclusive titles I just didn't get because I don't own a Wii (Epic Mickey, Donkey Kong, Kirby) or Xbox 360 (Fable 3, Halo Reach, Kinect). However, what really throws this all into perspective were the just released previews for what's coming in 2011 on Spike TV's Video Game Awards. Needless to say, any money I have is going to be gone by the end of the year.
To date, these are the games that I am looking forward to that are currently scheduled for 2010:
Uncharted 3, Batman: Arkham City, Dead Space 2, Portal 2, Little Big Planet 2, Mass Effect 3, Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, Resistance 3, Mortal Kombat reboot featuring Kratos, Infamous 2, Marvel vs. Capcom 3, Killzone 3, Dragon Age 2, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Bulletstorm....you get the idea.
And those are the ones with an actual release date. If there is a god Diablo 3 will be on that list sometime soon. And those are just the ones I'm interested in, while several more big name titles on the way like Gears of War 3 and Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword will be emptying the wallets of many others.
Oh, and that's all not to mention the Nintendo 3DS which will be releasing next year but doesn't have a US price point yet. But have fun shelling out the money for that and ports of old Nintendo 64 classics like Starfox and Ocarina of Time, I know I will.
And of course, as the year goes on more and more titles will be announced. So basically, for all the video game enthusiasts like me out there, start saving now, cause it's all going to be gone by next December.
To date, these are the games that I am looking forward to that are currently scheduled for 2010:
Uncharted 3, Batman: Arkham City, Dead Space 2, Portal 2, Little Big Planet 2, Mass Effect 3, Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, Resistance 3, Mortal Kombat reboot featuring Kratos, Infamous 2, Marvel vs. Capcom 3, Killzone 3, Dragon Age 2, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Bulletstorm....you get the idea.
And those are the ones with an actual release date. If there is a god Diablo 3 will be on that list sometime soon. And those are just the ones I'm interested in, while several more big name titles on the way like Gears of War 3 and Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword will be emptying the wallets of many others.
Oh, and that's all not to mention the Nintendo 3DS which will be releasing next year but doesn't have a US price point yet. But have fun shelling out the money for that and ports of old Nintendo 64 classics like Starfox and Ocarina of Time, I know I will.
And of course, as the year goes on more and more titles will be announced. So basically, for all the video game enthusiasts like me out there, start saving now, cause it's all going to be gone by next December.
Monday, December 6, 2010
Pillars of the Earth (miniseries)
For those not in the know, like I was, Pillars of the Earth is a nearly 1,000 page epic novel written by Ken Follett. Set in 12th century England, Pillars centers around...well...about 5 different storylines which are all far too detailed to try and summarize, especially when I haven't actually read the book. However, my dear girlfriend Amanda has, and so when the 8 hour miniseries was announced and subsequently released I decided to watch it with her based on her praise for the story and characters (and detractions for the repetitive writing). And after 8 long hours, it's done, and was quite worth it.
I am assured by Amanda that the plot of the miniseries is actually quite different in several places, sometimes for no discernible reason, but again, since I haven't read the book I can only remark on what I saw.
Now, first things first, 8 hours is a daunting number. Thankfully, and kudos to the production team for managing it, it never feels long. Each hour is somehow able to at once have the dramatic structure of a TV episode while maintaining the feel of an epically long movie, thanks greatly in part to the wonderful writing, sets, costumes, and high production values that went into this work. Add to that a high caliber cast portraying some wonderfully rich characters in very dramatic situations and you've got a recipe for one of the best miniseries I've seen.
To at least try to sum up what this story is all about, almost all storylines converge on the building of a cathedral over many many years. There's Tom Builder, who first dreams the dream and begins its construction. Ellen, a so called witch who lives in the forest with her adopted son Jack, who wears a strange signet ring and is eventually apprenticed to Tom after they meet when Ellen tries to save Tom's wife as she suffers complications from childbirth in the forest. The overly pious and proud prior Philip who commissions the work. Waleran, a man of the church who is overly ambitious, and after being spurned in his efforts by Philip tries in every way to stop the building of the cathedral. William Hamleigh, an evil bastard (not literally) who besieges the town of Kingsbridge at every turn, mostly at the bidding of his incestuous and slightly blemished mother Regan (different in the book) or Waleran. King Stephen, who having taken the throne under dubious circumstances arbitrates the disputes between Philip and William, often favoring William. Aliena, daughter of the Earl of Shiring who opposed Stephen taking the throne, who seeks to help her brother reclaim the earldom while he is enlisted with Stephen's army (under duress) by starting a sheep shearing business located out of Kingsbridge, and catching the eye of young Jack, as well as the lustful eye of William.
It's a lot of characters. Not only that, it's a lot of main characters. It's a lot of main characters who then each have their own distinct storylines. And each of those storylines converge and split apart and converge again over the course of many years. The point I'm trying to make is that it's a BIG story, with enormous depth, and it's obvious that even with 8 hours to tackle it, some parts got rushed or simply glanced over. However, that same large quality gave this miniseries a kind of robustness which made 8 hours feel like it was just the right amount of time to tell the story in.
But what really made Pillars of the Earth so wonderful to me was the acting. Ian McShane is spot on as the cruel and ambitious Waleran. Natalia Worner brings terrifying rage alongside playful affection and a grounded realism as Ellen. Matthew MacFadyen stands out as the proud, and ashamed of it, prior Philip. I could list each actor's name here along with their great accomplishment, but the man who really carries this show is the always brilliant Rufus Sewell as Tom Builder. While he normally plays a villain, and a damn good one at that, Sewell manages to bring one of the most brilliantly subtle performances I've seen recently. As a character Tom is kind of the everyman of the situation, looking only to do his job quietly in the background while the politics of war rage around him. Yet there is also great complexity that Sewell gives him, even in the simplest of moments while he scans the workers or looks up and imagines what these collection of rocks will one day become. There is far more that happens to him which gives even more substance to why I loved his portrayal so, but I'd hate to ruin anything more.
There are a couple moments that feel rushed or awkward/forced (more often than not things that weren't in the original story), and for me Eddie Redmayne as Jack got less interesting the more he talked, but on the whole there is very little bad I can say about this finely tuned work which much like the cathedral at it's center takes a long time to complete, and suffers some blows under its own enormous weight, but at the end shines brightly.
In short, if you're willing to invest the time, Pillars of the Earth will more than pay you back with a rich story, complex characters, and a high production value to back it all up.
Pillars of the Earth (miniseries) gets a 9.5/10.
I am assured by Amanda that the plot of the miniseries is actually quite different in several places, sometimes for no discernible reason, but again, since I haven't read the book I can only remark on what I saw.
Now, first things first, 8 hours is a daunting number. Thankfully, and kudos to the production team for managing it, it never feels long. Each hour is somehow able to at once have the dramatic structure of a TV episode while maintaining the feel of an epically long movie, thanks greatly in part to the wonderful writing, sets, costumes, and high production values that went into this work. Add to that a high caliber cast portraying some wonderfully rich characters in very dramatic situations and you've got a recipe for one of the best miniseries I've seen.
To at least try to sum up what this story is all about, almost all storylines converge on the building of a cathedral over many many years. There's Tom Builder, who first dreams the dream and begins its construction. Ellen, a so called witch who lives in the forest with her adopted son Jack, who wears a strange signet ring and is eventually apprenticed to Tom after they meet when Ellen tries to save Tom's wife as she suffers complications from childbirth in the forest. The overly pious and proud prior Philip who commissions the work. Waleran, a man of the church who is overly ambitious, and after being spurned in his efforts by Philip tries in every way to stop the building of the cathedral. William Hamleigh, an evil bastard (not literally) who besieges the town of Kingsbridge at every turn, mostly at the bidding of his incestuous and slightly blemished mother Regan (different in the book) or Waleran. King Stephen, who having taken the throne under dubious circumstances arbitrates the disputes between Philip and William, often favoring William. Aliena, daughter of the Earl of Shiring who opposed Stephen taking the throne, who seeks to help her brother reclaim the earldom while he is enlisted with Stephen's army (under duress) by starting a sheep shearing business located out of Kingsbridge, and catching the eye of young Jack, as well as the lustful eye of William.
It's a lot of characters. Not only that, it's a lot of main characters. It's a lot of main characters who then each have their own distinct storylines. And each of those storylines converge and split apart and converge again over the course of many years. The point I'm trying to make is that it's a BIG story, with enormous depth, and it's obvious that even with 8 hours to tackle it, some parts got rushed or simply glanced over. However, that same large quality gave this miniseries a kind of robustness which made 8 hours feel like it was just the right amount of time to tell the story in.
But what really made Pillars of the Earth so wonderful to me was the acting. Ian McShane is spot on as the cruel and ambitious Waleran. Natalia Worner brings terrifying rage alongside playful affection and a grounded realism as Ellen. Matthew MacFadyen stands out as the proud, and ashamed of it, prior Philip. I could list each actor's name here along with their great accomplishment, but the man who really carries this show is the always brilliant Rufus Sewell as Tom Builder. While he normally plays a villain, and a damn good one at that, Sewell manages to bring one of the most brilliantly subtle performances I've seen recently. As a character Tom is kind of the everyman of the situation, looking only to do his job quietly in the background while the politics of war rage around him. Yet there is also great complexity that Sewell gives him, even in the simplest of moments while he scans the workers or looks up and imagines what these collection of rocks will one day become. There is far more that happens to him which gives even more substance to why I loved his portrayal so, but I'd hate to ruin anything more.
There are a couple moments that feel rushed or awkward/forced (more often than not things that weren't in the original story), and for me Eddie Redmayne as Jack got less interesting the more he talked, but on the whole there is very little bad I can say about this finely tuned work which much like the cathedral at it's center takes a long time to complete, and suffers some blows under its own enormous weight, but at the end shines brightly.
In short, if you're willing to invest the time, Pillars of the Earth will more than pay you back with a rich story, complex characters, and a high production value to back it all up.
Pillars of the Earth (miniseries) gets a 9.5/10.
Friday, December 3, 2010
Assassin's Creed Brotherhood
Like many others, I've been a fan of the Assassin's Creed series since the first one. It may have been more than tedious, but it was so different in both play style and story that I couldn't help but enjoy it. Then the second one came along and varied up the gameplay nicely, though it still had several issues with freerunning and combat, and the money system seemed a little extraneous. So now Brotherhood comes along, an unforeseen new title inserted into what was originally going to be a trilogy. The best description I've heard explaining this was that they ran out of development time for Rome in Assassin's Creed 2, so they took it out and bloated out the edges to make it complete. Then they took Rome and bloated it up to make a complete game out of it, basically making it Assassin's Creed 2.5. Does that mean it's bad?
Goodness no. Yes, we're still playing as Ezio, who while being a great character can't help but have the same motivations and pretty much the same story as last time. And despite good intentions Rome feels much the same as the other Italian cities, this one is just way bigger and has open countryside incorporated instead of on the outskirts as it was with the others. Oh, and you can now ride a horse through the city, which unfortunately more often presents an inconvenience than a faster method of travel (especially since galloping is restricted to certain memories). But with all that being said, there's a lot of much needed improvements that make Brotherhood what Assassin's Creed 2 should have been.
First up, the story. There are two components here. One is Ezio's story, which revolves around his search for Cesare Borgia, who lays waste to Monterrigioni at the beginning, and the assembling of the assassin order to take him out and restore Rome to its former glory. The plot is unfortunately rather straightforward, with little surprises, but there are still some fun set pieces along the way. They also revived from the first game the ability to replay specific memories, which is much appreciated, especially since they also added challenges to each mission to get full synchronization. The other component is Desmond's story, which keeps getting more and more interesting as the series progresses. In another semi-revived feature from the first game, you can leave the animus at any time (it was in between sequences the first game) to explore the now crumbling ruin of the Monterrigioni mansion and modernized town. Unfortunately there is almost no development during these trips out of the animus. You can check yours and (thanks to a suspicious sender) others' e-mails to keep up to date on what they do when you're under, but most of it is inconsequential bickering or status updates on other assassin teams. There are also some artifacts you can find around town (which you are given 10 minutes to explore at a time since the Templars are looking for you) but I only found one and it appears there isn't much use to finding them all. However, I don't even care. You know why? Those beginning and ending sequences with Desmond are stunning, and tease you with what you can expect for the final installment. In traditional AC style the ending left at a cliffhanger with my jaw firmly on the floor.
Now here's the odd thing about Brotherhood. Most of the meat of this game lies far outside the actual storyline. This game, as a completionist, is both my heaven and my hell. It is my heaven because there is so fucking much to do that even after I have completed the story I've still been playing for a couple hours trying to get 100% completion. There are Borgia towers, which present a challenge where you must first kill a captain and then burn down the tower to reduce Borgia influence in the city, allowing you to renovate buildings like blacksmiths/tailors/doctors/etc. And the shops closest to your base have shop quests where you trade in certain items to get better weapons/armor. There are courtesan, thief, and assassination missions. There are all the assassins you recruit and send off on missions (more on them in a bit). There are 101 borgia flags, 10 feathers, and over 140 treasure chests to collect (and this time chests give items too, meaning there's a reason to open them all now). There are Lairs of Romulus, Brotherhood's assassin tombs equivalent, which once you complete unlock the armor and dagger of Brutus, equivalent to Altair's armor in AC2. There are challenges to complete for each guild, along the line of killing x number of papal guards, escaping pursuit by hiding x number of times, etc. There's a virtual training simulation along the lines of Mirror's Edge where you can race against the clock on freerunning courses or try to get to a 20 kill streak or many other things, each giving you a gold, silver or bronze medal depending on how you do. There are various deadly machines Leonardo Da Vinchi was forced to construct for the enemy that you then must destroy.
And all of that is why it is also my hell, because there's simply TOO much to do. For the casual gamer there's plenty there to simply occupy your attention between missions, but for the completionists like myself who are bothered by that spot on the map that needs to be CLEARED there's simply too much to this game to make it fun after a lengthy period of time. It's all well and good when you've still got a story mission ahead of you, but once those are gone there's still so much left over you're left wishing there were more than 9 sequences to complete, the last two of which are fairly rushed through. Once you're on to sequence 8, it's pretty much a straight road to the end.
But enough complaining, because this is actually a really fun game. So what did they do right?
Combat. Hoo boy is it improved. While in AC2 battles were a matter of blocking, waiting until someone swung at you, counter killing them, and rinsing and repeating, combat has been so amazingly streamlined that you won't even recognize it. The main method of getting through battle is still counter killing, but on top of that you can amass some major kill streaks by pushing the left stick towards your next target in the middle of an execution and then hitting attack, leading to a one hit kill. It's hard to manage since enemies now attack you in the middle of these maneuvers, and even when blocking you still take damage (like in AC1), meaning fights are much more feverish and finish in much faster time than in AC2.
The Brotherhood. Your new cadre of assassins is managed almost perfectly. With a simple push of a button you can summon a recruit to take out a guard in your way or a fleeing target. They pop up out of nowhere and disappear just as quickly once the job's done. Once you have enough assassins you can do this up to three times, or even use all three at once for an arrow storm that eliminates all guards in the area. Each time you use this ability it takes about a minute to recharge, which often isn't a big deal, and it really lets you feel like you've got an army at your beck and call, especially once they're leveled up. To do so you send them on missions throughout the continent to gather experience and sometimes rare items. Of course, sending them off means you can't summon them to help you, so especially at the beginning it's a hard decision of whether to send them off to get more experience or keep them around to help you with the next mission. Thankfully most of the errands you send them on keep them away for 10 minutes or less, but it's still something you have to plan.
Subject 16. He's back, and creepier than ever. It's quickly revealed that the codes you get after solving the glyphs from AC2 are actually coordinates for further puzzle madness in Rome. While the puzzles remain largely the same (pick the 5 pictures that are similar, use a code wheel to decipher a code) the things you listen to and find out, especially from the computer that says "Loading" between each puzzle, are just plain insane. And what's finally revealed at the end takes the surprise and confusion from the previous subject 16 revelation and cranks it up to 11.
Freerunning. In AC2 it could often be hard to navigate the rooftops from one area to another simply due to large gaps between buildings or a lack of things to jump on between them. Those problems have been solved here, though at the expense of horse riding, which is fine by me. While you will still spend a lot of time cursing at Ezio for jumping in slightly the wrong direction and plummeting to his death or severe harm (alleviated by parachutes sometimes), it's quite easy to get from point A to point B most of the time by a combination of horse riding in open areas, freerunning in close quarters, or using waypoints scattered throughout Rome if the distance is really great. It all flows wonderfully, though it certainly helps to have practice, which brings me to...
Virtual Training. Admittedly I haven't done many of these yet besides the short freerunning time trials, but they actually do teach you a lot about how to move in the environment. And that quest for a gold medal makes sure you have those techniques down and can apply them in game. They're varied enough and present enough of a challenge that you can keep going back to them to hone your skills.
The Lairs of Romulus. One of my favorite parts of AC2 were the assassin tombs, and their equivalents in Brotherhood are no less spectacular. Featuring combinations of Prince of Persia like platforming with heated chase sequences all set amongst highly unique backdrops/environments, with the added challenges to get 100% synchronization, these lairs are a joy to run through.
Multiplayer. Boy has a lot changed from the beta. While most elements remain the same, they've tweaked several underlying mechanics to make it much more playable and FUN. Unfortunately Alliance mode (Wanted mode but with teams) falls flat because nobody works together, but Manhunt (teams of 3 or 4 spend 5 minutes as hunters and then 5 minutes as hunted, earning bonuses for staying hidden) is surprisingly entertaining. There are also WAY more abilities and perks to unlock along with different gear and colors for each persona and tons of new maps. Basically everything plays a lot smoother and requires much more strategy than it did in the beta, which is highly welcome.
To sum up, while story-wise Brotherhood does at several points feel like a bloated DLC, they improved and added so much that it easily stands on its own, and in many ways outshines its predecessor.
Assassin's Creed Brotherhood gets an 8.5/10.
Goodness no. Yes, we're still playing as Ezio, who while being a great character can't help but have the same motivations and pretty much the same story as last time. And despite good intentions Rome feels much the same as the other Italian cities, this one is just way bigger and has open countryside incorporated instead of on the outskirts as it was with the others. Oh, and you can now ride a horse through the city, which unfortunately more often presents an inconvenience than a faster method of travel (especially since galloping is restricted to certain memories). But with all that being said, there's a lot of much needed improvements that make Brotherhood what Assassin's Creed 2 should have been.
First up, the story. There are two components here. One is Ezio's story, which revolves around his search for Cesare Borgia, who lays waste to Monterrigioni at the beginning, and the assembling of the assassin order to take him out and restore Rome to its former glory. The plot is unfortunately rather straightforward, with little surprises, but there are still some fun set pieces along the way. They also revived from the first game the ability to replay specific memories, which is much appreciated, especially since they also added challenges to each mission to get full synchronization. The other component is Desmond's story, which keeps getting more and more interesting as the series progresses. In another semi-revived feature from the first game, you can leave the animus at any time (it was in between sequences the first game) to explore the now crumbling ruin of the Monterrigioni mansion and modernized town. Unfortunately there is almost no development during these trips out of the animus. You can check yours and (thanks to a suspicious sender) others' e-mails to keep up to date on what they do when you're under, but most of it is inconsequential bickering or status updates on other assassin teams. There are also some artifacts you can find around town (which you are given 10 minutes to explore at a time since the Templars are looking for you) but I only found one and it appears there isn't much use to finding them all. However, I don't even care. You know why? Those beginning and ending sequences with Desmond are stunning, and tease you with what you can expect for the final installment. In traditional AC style the ending left at a cliffhanger with my jaw firmly on the floor.
Now here's the odd thing about Brotherhood. Most of the meat of this game lies far outside the actual storyline. This game, as a completionist, is both my heaven and my hell. It is my heaven because there is so fucking much to do that even after I have completed the story I've still been playing for a couple hours trying to get 100% completion. There are Borgia towers, which present a challenge where you must first kill a captain and then burn down the tower to reduce Borgia influence in the city, allowing you to renovate buildings like blacksmiths/tailors/doctors/etc. And the shops closest to your base have shop quests where you trade in certain items to get better weapons/armor. There are courtesan, thief, and assassination missions. There are all the assassins you recruit and send off on missions (more on them in a bit). There are 101 borgia flags, 10 feathers, and over 140 treasure chests to collect (and this time chests give items too, meaning there's a reason to open them all now). There are Lairs of Romulus, Brotherhood's assassin tombs equivalent, which once you complete unlock the armor and dagger of Brutus, equivalent to Altair's armor in AC2. There are challenges to complete for each guild, along the line of killing x number of papal guards, escaping pursuit by hiding x number of times, etc. There's a virtual training simulation along the lines of Mirror's Edge where you can race against the clock on freerunning courses or try to get to a 20 kill streak or many other things, each giving you a gold, silver or bronze medal depending on how you do. There are various deadly machines Leonardo Da Vinchi was forced to construct for the enemy that you then must destroy.
And all of that is why it is also my hell, because there's simply TOO much to do. For the casual gamer there's plenty there to simply occupy your attention between missions, but for the completionists like myself who are bothered by that spot on the map that needs to be CLEARED there's simply too much to this game to make it fun after a lengthy period of time. It's all well and good when you've still got a story mission ahead of you, but once those are gone there's still so much left over you're left wishing there were more than 9 sequences to complete, the last two of which are fairly rushed through. Once you're on to sequence 8, it's pretty much a straight road to the end.
But enough complaining, because this is actually a really fun game. So what did they do right?
Combat. Hoo boy is it improved. While in AC2 battles were a matter of blocking, waiting until someone swung at you, counter killing them, and rinsing and repeating, combat has been so amazingly streamlined that you won't even recognize it. The main method of getting through battle is still counter killing, but on top of that you can amass some major kill streaks by pushing the left stick towards your next target in the middle of an execution and then hitting attack, leading to a one hit kill. It's hard to manage since enemies now attack you in the middle of these maneuvers, and even when blocking you still take damage (like in AC1), meaning fights are much more feverish and finish in much faster time than in AC2.
The Brotherhood. Your new cadre of assassins is managed almost perfectly. With a simple push of a button you can summon a recruit to take out a guard in your way or a fleeing target. They pop up out of nowhere and disappear just as quickly once the job's done. Once you have enough assassins you can do this up to three times, or even use all three at once for an arrow storm that eliminates all guards in the area. Each time you use this ability it takes about a minute to recharge, which often isn't a big deal, and it really lets you feel like you've got an army at your beck and call, especially once they're leveled up. To do so you send them on missions throughout the continent to gather experience and sometimes rare items. Of course, sending them off means you can't summon them to help you, so especially at the beginning it's a hard decision of whether to send them off to get more experience or keep them around to help you with the next mission. Thankfully most of the errands you send them on keep them away for 10 minutes or less, but it's still something you have to plan.
Subject 16. He's back, and creepier than ever. It's quickly revealed that the codes you get after solving the glyphs from AC2 are actually coordinates for further puzzle madness in Rome. While the puzzles remain largely the same (pick the 5 pictures that are similar, use a code wheel to decipher a code) the things you listen to and find out, especially from the computer that says "Loading" between each puzzle, are just plain insane. And what's finally revealed at the end takes the surprise and confusion from the previous subject 16 revelation and cranks it up to 11.
Freerunning. In AC2 it could often be hard to navigate the rooftops from one area to another simply due to large gaps between buildings or a lack of things to jump on between them. Those problems have been solved here, though at the expense of horse riding, which is fine by me. While you will still spend a lot of time cursing at Ezio for jumping in slightly the wrong direction and plummeting to his death or severe harm (alleviated by parachutes sometimes), it's quite easy to get from point A to point B most of the time by a combination of horse riding in open areas, freerunning in close quarters, or using waypoints scattered throughout Rome if the distance is really great. It all flows wonderfully, though it certainly helps to have practice, which brings me to...
Virtual Training. Admittedly I haven't done many of these yet besides the short freerunning time trials, but they actually do teach you a lot about how to move in the environment. And that quest for a gold medal makes sure you have those techniques down and can apply them in game. They're varied enough and present enough of a challenge that you can keep going back to them to hone your skills.
The Lairs of Romulus. One of my favorite parts of AC2 were the assassin tombs, and their equivalents in Brotherhood are no less spectacular. Featuring combinations of Prince of Persia like platforming with heated chase sequences all set amongst highly unique backdrops/environments, with the added challenges to get 100% synchronization, these lairs are a joy to run through.
Multiplayer. Boy has a lot changed from the beta. While most elements remain the same, they've tweaked several underlying mechanics to make it much more playable and FUN. Unfortunately Alliance mode (Wanted mode but with teams) falls flat because nobody works together, but Manhunt (teams of 3 or 4 spend 5 minutes as hunters and then 5 minutes as hunted, earning bonuses for staying hidden) is surprisingly entertaining. There are also WAY more abilities and perks to unlock along with different gear and colors for each persona and tons of new maps. Basically everything plays a lot smoother and requires much more strategy than it did in the beta, which is highly welcome.
To sum up, while story-wise Brotherhood does at several points feel like a bloated DLC, they improved and added so much that it easily stands on its own, and in many ways outshines its predecessor.
Assassin's Creed Brotherhood gets an 8.5/10.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Wittenburg
Running in rep with Hamlet comes a play about Hamlet's time in school at Wittenburg, before the events of Hamlet take place. His instruction comes from two teachers who actually might have been there around that time, Martin Luther and Dr. Faustus. Luther, a priest who is dissatisfied with the church and the giving of indulgences, teaches Hamlet about God's path while Dr. Faustus, a medical practitioner and devout questioner of all things biblical, tries to lead Hamlet down the path of skepticism and philosophy.
The play is absolutely littered with quotes and semi-quotes from Hamlet, all twisted for humorous effect. In a brilliant move, the only people who actually speak in Shakespearean dialect are people from Denmark. Everyone else talks normally and kind of puts up with Hamlet's weird way of talking. It also leads to some absolutely hilarious moments such as the tennis match between Hamlet and an offstage Laertes, who every time he loses a point shouts something along the lines of "Thou hast got to be kidding me!" or "'Swounds! 'Sblood! 'Snails!" and ending with "'Sballs!" (Shakespeare used 'S as a contraction of "God's" for those who don't know). Oh, and during it all, Hamlet is high, and Connor Toms who plays him is to be well commended for being able to mime almost perfectly hitting an invisible ball matched with a prerecorded sound cue.
But don't be mistaken in thinking this is all about Hamlet. In fact, it was rather obvious that while the overall structure of the play dealt with some overarching themes in Hamlet like purgatory (absent, as far as I could tell, in the other Hamlet oddly enough), the source of Hamlet's ambivalence and his fear of dreams, the real purpose of this show was to have the discussion between Luther and Faustus. Between God and not God essentially. And have no doubt, the author liked Faustus much more. Both present their cases equally well, but the character of Faustus was just so damn funny and likable, and he got all of the good jokes and scenes, that there was no question who the star of the show was.
Yet despite the bias there's some solid philosophy sitting under this play. Unfortunately it's the kind of philosophy that doesn't quite make sense in one sitting, but you get the sense that were you to study it you'd be blown away. And the nice thing about this play is that even if you don't necessarily understand the main point being delivered, there's plenty of funny bits to keep it entertaining. Some of the humor was surprisingly, and to its detriment, low brow (namely a poop joke that occupies the beginning of the play), but for the most part it all hits the mark, and the actors had wonderful comedic timing to make it work.
Overall Wittenburg was a play I enjoyed, though much more would rather sit down and read through and study to get the most out of it that I could. Watching it, it became fairly apparent that this was a new play, and needed some more editing to really make it great, but what's there is still a fun mash up of religion, philosophy, comedy, and Shakespeare.
Wittenburg gets an 8/10.
The play is absolutely littered with quotes and semi-quotes from Hamlet, all twisted for humorous effect. In a brilliant move, the only people who actually speak in Shakespearean dialect are people from Denmark. Everyone else talks normally and kind of puts up with Hamlet's weird way of talking. It also leads to some absolutely hilarious moments such as the tennis match between Hamlet and an offstage Laertes, who every time he loses a point shouts something along the lines of "Thou hast got to be kidding me!" or "'Swounds! 'Sblood! 'Snails!" and ending with "'Sballs!" (Shakespeare used 'S as a contraction of "God's" for those who don't know). Oh, and during it all, Hamlet is high, and Connor Toms who plays him is to be well commended for being able to mime almost perfectly hitting an invisible ball matched with a prerecorded sound cue.
But don't be mistaken in thinking this is all about Hamlet. In fact, it was rather obvious that while the overall structure of the play dealt with some overarching themes in Hamlet like purgatory (absent, as far as I could tell, in the other Hamlet oddly enough), the source of Hamlet's ambivalence and his fear of dreams, the real purpose of this show was to have the discussion between Luther and Faustus. Between God and not God essentially. And have no doubt, the author liked Faustus much more. Both present their cases equally well, but the character of Faustus was just so damn funny and likable, and he got all of the good jokes and scenes, that there was no question who the star of the show was.
Yet despite the bias there's some solid philosophy sitting under this play. Unfortunately it's the kind of philosophy that doesn't quite make sense in one sitting, but you get the sense that were you to study it you'd be blown away. And the nice thing about this play is that even if you don't necessarily understand the main point being delivered, there's plenty of funny bits to keep it entertaining. Some of the humor was surprisingly, and to its detriment, low brow (namely a poop joke that occupies the beginning of the play), but for the most part it all hits the mark, and the actors had wonderful comedic timing to make it work.
Overall Wittenburg was a play I enjoyed, though much more would rather sit down and read through and study to get the most out of it that I could. Watching it, it became fairly apparent that this was a new play, and needed some more editing to really make it great, but what's there is still a fun mash up of religion, philosophy, comedy, and Shakespeare.
Wittenburg gets an 8/10.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1
Hoo boy have I been lax in keeping up writing reviews. So the long process of getting up to date begins with a big one: Harry Potter. But before getting to the actual movie review I feel I need to expound upon some things leading up to it.
In prep for seeing it, as many others did I'm sure, I not only read all the books once again but went back and watched all the other movies too (over a course of several weeks) to get a better sense on what the movies had missed, how the movies themselves had developed between directors, and what could be expected from this first step towards the final movie. I remember in watching Half Blood Prince the first time how wonderfully surprised I had been at how good it was, though I realized that there had been several plot lines left out that would pose a problem going into Deathly Hallows. Then I reread the book...and watched the movie again. It was then I realized...they fucked themselves over royally.
So how were they going to fix it? How could they possibly talk about horcruxes without any mention of Voldemort's past? What were they going to do about the Burrow being burned down? What about Dumbledore's funeral and his casket? The answer? A combination of ignoring what has come before/pretending it never happened and assuming that if you're watching the Deathly Hallows, you've read the book. Unfortunately, along with this comes several important pieces (namely the mirror shard) that were missing in previous movies and for some reason are never explained in this one. Basically, more than any of the other movies if you haven't read the book, you're going to be lost. And if you haven't read the book in a long time, you still might get lost. However, despite this, it was probably the best thing they could've done. Because then instead of spending valuable time trying to explain the things they messed up, they just move past it as a way of saying "sorry", and then proceed to follow the book more closely than any previous installment.
And that's why Deathly Hallows shines above the rest. Reading through the book, I was actually kinda sad because I realized that out of all of them, Deathly Hallows is really one of the only ones that doesn't need two movies. There are very few big set pieces, with most of it being the trio roaming the countryside trying to figure out what in the hell to do. That being said, I am glad they decided to split it up, mostly for the director and screenwriters' sake, who you can tell were finally allowed to breathe and take some time telling this story instead of hurrying through and trying to choose what should be important. With this breathing room, not only did they get to really get the most out of the big moments like the first battle but they also got to focus on the relationship of the trio and how they've grown up and matured after all these years together.
Yet despite all the good, there are still some awkward moments (Ginny is bland as always, poor Daniel Radcliffe is awkward kissing anyone), and despite following the book so closely, they have still somehow managed to avoid the number one most important thing about the horcruxes, namely why Voldemort chose them, which helps the trio figure out where to find them. The movie also ends rather abruptly, which is expected given it's only technically half a movie. It feels like the intermission between discs 1 and 2 of a Lord of the Rings movie. The first part ends at a good/important stopping point, we switch discs, and then keep going. Only problem is we have to wait 8 months before we can move on. Oh well.
All in all it's a wonderful start to the end, and I can't wait to see how they do choose to finally bring things to a close.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 gets a 9/10.
In prep for seeing it, as many others did I'm sure, I not only read all the books once again but went back and watched all the other movies too (over a course of several weeks) to get a better sense on what the movies had missed, how the movies themselves had developed between directors, and what could be expected from this first step towards the final movie. I remember in watching Half Blood Prince the first time how wonderfully surprised I had been at how good it was, though I realized that there had been several plot lines left out that would pose a problem going into Deathly Hallows. Then I reread the book...and watched the movie again. It was then I realized...they fucked themselves over royally.
So how were they going to fix it? How could they possibly talk about horcruxes without any mention of Voldemort's past? What were they going to do about the Burrow being burned down? What about Dumbledore's funeral and his casket? The answer? A combination of ignoring what has come before/pretending it never happened and assuming that if you're watching the Deathly Hallows, you've read the book. Unfortunately, along with this comes several important pieces (namely the mirror shard) that were missing in previous movies and for some reason are never explained in this one. Basically, more than any of the other movies if you haven't read the book, you're going to be lost. And if you haven't read the book in a long time, you still might get lost. However, despite this, it was probably the best thing they could've done. Because then instead of spending valuable time trying to explain the things they messed up, they just move past it as a way of saying "sorry", and then proceed to follow the book more closely than any previous installment.
And that's why Deathly Hallows shines above the rest. Reading through the book, I was actually kinda sad because I realized that out of all of them, Deathly Hallows is really one of the only ones that doesn't need two movies. There are very few big set pieces, with most of it being the trio roaming the countryside trying to figure out what in the hell to do. That being said, I am glad they decided to split it up, mostly for the director and screenwriters' sake, who you can tell were finally allowed to breathe and take some time telling this story instead of hurrying through and trying to choose what should be important. With this breathing room, not only did they get to really get the most out of the big moments like the first battle but they also got to focus on the relationship of the trio and how they've grown up and matured after all these years together.
Yet despite all the good, there are still some awkward moments (Ginny is bland as always, poor Daniel Radcliffe is awkward kissing anyone), and despite following the book so closely, they have still somehow managed to avoid the number one most important thing about the horcruxes, namely why Voldemort chose them, which helps the trio figure out where to find them. The movie also ends rather abruptly, which is expected given it's only technically half a movie. It feels like the intermission between discs 1 and 2 of a Lord of the Rings movie. The first part ends at a good/important stopping point, we switch discs, and then keep going. Only problem is we have to wait 8 months before we can move on. Oh well.
All in all it's a wonderful start to the end, and I can't wait to see how they do choose to finally bring things to a close.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 gets a 9/10.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
