Easter Special: Games I want to see resurrected.

I have quite a decent list of articles to write, but I've been holding them off during a busy week. Though I wouldn't have time for an easter idea never the less time to write it.... but now, I might have one and write it on time. Its actually something I've been wanting to talk about lately, and it appropriately ties in well with the idea of being reborn... more specifically its games I want sequels or more appearances from. Everyone has their own personal wishlist, well here is mine. Its in no particular order either, as I couldn't really feel motivated to put them all over each other.

Warhammer 40'000: Space Marines

In addition to just being awesome and one of my favorite games out of last generation, Space Marines is just a really good concept and use of the 40k license. Its finally a game where you're truly controlling and feel the immersion of a space marine up against a large conflict. You wield the chainsword and hack and slash with combos, can swap into shooter action with a bolter, metacannon, plasma pistol, and more. Finally while its clearly a 3rd person shooter it replaces cover system and regenerating health for a style that forces you to really get into the action and tear up the battlefield. The game doesn't instantly come off as gold, but you end up coming back to it again and again until the value and joy all sinks in. It was a unique and fun experience, and of course the setting and all that comes with it certainly helps to make the experience incredibly enjoyable.

It needs a sequel for a couple reasons. For starters, it held an interesting cliff hanger for the main character's fate where his allegiance was questioned and he might be corrupted with chaos deep inside. Playing as a chaos space marines with powers might be interesting... however even if that's not the case, as the main character seemed just fine, it would be great to see this plot continued. Maybe he ends up fighting some other space marines and goes "rogue". On the gameplay side, there is some refining to do. You could be hurt during animation locks causing for some cheap moments or useless health grabbing. Some felt the enemies and lack of deeper combos made the game feel repetitive, and even if it wasn't always repetitive to play it could be said that the level design was damn near one of the stalest I think we've seen in last generation. They didn't even try to dress up the fact that it was hallway after hallway mentality, with invisible walls, super straight paths, and of course the setting was as dull and brown as possible to the point where it could have been better suited in a satire game. It didn't help either that the graphics themselves were barebones, with flat textures, generic resolution, and no noticeable effects of any kind at all. It was just dull looking all around. I think the PC version had some armor sheen, but that's about as much that can be said for it. A sequel would give us a new location, new refinements, new visuals, new weapons and enemies, and potentially more than what we'd just be typically used to expecting. Oh and the competitive multiplayer was barely tolerable, they need a makeover for many reasons in that department. This is just one of those games that just begs for a sequel on every level. It was so good, a great title to remember (and maybe one of the few I'd say was catering to the hardcore market), however its just something that needs to be continued and improved.

Dark Messiah

Kind of like what was said about space marines, except more extreme. This game has a cult following that loves it for its ideas and some enjoyable laugh and fun times, but at the same time we all know very well that it has some serious issues and looks more dated and difficult to work with as time goes on. When I was little I adored this game's ideas, and it was the first step towards serious melee combat. Kicking enemies, impaling them on spikes, playing with physics objects, hacking and slashing in immersive first person with multiple bladed or blunt weapon types, and playing within an interesting and fun fantasy world. Again though, it had some serious problems, and as I've mentioned in the past the combat could have done more than one click and critical wind ups. The gameplay needed heavy refinement, and honestly I might even prefer a remake and re-release over any idea of a sequel. However a sequel wouldn't hurt.

Turok

I've mentioned my love of this game with the topic on games I love but few others do. The classics series is more recognized and regarded as incredible, especially by "console standards" of that time, but either way the series feels kind of like it just went out quietly. Evolution came out to a mixed reception and so did its weirder reboot. Personally I want turok to come back in sort of a mix between Classic, evolution, and of course modern sheen of higher graphics and whatnot. The reboot was something too different, and I'm not the biggest fan of the pure classics style. However even with all picky-ness set aside, just the basic concept could be better executed and deserves a place again. Crazy weapons, monsters and dinosuars, and a setting within a collapsed time of cool stuff. All done in FPS style fashion, hopefully with old school mechanics. I really do just want to see the series again, heck an HD boosted trilogy of the original 3 would be great to. The name alone could bring a smile back to my face as well as a couple others that still fondly remember and idolize the title as a great early step in the FPS industry.

Gex

Ah yes, gex. Yet another forgotten lizard associated icon of the 90's gaming industry. I'm not quite sure why he was forgotten, whether it was because people were genuinely annoyed with his style of comedy, or just because the company themselves stayed away from it to keep pumping out tomb raider. I suppose his satire and television style wasn't quite as strong as Mario, Banjoe, Spyro, Crash, or Donkey Kong's original colorful worlds by comparison, but never the less this was a solid and notable platforming icon that holds strong value and nostalgia to a small following. For those that may not know of this series, it was basically a gecko full of one liners and puns spoofing various people and television shows. It was a bit more crude, and "mature" than the usual platformers, but still quite fun and colorful in the end. The original was a 2D game that was at home in an age before saves were a thing, while the others proceeded into more of a Mario 64 style game going from level to level collecting various TV remotes as the key item to progress. Each level had a sort of theme, and often some light gimmick that mixed things up while keeping the usual ground rules at play. I suppose the camera and draw distance could be criticized, but in the end they were solid and fun games. After the 3rd entry on the PS1 and N64 the series just sort of died, and it rarely gets brought back up into the mainstream light.

I think it needs a sequel for two good reasons. 1) Nothing like this seems to exist anymore. Seriously, apart

from Sly copper 4 there hasn't been a great 3D platformer out there... and no, the Wii U mario game doesn't count as its done in more of a way to the 2D's sense of style. I'm talking real 90's style 3D platformer fun here. At best there are a couple of indie games to remedy the strange lack of what was once a powerful and loved trend. The second reason is because I think Gex had enough of its own DNA to be worth seeing something new from again. While Nintendo has become quite predictable, Gex and video game comedy would be a more welcomed approach to the market now if its done right. At the very least, please just re-release them for those missing out on such an underappreciated hit. I'm hoping the recent and awesome $0.99 sale on PSN with Gex 2 being up for grabs will help a bit.

Timesplitters

By the time you've gotten this far in the list, 5 other people have complained about the absence of this series for a whole generation. Timesplitters is considered the successor to the famous 007 Goldeneye shooter for the Nintendo 64, and in case you didn't know that was basically the Halo and Counter-Strike of the PS1/N64 era as far as consoles go. Timesplitters updated that style and some of its aesthetics towards PS2, had better bot based multiplayer, better customization, and was just a generally pleasant successor with its own face and IP. Basically its level of customization, its fast paced blissful style, and its packed content level made it one of the best shooters of the PS2 days. Future Perfect was also an entry that left off on sort of a high note with a great campaign that had lots of laughs and some good moments. Oh and did I mention there was a level editor to build your own scripted campaign-like levels and multiplayer arena maps? Yeah that's great. :) If you can't figure out why I want a sequel, especially in today's lackluster FPS conditions, you need to do yourself a favor and pick up a copy of this game. The good news is that an indie scene with approval from Crytek are making a fan version of a re-release, and its supposedly coming to PC and PS4/Xbox one. It might not be a Timesplitters 4, but its coming close.

Well that's all for now. I'm considering a return to this type of list some other time as there are other games worth mentioning, but this is a good start to naming them and a good way to go about an Easter blog post.

Innovations I would like to see...

Gaming as it is can be amazing. However possibly more than any other form of medium, its interaction and technology melts together to from nearly unlimited potential. As another generation has been set into place, its good to wonder what might come out of it soon. Gaming doesn't need to change much, and heck it actually has some roots it needs to re-explore, however its fun to estimate or hope for some fun changes you feel have yet to be seen. Or sometimes its just about things that have yet to be properly implemented into the mainstream. Here are my personal hopes in an odd top 6 list...

6) Continue to explore online potential

Jolly cooperation time!

Dark Souls and Journey have some common grounds in breaking through to try and do something different in online play. I'm not a huge fan of forced online, so I want to be careful about what I wish for. Still its nice to see games that try new things, and push the barrier between online and solo experiences. It would be awesome if we could continue to share our adventures unconditionally by friendly anonymous gamers that are on that same quest for fun.

5) Weather. 'nuff said

Rain... Snow... Warm sunny days. These are common weather habbits most will experience and be more than familiar with. So why is it so rare that a game even tries to slap light aesthetics of basic weather on? It feels like magic if rain occurs on its own in a game. We have some strong tech now, can't we see more natural weather and even effects it may produce? I would be thrilled to have an open world game where snow can actually build up and needs some management. Of course I guess it would be great if that sort of thing was optional and didn't become a tedious chore. Maybe that sort of risk is more of the reason to its disappearance rather than tech? Still I want to see some efforts made in this area. Even something as simple as seeing tree leaves twitch to dynamic rain.

4) More Destruction!

Simply put, we've been wanting more destruction in our shooters. It doesn't have to be Red Faction or Bad company 2 amounts, though those are nice, but it would be just great if something like... Killzone went a little further. Killzone has the aesthetics down to where decals actually give the illusion of a dent, and many objects leave rubbled particle effects when shot, and certain edges or very specific objects (toilets, and couches) can actually be broken down. Amplify that up just a bit, and that's awesome. However it would be great to have more games like bad company 2 as well where they're built from the ground up to change over time, and to become a strategical difference within and fluid and living field of war you have to adapt to. Also, why am I just restricting this chatter to online talk? There should be a heck of a lot more to this destruction trait going on in campaign side of gaming. This is where the land really is built piece by piece and you don't have to account nearly as much for player vs player balance, so let the one and only guy available tear things up if they want to. I'm kind of surprised we've been going as long as we have with so little use in destructive terrain innovation.

3) Steel blade Renaissance

Despite being a person that gets a heavy does of combat fun in through First Person Shooters, there is a better way to hook me. Swords. Slashing. Maces pounding a skull inwards. Oh and kicking that guy off a cliff when he's already dead... just because I'm mean like that. :p I love sword fighting in games, when it is done right. However that boils down to Chivalry, Dragon's Dogma, and Dark Souls. Maybe Mount and Blade. 4 games with a dreamy combat system sound nice, but the real truth to it is this is kind of embarrasing. Fantasy medieval settings are one of the most oldest and cliched things to gaming, if not the most cliched thing ever to nerd culture. Yet so few games have made blade combat more complex than mashing a button. So few games have made it truly satisfying. Its been so bad its literally kept me out of RPGs for years, just because the combat on its own just sucked that badly. It was ran by numbers, not andrenaline, steel on steel, and heroic swashbucking adventures. Games like Dark Messiah occasionally come along and dress it up nicely enough that its fun, but few really pull out with an incredible experience that I know sword fighting could become. Even then, you still have the matter of the game itself to build upon. This is why I can barely put M&B here as the game just bored me, and then there's how poorly Dragon's Dogma handles it compared to Dark Souls (still good, but the two just don't compare.... DD is way too arcadey). So you have a major two step process to grab onto... make an amazing game, and make an amazing combat system, and tie the two up right so that the combat is a thrilling and deep part of the game without making it tedious. To be honest I would probably put this on the #1 spot of what I really and truly want, but I'm also ranking this by true innovation, and chivalry exists to do it really damn well already. It feels like there is that and some others that are slowly building an aim to introduce the world to deeper melee experiences, and I can hope that it might be coming into play already.

2) Lets get philosophical and spiritual...

Ok honestly this is heavily biased in what I like, but it could extend to just suggesting that games try to cover diverse themes. However I specifically want to see more religious and spiritual themed games. I want it a bit over the top as well, like any good theme. That can include the game portion of it as well, because if you know me you know I hate games taking themselves too seriously. Dante's Inferno and God of war are fine, Okami was another good example, and then there's Journey that traces around the shared spiritual aspect of reincarnation and just generally has some theme of finding something spiritual, even if its not specific to any religion. Out of those, only Journey was a "serious" game while the others could be quite silly and gamey at times... and that was still nice and they were fun themes to play within. Now some may bring up sensitivity, but Religious sensitivity shouldn't damage our will to make great art out of it. Do you think Dante really stopped his great story because it might be offensive? Did that stop great games like Okami and God of War? It certainly didn't stop bioshock from fooling with it either and becoming a big seller. If your religiously sensitive, you should stay away from it just as a strong pacifist would shooter genres. Anyways... outside of those games though it starts to become difficult to find a relevant use of religion in gaming. Assassins Creed vaguely brings it up in between throwing terms around, and comes off more as historic fiction that has to accept religion happens but nothing more. Bioshock infinite could be taken in as good use, and I appreciate what it does, but it feels like it later gets tossed out before it ever amounts to anything memorable aside from being a part of the old fashion American theme. Then "god" games are too arcadey to seriously count, as it does nothing to get you thinking on the content but rather is an excuse to feel a little "meta". I would love to see religious and spiritual content dug into a bit more within gaming. It makes incredible grounds for story telling, has plenty of tales at high scale and great power already set up, and it plays with the fabric of philosophy and inspires critical thinking. Oh and where the heck are the Ancient egyptian themed games!? I want to see a god of war style fight with Anubis!

Now outside of religion, I feel like this still applies in some way. It'd be great for games to explore new themes, and form around places that don't already get much attention in games. We've seen plenty of games that just don't care about their own themes and settings. Whether its COD or similar military shooters, Dota, generic RPG fantasy, or simple arcade games, they never really engage far into their own world or nature and never leave you thinking or impressed. I want to see new places, themes, and thought provoking bits explore, and contrary to popular belief you don't have to sacrifice the integrity of the gameplay or even cheesy "fun for the sake of fun" tones. Actually I would say some of the best and most cheesy games have a heavy theme to them. Yakuza is a somewhat arcadey brawler and free roaming game, yet its awesome in how it captures the city and life of Tokyo. Metro is russian themed, but full of fictional events and silly odd moments and dumb character writing. That's ok though, it still provides a freshing and unique experience. Meanwhile Hotline Miami supposedly explores the nature between killing and virtual killing without being so serious or hung up about it. Then Killzone explores a gothic war themed universe that revels in propaganda, war crimes, bioweapons, and conflicting interests without removing the competetive multiplayer or exciting gun blazing fun moments out of the system. Oh and lets not forget just how cheesy the cast sounds in that game as well. Unlike the push for artificial maturity, these games remain mentally engaging and philosophically different from most peers while keeping fun if not better cheesy game experiences than their peers also do. My hope is that more games end up like this and push for stronger use of themes without losing integrity as a video game. Besides having a theme might also set it up for that terribly awkward morality system that is trending in games now, and speaking of which....

1) Polished and intuitive morality

This is actually something I didn't care about so much until recently. Well... it bugged me, but I didn't have an idea on how much better it could be until recently... and I do mean really recently. Like Okami HD that I started this week recently. Morality in gaming is starting to pop up everywhere, but its nothing less than black and white or arcadey at best for most notable games. Infamous has the good and evil sides, Mass Effect has obvious color coded choices that influence the story, and possibly one of the better examples with Dishonored still breaks down the effects in binary differences based on whether or not you played like a pacifist. Look I love games being cheesy, and I don't mind good and evil stuff, but if your trying to drive home this morality idea seriously (I'm looking at you and your hypnotized fanbase Bioware) then this just wont cut it. Its not even fun, it feels robotic, drags the game on, and there's that artificially padded feeling that you haven't beaten it until you switch your chooses into another full gear. Either way though the current system is set up so that the player gets the idea that they'll be making choices A, B, or C and each time they hit one they end up pumping their meter some direction. You essentially corner the player into caring about that meter for consistency rather than the story. I think that sounds actually pretty damaging to the integrity and story of the game in question, and honestly I'm surprised entire series got off well on it. Still maybe those are just baby steps.... but its not exactly effective, and we've been able to do better so I'm hoping to see it. I want a game where the choices actually feel natural. No meter attached, no binary function, and heck maybe even ditch the idea of separate endings altogether. Instead make me choose things, and give me consequences based on them. Most of them probably short term. Give me rewards that suit the actions I've done. Certain RPGs have a radical form of this in place thankfully where they let you kill NPCs off. You get to steal their stuff, but lose a possible companion or even entire quests as a result. This is good, but it could be expanded on. Dishonored again is a nice mention for coming closer despite a binary end result. Killing people changed dialogue to suit it, and made people fear your mask rather than hunting the face under it. However being the closest to good and sparing your targets using some alternative also gave you rewards from admirers or people who gave you an alternative. If it wasn't so repetitive, and didn't bottleneck the end result, this would have been perfect! Imagine dropping loot by an NPC's door way, and later on hearing them tell an NPC friend about how they found a gift they were delighted in. Wouldn't that be so cool to hear and send a strange sense of fulfillment in you? Or how about robbing from someone, and instead of magically being busted you instead have that NPC leave town out of insecurity and you lose out on anything valuable they had to offer.

Where does Okami come into this? Well... possibly without even doing so intentionally, it kind of has a fluid and intuitive morality system, and one of the best at making it feel so good and showing me how valueable an effective system comes into play. You play the role of basically a super powerful goddess without the power, and as you progress on your adventure to collect power you get the ability to fix the natural order. However apart from a select few nobody even knows you exist, and your powers also go unnoticed when used wrong as it goes quite off hand. However whether they notice you or not as the wolf you're playing as, they notice the miracle and restoration of the world and start to regain a sense of faith and belief in miracles. This Praise powers certain character attributes like health and immediate ink storage. So doing nice side stuff basically powers you up, but you'll still get by even if you decide your not going to waste your time with praise. You get the bloom ability and get to go running around growing trees, fixing patches of land, buy food for animals, shutting down evil demon gates that choke the world, and all in addition to saving the general day within the main adventure. Many of the good things you can do are optional and don't truly effect the plot. Its mostly just to give Praise and a nicer aesthetic, like animals that cheer as you walk by, or just a more detailed and majestic cell shaded rural Japan. Its not a perfect example, as there's no real feeling of doing wrong to balance this out and the Praise bit might still be arguably arcadey, but heck this still beat Mass Effect's attempt at morality any day. It just felt so good, worked with the game's theme and story, and felt like you were actually making a difference in the world because you wanted to rather than being prodded into it. I want to see this done more, and to think so many try and stumble so hard with this "innovative" thinking while a simple and undersold PS2 game did it stealthily better is quite an embarrassment. I think morality is a mechanic that has entered gaming for good by now though, and its here to stay and improve. Again its probably ok to keep things silly and black and white in some cases (Infamous might be a fine example,  they're quite happy with radically going one way or the other with a theme of hero or villainy clear at the goal), but I think we really need to see it improve to. Seriously guys, its awesome when its done right, so lets fix the formula for the better of gaming. Thanks to the reference of Okami, and just the potential I can see in having players feel so good (or evil) in how they influence a digital world beyond poor binary functions, I'd really like to see it happen more. I think it could be one of the better possible innovations yet to be truly found. So its my #1 thing. Ok well... I'd give it up for good sword play, but again we already have Chivalry for that.

Dear Valve: This "new release" thing isn't cool with your consumers and developers

Quality control, and store management have been issues among those that take daily notice of steam's store... which happens to be a lot of folks. Steam has currently very poor and loose feeling of control over their store, and while that's not but so bad in itself its the way its executed that is directly tied to Valve's fault more so than the garbage raising the complaints. Its nothing really new, and quite a few have called steam out on it before including popular internet critics/commentators Jim Sterling and Totalbiscuit. Heck they've both ended up practically making mini series out of the embarrassing nature of the store's situation. These include old obscure games, knock-offs, broken games, and even outright stolen material that just gets dumped by the load in the exact same spot you would usually expect to see triple A releases and ambitious new indie titles. I was originally going to join in and write an article about the situation, but as I was doing so it felt redundant and out of my place. I actually felt ill when originally writing it out, and just scrapped it as it wasn't my natural sort of thing. However it got more personal today. Some ancient but slightly popular point and click pre-school games got a proper port job and dumped all over the front page right in between new games.... including Secrets of Raetikon, a game I was looking forward to seeing in the spotlight so that its fascinating style could get some well deserved recognition.

Why this betrayal putt-putt!? WHY!?

Well now I have nostalgic ties to some of these games. I spent hours upon hours building mazes in freddie's maze game, and I remember bits of putt-putt. Regardless though that doesn't excuse them (and others, like Fate that re-released today) when they bump up the entire new releases list to the point where brand new and ambitious indie games get shoved all the way down to the 3rd row. Indie developers count on that sort of attention and spotlight. The sales of launch day are a big deal, and getting on that page used to mean something special. Now anything can get on it, and it looks kind of like a description of the old gaming crash. This especially bugs me since this was the day that Secrets of Raetikon released and was one of the games to see fall because a bunch of 15 year old children's educational games decided to cram their way back into the "new" releases. SoR was a refreshing title where you play within a mystical nature world as a bird, freely flying and interacting with the world around you. It was the first and still the only game I liked enough to go into early access with, and I was lucky to even find that thanks to how well hidden the thing was. It was worth it though, and quite a refreshing and nice game. There was good testing done for it, developers that cared to evolve the game in suiting ways and across a wide range of computers, and there was even a level designer built into its core so that you could re-design the game. Amazing concept, only it was going pretty obscure and unnoticed for a while. So I was really excited for when the world would wake up and see it new on steam. Obscurity is not really a problem when it gets that shiny position on the biggest PC gaming client out there, right? Well its all shot thanks how lazy steam has been with their management. I hope the indie team can still make it with some fundings, but it looks like they'll have to either count on TB or resort to a flashy sale to get noticed by those that don't dig through the newest 30 games. Again... slow clap to you valve. -_-

Now don't get me wrong, games of all kinds have a place on Steam. Old ones, new ones, obscure ones, ports, and of course whether or not they're good or bad is subjective. The only thing is, they need to work and be placed right. Steam does not check for these well. Steam will cram anything onto the store's new page, no filter, and almost never the appropriate release date either. Heck its so bad even the dump is being dumped over. Before the day was up even these children games were pushed away, because apparently the update wasn't finished kicking enough titles around. The answer to fixing this is so stupidly simple. 1) Make sure you know what the heck you're putting in your own damn store. 2) Put it in a matching category. Both of these could be fixed with either a toggle filter on new to steam vs new overall, or there needs to be a totally new tab. That's it, assuming the honest release date is included in the description to. Nothing else necessary. You've fixed a major problem. Do it already valve, and earn back the respect you're losing fast from the community. This crap needs to stop. Your damaging some wonderful games out there by this unmatched laziness.

I do hope the sun will rise again upon this one.

Crawling into a new generation of consoles

It looks so beautiful....

The PS4 is awesome. The Wii U is awesome. The Xbox one.... is probably awesome, but I wont lie to you and pretend to know as I don't own one. However despite how awesome they are, in both features and just for being able to run some good games, I can't exactly say it feels like next generation is really here yet. Heck I've been trying to keep myself saying current generation, because its here and its current so fuck off with the "next generation" for 3 years nonsense like we had last time. However it becomes hard to not say next gen because that's what we're still hoping to see... and apart from visuals we're not seeing it yet. That excitement that comes to a new console era, that hope, that hype... it just wasn't quite what I expected. With Gearbox and FromSoftware also developing brand new games exclusive to the last generation, I suspect its not just a consumer thing on its own either. When it came to the Wii U, I was sold on the idea that something great was coming. Pikmin 3, 3rd party teams, and a potential tablet tied to console idea, and it would be nintendo's first time taking the internet a bit more seriously. Well I overlooked the fact that the 3rd games weren't ones I wanted, and apart from that none of the real hopes have come true yet and 3rd party has pretty much abandoned Nintendo faster than ever before. Meanwhile I wanted the PS4 because... well there was talk of greater things, but to be honest it was 80% for Killzone shadowfall. Now that paid off completely and I was just having a wide grinning blast with it online this morning, and AC4 is better on PS4 as well, but.... that and the PS+ meddling is all that I got with it. Oh and speaking of which, PS+ is more of a benefit to me as a PS3 and vita guy. The PS4 just finally kicked me to that end, so one of the best things to come out of the PS4 was how it made my past consoles better..... that's odd and a little telling of how slow this stuff is warming up.

The fanfare for next generation kind of went with a thud. It started with people panicking over typical hardware failures that were supposed to be expected, and then continued with arguments and fanboy wars with a surprising lack of talk on fun that usually comes to counter the hate. Meanwile the hype train to Dark Souls 2 was like an E-party, TitanFall got a lot of joy yet felt more accepted on PC than it did Xbox one and either way wasn't anything worth the exclusivity, and the PS4 and Wii U seem to break more worthy news on indie titles that were already going to PC than they are about big triple A games that the developers are supposed to be pushing. Even Infamous: Second Son, a big hype title and supposedly a system seller aiming to take the world by storm basically ended with an "oh cool, its a good Infamous game." by critics and gamers alike and people just sort of played it and fell silence. Oh and a Last of Us port for the PS4 was filling up the news as a big hot topic thing lately. I suppose that is to be expected as an exciting thing since its considered as the "best game ever" by so many, but heading into next gen with one of the biggest head-spinning topics being a quick port is still kind of a slap in the face to those expecting a big stepping stone instead.

So now you have Dark Souls 2 and a brand new recently announced Borderlands game aimed at older platforms. Why? Well because the hardware is very well, well established, supported, and people still love and play it.... a lot more people. It was more effective and efficient for those games to tie themselves to tried and true hardware. You know even though I sort of debate that back and forth as lazy, in the end I kind of respect the fact they aren't throwing costs sky high for everything. However they most certainly would enjoy using new hardware... if they had a real reason to. Thing is though we've hit if not passed the peak point of performance. It wasn't going to get much better (while staying efficient) in a traditional sense. The PS3 and 360 put out amazing visuals that could do practically any visual design effectively... even boring realistic ones look fine. So why would the borderlands team burn and throw money at a new console if the old one was just fine in every way?

Beautiful to, right?

Don't get me wrong, there is a set up and potential for next generation to take off. Indies are going to continue to make a good impact for starters... but then there's the better Ram that may go into some good use down the lines. Also at the risk of sounding contradictory, the two games in specific question have a bad history with Framerate. I'm not going to blame the last gen consoles as I've seen far better run way smoother, but still you could imagine they would actually improve with more room given. However until we see a golden game, a game that surprises people, and a game that uses the full power to create some new vision we couldn't quite comprehend, we wont be seeing next gen take off quite so fast. The Wii U has not been able to do that with just a convenient tablet function. The PS4 has not been able to do that yet with a tiny track pad addition or its power. The Xbox one has not been doing anything special yet with its "All in one" connectivity or its similar to PS4 grade power. Its just too basic to see the next generation fly out in colors this soon. The PC has a constantly expanding market full of too many new experiences to keep track of is actually looking more like the real next gen, and that's existing outside of such a cycle. Truth is though its got a lot of tempting bits as consoles have lost more ground to reason with beyond the obvious exclusives and out of the box controller support. Its not really much wonder as to why PC is seeing quite a good number of new people, and a lot of the intelligent chatter is held within the PC player side. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying consoles have no purpose, but its getting more and more difficult to say that as time goes on...

Again I'm going to restate that its good to see some new consoles out, and its nice to wonder what will come out of them. Soon I'm probably going to write a small list of my hopes in innovation with this upcoming generation. However for now, it just feels more quiet than expected. Actually... I'm kind of enjoying it a bit to. Setting aside the crappy nature of the resolution mess, the industry is kind of taking a bit of a backseat while gamers just figure out what's good to play. Less controversy, Less hyper hype (save for titanfall, which is thankfully taken heat for being overhyped), and its just a time to relax. I've been reading big news over the simple indie MOBA Awesomenauts and their starstorm update, and similar indie news from the big event that happened not long ago. Apart from that few other things have become strongly noticeable, and I'm just able to log out of news and play games like Okami and Killzone Shadowfall. It kind of reminds me of my disappointment with last year's GOTY contendors, I was having more fun with older games... but I didn't really care all that much, because it was still fun that way. This sort of thing happening on a bigger scale even provokes gamers to make up their own news stories and discuss personal opinions and potential innovation among themselves. You know what, Shadow Fall has been a blast, I have some games to catch up on with the Wii U, and I'm sure whenever I get around to Infamous it'll be great. If that's all we get alongside indies and these more peaceful feeling to the industry, heck I'll take it! :) I just wish the Wii U and Vita would just randomly pick up thousands of sales so people would stop shouting doom for no reason.

Now Playing: Okami HD... also something about my experience with Zelda games

Truth be told, I've kind of been meddling with multiple games within down time from Dark Souls 2. I've played that up to the Rotten, and really want to work on beating it, but I've been dabbling across a variety of games.... and I do really emphasize variety. In the past 5 days I've played Doom 3, Last of Us, EDF Insect Armageddon, Hoard, Zombie U, Sonic all stars racing, Lone survivor, Worms Armageddon 2, Thomas was Alone, Brink, and Advent Rising. That's without bringing up Dark Souls 2 and the soon to be focus point Okami. I came close to adding PlayStation Battle Royal and remember me to that list to. My original plans were to work a lot on Advent rising, but that got sidetracked thanks to pressure to stay connected to steam and steam chat. So instead I decided to shove most of PC gaming out the window and I've been tinkering with several games. Its not so much as this "gamer ADD" problem, though I am still plagued with that, but it was more of this odd feeling to just tinker with something. Multiple of these games were free PS+ stuff given out, and I wanted to check them out, so I did. Then there's the dumb B movie feeling I wanted to fool with in EDF, then I was inspired to go back to Last of Us and work on campaign, but oh Doom 3 still has that weapon I was experimenting with and an easy transportable save file to safely progress through, etc. Its kind of crazy really. However the one that really grabbed me, and the thing I'm probably going to become pulled into for a while is Okami HD. Even if I'm wrong, and end up playing 8 more games or something I still have to talk about it.

Lets get this out of the way first... Okami is brilliant! I never really heard of it during its PS2 release, and after quite some hisitation I went after it on the Wii version. When I did play it though it was so worth it, and I really enjoyed it up until the point where I was glitched into a broken point 20 hours or so into the game. Despite some very obvious zelda influences, and a certain familiar sense of personality to it to it, its an incredibly refreshing and unique sort of game. Its also probably one of the few "classics" I'll 100% agree with, enjoy, and might even ask that it gets even more credit. That usually isn't the case, unless the game's name is Metal Gear Solid (2 or 3), or Duke Nukem 3D. Okami has you running around progressing a Japanese mythology themed plot, fighting enemies, and advancing both the world and your own powers by learning paint techniques. That last one seems a bit odd, but a huge reoccuring theme of the game is using paint strokes for attacks/distractions/set-pieces/extra interactivity. It has its hit and miss moments, but its probably one of the more interesting traits of the game and has a special sense of power to it. There's a strange feeling of Zelda with a small hint of Spyro that rests beside a totally different game altogether. Of course there's also the novelty behind the set up to the game as well. You play as a Goddess taking on the form of a wolf within a fantasy Japan world. Everything is all artsy with cell shading, vibrant colors, and a lot of minor effects exploding at once to the point where the big things are ironically quite dull by comparison. ...Also, again you're playing as a wolf with magical godly paint brush powers... that's something you wont be able to say in any other game.

Still despite all its interesting bits that make it so different, it also kind of has a slight pull of familiarity to it that really hits hard after some years have gone by. I wouldn't exactly call it nostalgia, (and the original play came to me too late to feel that sort of attachment anyways) but its similar. It feels like I've sort of been thrown back, and my current self is sort of meeting my past self at the same time within gaming terms. Seeing Okami in this way again feels kind of like its hit me... I seen where games have been, I've seen how they've evolved,

and I've expanded what I play to the point where I've sort of evolved myself and have become more embedded withing the general culture. Now I'm playing a major classic that just crossed so many odd lines, and somehow went through 3 generations re-releasing each time to low sale records yet remaining a legendary experience to be immortalized by near perfect acclaim. As I play it the little gamer I was wants to interact with everything, get immersed under all the glorious interactions, and do everything there is to the point of finding the breaking point of the game. After all, I was a freakin' wolf, and there was a big village and cast to see and an adventure to be thoroughly enjoyed! Yet there's another part of me analyzing it under the influence of the web, counting the traps and bad cliches the game design fell into (like how certain paint sequences are basically QTEs), or challenging it to be better than Zelda as it was to me when I initially played it, and to think of how I would score the game compared to critics, or whether or not it has marketing relevance in today's world. Then there's yet another side of me that caused me to have some terrible first impressions... the part of me that adores games like Dark Souls, and Dishonored where I wanted more

mystery and sense of my own expression and blind risk taking. Instead the game kept hammering me with constant text after text after text of chatter only to take a break so it could force me into a one way story progressing script or a paint themed QTE. That also meant I could never enjoy something new like I should. New technique? They'll force a repeating tutorial on you 5 times. Mysterious looking tree? There's a paragraph of  exposition on why it looks funny before you can ever interact with it for yourself. Distant treasure catch your attention? Nope, can't leave your small area until you complete the exact objective first! Ugh, I swear I can't remember the game having nearly this much hand holding, and its just horrible. That sense of adventure is supposed to come with discovery, risks, and mystery, not a convenient chain of lectures! Ok with that mini-rant aside, the game still holds up as fun. Its just weird to have a game sort of conflict with all sorts of my own mental states at once. The result is much like what the game is in itself... there's a warped feeling of familiarity to it all, but it melts together as a unique experience. It kind of makes me wish I could have that younger inspired side of me just take over. I want it to be totally refreshing, completely immersive, and obey everything at face value as an amazing experience without any consequence. Yet I know now of its history, its failings, its reputation, its charms, its game design choices, and I'm more straight forward with a task. Overall I know I'm a smarter and more improved person in the way I've grown up in gaming, but this game tugs hard on that desire to erase intelligence for a strange sense of blissful child innocence and ignorance.

Anyways moving on, I remain really impressed with the game. Its story is interesting, (even if its cast and timing is intrusive) the art direction lives on well in HD, and the gameplay is very fun. I've never been able to get into Zelda. I'm not 100% sure why though... I love its feeling, I love starting a new game in that immersive and fun village the series always has, and I adore that sense of a high fantasy adventure in a strange enchanting world. I think its the scripts, progression system, and the level design philosophy that generally stops me. Its like what I was complaining about with the hand holding, except its applied more into the design. You so clearly swing on the prompted hook swing bits here, you follow the obvious path there, and your stopped when you need a specific item that only works with whatever is stopping you. Its one big overglorified key finding game basically, and once that feeling sets in the illusion of adventure is shattered for me. Oh and puzzles.... I hate those puzzles. Meanwhile that charming village with freedom, interaction, and immersion that got me so excited just comes off as a bait and switch thing of the past once the real game warms up. I'm not trying to insult the series, as its clearly doing well and doing something right. If anything I envy the fans. They "get it" while I'm lost trying to find that value. Yet with Okami, it changes and I feel more welcomed into it. I'm not going to say it is better as a fact, but to me personally there's little to compare considering how much it trumps it in my eyes. The combat is better, setting is more specific in a way that interests me, I like its graphical style more, its abilities are more open, and did I mention the combat?

The game has some serious hand holding problems and that same sense of stupidly specific progression that makes Zelda feel like a linear trap more than an adventure to me, however Okami has that feeling to me of leaving everything else pretty open. The best example of this in work is the combat itself, and the area surrounding the bloom power. The combat is set up with specific efficiency in mind. You combo off enemies, dodge their attacks, and when they lose color in a stun effect you have to draw a slash over them. Yet you can also place bombs, sprout trees, switch your core weapon set and a sub-weapon side effect, and use items or dojo abilities that effect the battle.  Its almost like a real time version of those old JRPG battle systems, you have so many items and combinations to use but an efficiency to strive for (better time and less damage get extra yen). That's kind of the same method that feels like it applies to the main game. There's an open-ness to the way you do things, even if your true quest is full of precise predetermined objectives that restrict input. When you get the bloom ability, the way to get it was strict and pre-loaded as heck, but once you have it your welcome to practically change the world. First getting that ability, and doing that along side other "praise" enhancing side tasks becomes less of a chore and more like the joy of a kid on a scavenger hunt.

Another thing I also noticed about the differences between Zelda and Okami... Okami has a better sense of empowerment in my honest opinion. Zelda throws you into a peaceful and lovely village, eventually gives you a sword, and then your on some weird adventure without much clue or clear reason for progress until you come across something that telegraphs your requirement. Okami tells you what your goal is pretty much right off the bat... an ancient evil, Orochi, has cursed the land and as a weakened goddess you must reclaim your power, heal the land, and kill the beast yet again. You need godly paint powers, and there are 13 to collect. Simple as that. That sounds kind of like lame writing that makes the game predictable, but its actually not that black and white. The way you get them, the way you interact with the people, and the reward that comes within them are far less predictable and become a very enjoyable part of the discovery. Also I have yet to bump into a place that feels closed off at all, the game constantly throws open looking environments out. I've heard there are dungeons, and I'm currently heading towards a closed off part I remember as the ruins, but those type of places are far less frequent than the open world vibe. The game also has a nice touch to the start... no you wont be in that lovely village immediately, but instead its rewarded to you after about an hour into the game (way less if you mash those text boxes away). You have to get the ability to free it, then you have to slowly bring things into it to restore it and make it both safe and accessible. The village is used as an example... its an example of how the world needs to be restored, its what your powers are capable of, and when you use them right really nice things and new opportunities unfold. Now again I'm not saying Zelda is wrong in how it does its thing, but I can't help but feel like they went through some radically different thought processes despite a common general direction, and I prefer Okami's side far more while Zelda leaves me scratching my head and leaving early.

I think within all that, I've also sort of stated why I love this game quite a good bit. It gives me an odd sense of adventure despite some contradictions, and it has a very fresh feeling that plays with a variety of my mind sets and emotions. I enjoy the game a lot in the end, and its a great example of our grand interactive medium. It really has a strong feeling of grabbing an old folk tale and pulling you into it, telling you to be a part of it, and to leave your paw print and brush strokes along the world as you go from start to end on a predetermined ending. Meanwhile it also manages to surprise you, and keep you thrilled by those same predetermined rules and strong direction. It does that in its art, with its cast, and with the events that unfold. Its a true work of art, looking artsy, and yet being a good "fun for the sake of fun" sort of video game.Just as the tale itself, it is full of magic, and I am very happy to be playing it again.

Gamer Crimes: Musical Mics

Its been a while since I did one of these... heck I only did one of these. So a recap: Gamer crimes was supposed to be a sub-series of things that I see/hear/know gamers do that really annoy me for some reason or another. Last time it was about how bad it was to trade in every single game you play, but now lets talk about something more well known to annoy people... the Microphone spam. This wont take long.

Your playing, having a good or bad match, and working with your team... until some idiot start fuzzing up the mircophone with his lame music. Now you have to find a safe spot, pull up the menu, and sort out who is causing the disturbance so you can mute them. Now in part this can be partially blamed on microphones to begin with. As a guy that started online gaming on PC with TF2, I remember pushing V to talk through my mic. When I heard a lot of the mics people used on consoles had no switch, no buttons set aside for talking, and upon hearing all the background mic buzzing, I knew this would be a problem. However with all that being said though, the person on the end can still make things much worse...

For starters... if you have an open microphone, SHUT YOU STUPID MUSIC off. I don't care how cool you think your rapping beats sound in a competitive FPS, truth is it doesn't belong. Even if you had some metal, or some kind of military marching tunes,  or something else that remotely went better with the game the quality coming through the microphone would still make it crap. Even more ridiculous is the obvious implication that in order to have an open mic, you should be a chatter. Do that, not flood us with music. I'd be fine with a team mate giving some orders, having a casual conversation, and heck I even like humorous mic spam if its in good taste. Yet just wasting it to blare bad rap and disrupt everyone's game... seriously, quit being a jerk and lets get back to the gaming.

Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes review

This snake venom isn't quite as potent as it should be...

So Metal Gear Solid has had a controversial return to the market after a long absence from its main line-up. Ground Zeroes is put on the shelves at half price of full retail and more of a premium teaser or in the director's own words a "tutorial" rather than the full experience that is coming sometime next year, and not everyone is happy with this. People from critics to die hard fans seem split on determining whether or not this is a cash grab, or just a short and sweat budget game. I got some time with it on the PS3 version, and now I'm prepared to give my view on this title from how good and bad the game is.

The game throws you (playing as "Big Boss" Snake) into an American military base within Cuba with the goal to rescue some hostages. Despite past entries, this time around the cut-scenes aren't that big of a deal. They're still probably long-ish by some game standards, but they don't build up to anything serious and the real ones happen before and after the level while past games could pop up at any minute during gameplay. I'd still say the two big cut-scenes do deliver enough for the usual presentation you would expect though, especially when we're talking about the intro. It opens in a way leaving you very curious, the scene was backed by an interesting song and the usual interesting yet cheesy dialogue of the series, and gives the playable character and the villain a silly but welcomed introduction. This feeling with the cut-scenes can honestly be applied to the rest of the game. It constantly reminds you that something is different, but not the sort of thing you would panic over. The main formula has been reworked and toyed with, yet the heart and power that was always behind the series is still present and gripping you in a way that only comes from the MGS series.

Speaking on those changes, there's a lot of good and bad. To get the sour side out of the way first, many things feel comparable to the typical stealth market. You have a limited inventory now with a single pistol or tranquilizer slot, a rifle slot, a special weapon slot, 4 throwable slots, and a goggle gadget spot that only had Night Vision for this game. This also includes special equipment, and as you can imagine there's a reason I didn't say a slot for food or health packs.... there isn't any in this game and the health is purely regenerative like many action games. Likewise you just wont have many tools at all like you're used to having, the new inventory just isn't made to hold much beyond basic weapons. I do have to say though that its nice to have the tranquilizer show some limits, that's always been sort of an overpowered toy for those that knew what they were doing... and now you wont always have that as a plan because you might need to make room for something else. The next big change in format is codec calls are replaced by a radio which works on the go and with a single button. This is viewed by some to be nice as you wont be interrupted and get to run around while your commander talks and relays important messages. However it also means you wont be selecting your own call frequencies, chatting with multiple characters, or even saving the game at your own will. Plus to be honest I kind of liked having my gameplay and chats disconnected to provide better focus and more quiet gaming or more developed conversations. The commander will sometimes throw in his dialogue right over top of me trying to listen in on enemies, or even cutting himself off to say another scripted piece if I'm moving over another trigger point for his lines. Finally, there's a giant change in the alarm process, which I originally wrote an entire paragraph of ranting on how backwards its gone before realizing I was drawing it out a bit. To try and shorten the point though... When spotted you go into an overpowered reflex mode where everything slows down for a pretty good chunk of time so that you can pull off a headshot. Its not that bad of an idea, but just lasts way too long and really breaks any tension whatsoever. It also has no cool-down, and you can actually run out into the open and activate it again and again with multiple guys around the same area. As long as they didn't both catch you at the exact same time, there will be multiple reflex modes. Now the game has a way to turn this off and even rewards bonus points for it, however the fact is the game is balanced more in favor of it. The other extreme is where the guy spots you and that flash second of spotting results in the entire base chasing you down. This binary choice of too easy or instant detection is a massive step backwards from the more advanced protocol-like multi-step alert phase from the older games. Its less fun, and the skill level is whacked out towards perfectionism rather than a fluid reaction. Oh and while I'm mentioning the alert problem, I'll point out that guys who die in fights during the alert phase wont go noticed until AFTER the alert phase is down, making it so that the idiot AI gets surprised and thinks there is a new invader threat from spotting a corpse they should have detected long ago. Its ok to face palm there, this type of flaw should not be acceptable for a "next gen" step in the series.

However I'm glad I wasn't scared away by the new changes when I first heard about them, because once you actually play it the Metal Gear Solid charm and heart is still very much alive. Despite my compressed rant on the alert system, and the fact I dislike many of the staple changes, there's a lot new and entertaining changes that are welcome and the fun that is had in this game far outweighs the criticism you just read. Not to mention even the bad changes often have their fun twists to them. A lack of infinite inventory gives me motivation to track down what I need if I decide to change up the style, making better use of the big world. The radio feels less personal and interactive, but you will be in the gameplay more often because of its change. However the best change to the series is the level layout, and it is fantastic! No more frequent loading screens, tiny guard count following tight scripted spots, and its a real and good break away from the nostalgic isometric camera we remember the classics in. It takes full use of a large scale environment to sneak through, and buildings that are part of the same world rather than a stage. Oh yeah and then there are vehicles. There's a better feeling of fluid and natural stealth within a huge layout where you're up against spotlights, jeep patrols, guards that often have a big radius, and that when the alarm comes on reinforcements can come in large quantities. The spotting also carries over from longer distances, leaving the line of sight and staying hidden to be a bit more realistic and immersive. You also have a higher sense of exploration that most of the missions use to an advantage. The first mission has you going after two hostages which is easy until you realize the 2nd one was moved into a special location for interrogation and may or may not have been killed. You have to listen to a tape recording of the path the hostage traveled, and find the spot based on the sounds. However you also overhear guards talking about an optional hostage location that you can go to, and they will give you more details if you promise to save them. Then there's two side missions later in the game that involve you scanning through the base's guards with your binoculars to look for a specific face. These kind of missions simply couldn't be done in the old stage layout, and are a very welcome addition to the new MGS.

http://i.imgur.com/mJtJIDr.jpg?1

...and now to burn it all down!

There are still plenty of staples to the series in place as well. You still hold up guards, hurt them in knock out, sleep, or death states, and there are still fun gadgets to play with. You also have that feeling spread into the new layout. Listening to guards can reveal details that change the dynamic of the mission, you can shove enemies or hostages into vehicles or stow yourself away on the back of a truck in motion, and there's a new end level set-up where you signal a helicopter to escape in. The game holds a lot of the depth and even trivial effects its been known for, proving that its generic bits aren't exactly turning it into the splinter cell clone it sounded like it was going to be. Throughout my time sneaking, taking information from held up guards, finding new weapons, and escaping from an angry base full of guns aimed at me I was having the sort of fun that just doesn't come from just any stealth or 3rd person action game. The game also retains a strong sense of humor that shows up in between serious parts. You'll hear it in from silly dialogue to 4th wall breaking gags. It earns the name it wears and it reminded me why it was so much better than what I've been playing it the series absence. Its only a shame that it all comes up a bit short as we've all heard.

Now I hear lots of people dismissing the game as a demo, or just a tech showoff. I'm not sure how much I'd agree with that, but it certainly is that sort of a prologue experience we're occasionally seeing around the market every once in a while. Its a budget release set with a limited show. There isn't much of a story despite the big presentation the cut-scenes set up. Character development is practically gone as well as you could imagine, except for the villain which is odd because you practically never see his face. So... when the most developed character is nearly faceless in a MGS game you know something is a bit weird. The weapon selection is limited, the missions are pretty disconnected and yet all set on the same chunk of land, and the game can start to feel predictable within 3 hours. That's also saying IF you're even playing for that long, as the game's credits are often hit within the hour mark and everything beyond that is just optional stuff. Yeah... that game is really short. However I'm actually not going to really complain about the length itself so much, and I'm especially not going to beat the dead horse on price for length ratio as that's been taken way out of context to stupid proportions for this game. The replay value is still really high thanks to the natural replayability out of a MGS game, and even the new editions that add more of an arcadey sense of replay. You get graded on your playstyle after every mission, end level comments on special ways you may have completed them, and have collectibles to fetch as well as a pile of audio tapes that could write themselves a freakin' novel worth. It has a ton for major fans and completionists. However like I was saying, that's not my concern....

Instead I'm complaining about this because there's a weird feeling of underdevelopment tracing through the whole game. Once your first few hours are done, you've practically seen everything and things begin to feel predictable. You have about 10 firearms in the game, even less gadgets (only one thing, nightvision, goes into your left slot the entire game) there's only but so many buildings, and the missions are easily identifiable and once accomplished they don't really play out with many surprises.  Its not about length per value in this case (it probably takes hours upon hours to probably hit 100%), its about the fact that it feels like there's still an underwhelming use of the world. The gameplay itself is very fleshed out, but nearly nothing else is. The same base, the same enemies, the same weapons, the same vehicles, the same voices, and a story and general experience that doesn't go far at all. Its not exactly what I would call a serious flaw, but it is the short end of the bargin with this budget release. I suppose that's the problem with an open world premium demo of this sort. Meanwhile an epilogue to an adventure game such as Ratchet and Clank: Into the Nexus feels fully fleshed out, and has a clear beginning, middle, and end with replayability tagged on as well. Same with something like those "experience" artsy games such as Journey. It comes to a solid and fulfilling closure. This game just slaps you in the face with a feeling that it was only a beginning without any feeling of climax, progress, or the usual amount of surprises a new game or complete experience would often pack.



http://i.imgur.com/BB6i6GX.jpg?1

Sneaky snake is sneaking

Now the game does present itself as the first game using the new Fox engine. It is fantastic! Going through a rental I was kind of forced to take the last generation PS3 version, yet its not bad at all. The lighting, amount of texture detail, and the fact that bodies have full physics presents a fantastic level of graphics that few games have bothered to match. Rather than wishing I had it on the PS4, it actually reminded me more of the question about why some were in such a hurry for better hardware, as this is damn impressive and doesn't leave me wanting much at all. The only two downsides are how flat the patches of grass and bushes look, and how dead bodies will inconsistently disappear (some stay for the whole level, others fade as soon as you look away). The new engine in the end is very impressive, and if this really was a "premium tech demo" it is a really good one.

Verdict & closing notes:
Click for the score card...

It was a tough game to grade due to the fact that it may not even be a game by some standards... its more of a premium teaser. However despite all the controversy, hate, and negative attention this move was given I feel like the consumer end got more carried away than the publisher here. The game is still absolutely fantastic in terms of fun value, and anyone that really was right for this series will know how to get their value out of it. The new interface and gameplay changes took some getting used to, but in the end this was a clear blast to play that reminded me why I love the series as much as I do... even if I had to play it a bit differently than the exact ones I sort of grew up with. The over the top humor, interactive player choice, and intense stealth is not lost on this small package, even if its not as fleshed out as it should be. However because it sells itself short and feels like its in need to be fleshed out more, there is no way I can give this game the legendary status I feel like the upcoming Phantom Pain MGS will be. Its just a really awesome and fun game, but a teaser of a much grander experience. While I think the price moaning has gotten out of hand, I'll admit I can't exactly find myself agreeing with it 100% either. My advice is to be a smart consumer and take advantage of this short and sweat game with a rental like I did. Heck I spent triple the time it would have taken me on the first mission just to make this review. So unless you feel like you're MGS's #1 fan, I can't recommend an immediate purchase. Still... I'd say its pretty much more fun than any stealth game save for maybe Dishonored, so if your desperate for just sneaking this is the best recent release you'll get for such a short price.

Top 5 things to make me happy in a shooter

With Wolfenstien coming up in less than about 3 month's time, its nice to dream and hope it'll be fantastic. Being a massive FPS fan who's been repulsed by modern trends and desperate for a real and solid triple A corridor shooter, I have every reason to hope this game delivers. Yet does it really contain what I love in shooters? Well... actually I think so. I sat down and really thought about what makes me really adore the shooters that I do. It turns out there's more to a good shooter than just good mechanics, though that helps a lot. I have a funny tendency to adore certain ones over others for odd reasons, and also I'm able to adapt and forgive things I commonly preach against if the shooter does something special to go beyond my expectations. For example why is it that I adore Killzone 2 far above Resistance 3 when R3 has far better mechanics and depth to it? I eventually came up with 5 things that either catch my attention, or make me keep a tight hold on a shooter if it hits these marks, and it also reveals the priorities of each piece. Now that isn't to say that a shooter has to have these to be objectively good. Its just about what I personally prefer and what I like to see in the genre. Maybe some people have a different take, and that's just fine. However this is my list of the things I usually adore in a shooter...

5) Enemy Novelty

It sounds a bit silly I know, but I do care about the types of enemies I'll be facing. It effects the gameplay more than you'd think to. A b-movie them putting you up against demons, fantasy creatures, robots, or all of the above will certainly be a different experience than a shooter full of army guys, or zombies. When you have a game full of zombies, you know you can expect a feeling of being swarmed full of dumb AI and you will probably be able to find the atmosphere predictable. Meanwhile a plot full of army guys... best case scenario is the Helghasts or Half-life 1 (HL2's AI can't compare) marines with intelligent maneuvers and some interesting suit designs. However for the most part you'll get pot shot dull lifeless enemies likely taking place in a game that either takes itself too seriously or is trying too hard to be a casual blockbuster experience rather than a good shooter. I obviously lean more towards the side that wants to decapitate lizard aliens, or watch an army of disfigured mutations spawn out of fire walls butchering my allies and throwing interesting circle strafe worthy attacks at me. On top of that, I just love the raw creativity of some of the bad guys that go on behind some of the games that get more wild with enemies. I mean look at the doom 3 picture above... Freakin' armored skeleton man looks pretty awesome! Then there's the lizard dudes from Turok, those zerg things from Metro, that epic widow maker boss fight in Resistance, and when you hear that poison zombie in Half-life 2.... just wow, its so awesome to see and hear for the first time. I just love creature designs, and gaming and specifically shooters and RPGs are a breeding ground of great ideas towards aliens, monsters, and fantasy variations. However where as RPGs usually turn it into a giant calculator, FPS actually puts these creative monsters into live and intense combat with unique pros and cons to test both skill and reflex. If your a shooter with great and creative enemy types, you have my attention slightly more than those without them. However with that being said... you can still go so very wrong with it, and honestly I'll take pot shot enemies that work over a broken game that failed to use any enemies up to potential, or even worse... annoyed me with them.

4) An engaging slice of fiction

I say this a bit weirdly because I'm essentially dodging around "good plot", but I don't want to mislead you by saying that directly.... because saying I like a good plot really is a bit off. I like one that grips me, and I like the universe and fictional elements more than I do characters or morals that build up what people expect to be the good plot. So saying "engaging slice of fiction" feels much more honest, even if it sounds weirder. Now you could be taking this a bit weirdly... Either your picturing I'm a massive fan of Half-life style games and that I play them because I somehow see a big awesome epic within it. Well I suppose that's not totally off, but not quite right either. I'm not that picky about games to desire only that, and I don't totally agree with the way those player controlled cut-scenes are done either. The other thing your probably thinking is that shooters can't have a good or gripping story piece at all, and your probably laughing at this. Well... to be honest I'm kind of sick of that attitude, along with a couple other smug mockeries people assume the whole genre goes under. I suppose I'll get around to that another time though because getting to the point: shooters are a lot more creative than they get credited for.

I like a lot of FPS stories actually, and I think that's a big part of the reason I love the genre more than most... until more recently where it just seems to be about army men and terrorists with some nuke threat thrown in. However it doesn't take me much to be invested in your story. I don't need an objectively grand plot with some stupid "relatable character", romance, or other hollywood formula BS. I play games to get away from those stupid story formulas. Yeah you read the last part right, I actually favor the old method of game premises over the common formulas out of movies, and industry that is supposed to capitalize on story. Honestly games sort of felt like a more mature version of what Saturday morning cartoons put out. They had some silly super villains, failed experiments, over the top action that looked too ridiculous to take seriously, and sometimes there were rockin' tunes to back it all up. You know what makes that even better though? You were into it, looking into that world and concept through your own eyes and actions. You got to read documents on those experiments and abominations, look into military intelligence on the threat, hear audio logs from other people going over past events, you got to fight important villains through climatic boss fights at times, and you did it along with taking on piles of faceless enemies. Gaming also fixed problems I found with those cartoons. It was allowed to be violent, it encouraged more creative monsters and enemy types for the sake of gameplay, and it didn't end in 20 minutes. Even your bigger story driven games were in this boat. You can try to justify Half-Life 2 as a legendary plot made to bring shooters closer to high art, but at the end of the day I got into that story because I wanted more details on that awesome strider machine, I wanted to feel what it was like to be in this slice of fiction where the world has become our prison by aliens, and I wanted to be a part of that rebellion when it all got uprooted, and I'm still excited to see the alien face behind the threat so that I can blast them with a trash can powered by a gravity warping beam gun. If this were all done in a movie or any other medium, it would be as cheesy as hell, but its actually considered a new high for gaming for its better detailed scripts. I love this sort of story telling in shooters, screw the naysayers.

However it can go beyond the typically cliche sci-fi stuff. I even find character development done better in some of these games. The Last of Us made me care about what might as well be otherwise another The Walking Dead inspired zombie drama. Why did it make me care? It was longer than a movie and more fleshed out while having a solid beginning middle and end pattern, it let you see parts of the world for yourself with its subtle clues and big shocks left for me to see rather than a fixed camera, and it was all digital meaning they could build all sorts of awesome creatures rather than dressing up people for lazier monsters (this is also why there are more and better uses of aliens in gaming). However to top it all off your with Joel and Ellie their entire adventure, with a lot fewer cuts than there would be in cinema, and a lot more control over them during their more stressful times. By the end of the game the plot all ties together because you worked with them, you saw what they saw, they were a part of your life rather than some director's, and you struggled to get to that ending... even if its hardly a true struggle in games today. Heck you can also take a quick look at Killzone for yet more reasons to love a weird take on video game story. Its more about the war itself and the worlds in danger rather than characters, and in doing so you have a nice sort of gothic medieval vibe in space with propaganda blaring, civilians being pushed around and troubled by the war, a questionable background of the conflict spinning around questions on who's the bad guy, and a presentation that ends up being more amusing than pretentious or serious like you would see with most "grim dark" stuff in other mediums. You don't need aliens and lasers to appreciate how awesome this cheesy world of Killzone is. At the end of the day I want these type of stories delivered by great shooters and great games more than anything else, and I feel like this is a strong point a good shooter game can handle. I look forward to Wolfenstein doing this as well, as its already got the stage set for a good cheesy grim dark setting with a nice world to escape to and shoot up in my free time.

3) Solid input, depth, and player options

Pssst.... Hey, want to know a secret about gaming? Its interactive, so take a clue from common sense and make use of that to let the player have a ton of control. While your at it, use intelligent design choices to really make use of the game's potential. When I talk about gameplay depth I'm thinking of all the mechanics that the player has to take in, and use to shape the world around them... or what the world may use against them. FPS has always had some of the best balance within depth, often not being so open that is all down to raw numbers and precision, yet its open enough for a lot of strategy and player expression to overlap perfectly with a well refined linear experience. Good player input in an FPS is as simple as letting them feel in control over the situation to some extent. Like giving them a wide selection of weapons, a variety of enemy sorts to face, multiple ways to hurt them, and a feeling that when they mess up it was a true moment of brain fart on the player's end rather than some bad or limited game design.

A good example in Serious Sam 3 was a moment where you had a mounted automatic Minigun turret that fired at waves of enemies by itself. You could choose to help the gun take them out, pick it up yourself and take all the glory but risk ammo depletion (as it was tied to a limit once detached), or sit back and relax only picking off what few enemies made it around. Then once all was said and done you picked it up and moved on to a massive hoard of enemies. There were massive brutes that fired rockets, but only a handful while what was literally over a hundred fast steer skeleton foes were the main body of this stampede. This part took me forever to get past because it required a massive balance between ammo, resources, pacing, and gunning, but it was all down to my end and I had so many guns to use to fight back and had the challenge but freedom to prioritize the destruction of my enemies. I mostly killed two big guys with rockets before saving up the rest of that and pulling out my minigun for the steer. Once I was running out, I retreated and shot at them with a variety of shotgun and assault rifle rounds before falling back to a stash of minigun ammo I was saving for later because I choose to manage that for emergencies, and that strategy worked.... after a couple of tries of course, it was still a tough fight. This is ideal depth in a game. By contrast many games now have turned towards linear scripts, uninspiring lack of choice, and mechanics too shallow to get a real feel for. This doesn't instantly make a game bad, but it is a very lacking and uninspired way to go for a linear shooter and is not going to grab my attention easily.

However what if you're not making a game that is linear? Well.... options! Options for everything. Take notes from Timesplitters and Unreal Tournament as well as the modding community on Teamfortress2 if we're talking multiplayer. Seriously, those games could be played over and over again way out of their potential life cycle all because of player freedom and full interactive rule changes. Let me pick my character model, let me choose what guns I do and don't want in a match, and let me feel free to enjoy tweaking some rules so that I may enjoy any mode if I put down a massive chunk of money on a game. Also of course, add bots whenever you can. This is why I put so much time into Unreal Tournament 2004, why many of my multiplayer comparisons revolve around TF2, and why Timesplitters was one of the greatest FPS games to grace the PlayStation 2. Screw your matchmaking and stock rules, give me depth, user friendly interface, and above all the power to tweak the gameplay so that its fun for me and my friends. With options players can give new life into the game every now and then. Actually... even without MP and offline MP in mind or even shooters, this still applies to a strong game of any kind. Give me remappable controls, give me HUD options, give me FOV sliders, etc. The list can go on and on. Freedom and good user interface is a fantastic and beautiful thing. Please... stop leaving it out. I think Wolfenstien is on the right track by not only seeming deep in mechanics, but also I've been told by a friendly fan that the next generation consoles have FOV sliders.... something nobody except Mag runner has done. That on its own deserves a ton of respect, but I hope they also continue that trend with button mapping so I can have my R3 toggle aim.

2) Awesome gunplay

Do not ever underestimate the awesome feeling of weapons with some serious effort put into their aesthetics. Especially if your a multiplayer driven military shooter. I put up with and played one of the most objectively worst modern military shooters, and stood up for its multiplayer, just because the gunplay was so damn fun and so much less interrupted than most games of its kind. Talking about Medal of Honor Warfighter of course. Then again... honestly this is the giant 1-UP military shooters have over most old school shooters, and I adore it. While older focused on crazy and silly weapons with awesome functions, the military shooter job has to make iron sights look as interesting as possible... that means recoil, multiple sights, deep thick sounds, the feeling of unloading heavy metal piece by piece into a foe before you. It makes for better immersion than circle strafing some point and click plasma railgun or triple barrel rocket launcher ever was. Now that's not to say gunplay in old school sucks... quite contrary, its just in a weird league of its own and captures a different feeling to it than military shooter gunplay. Secondary fire, and crazy functions can lead to some awesome gunplay experiences, and then there's games like bulletstorm that turn gunplay into a meta game of how creative you string it to the level environments and you foot. However more than just how the gun feels goes into gunplay. You have environmental impact, body impact, and of course even mechanics can lead to how this feels. Despite how much I adore this idea that a gun needs to sound and feel powerful, I actually want the health to be higher than the bullet pain making for an ironic bullet spongy experience. I come from this Killzone 2 sort of mentality for a good reason though... its just more fun this way. As much as that sounds subjective in general, I can't help but carry it in my head as fact because of just the countless outweighing bits that benefit the game in larger health. You don't have corner campers because its not a worthy advantage if people can turn around and shoot back. Bigger health gives players a feeling of real battle, and a reason to know that two shooting on one guy (kill assists) is a very strong helping hand encouraging team work. Bigger health lets the player feel like they can take more risks even though its still just as easy to fail but this sense of carelessness leads to a sense of fun chaos in addition to other mechanics that game may offer. Then to state that obvious... it avoids making the whole game into a big reflex contest, and gives players a chance for skill and aim to overcome a poor player getting a fast shot in. By contrast the only good things I can name out of small health is that its great for intentionally fast reflex based games (likely aimed to a more casual focus), and it can be good for tense and heavy consequence tactical shooters. For the most part though big health is just great, and feels so right when its done well. Finally, there is the fact that gunplay just needs to be a big core focus considering it is a shooter, and little to get in the way... that even means keeping guns simple but heavy on the delivery of each one. No 30+ weapons that have no substance, and while Vehicles and Killstreaks may sound fun, they detract from a straight up match and can get in the way of the good side of simplicity. I have nothing against a small thing to shake stuff up, and honestly StarHawk's execution of vehicular combat was just perfect to still keep gunplay strong, so extra stuff can still work... just be careful and don't overdo it. So to recap, one of the biggest factors for a game to grip me is great gunplay. To have this, you need great aesthetics, the proper amount of simplicity, and the right balance of health leaning on a higher end. Few games do this 100% perfectly, and honestly that's one of the main reasons I put Killzone 2 as my personal top PS3 game (though its since beaten by Dark Souls, but 2nd ain't bad).

However its also worth mentioning to add on to what I was saying about military vs old school gunplay: Military shooters can and have been older-school before, just look at Killzone 1 and Resistance (though it wasn't the best in gunplay) that have strong ties to both pieces. Heck both actually got converted from old to new and worked pretty damn seamlessly because they can hope the fences so easily. That's kind of where I see the new Wolfenstien and part of what gets me excited, its taking military style weapons with beefy and strong metallic depth and throwing it into a world full of health packs, enemy types, weapon wheels, crazy power, and making it compatible with both iron sights and circle strafing alike. Sounds amazing, and I'm hoping it delivers well. Also just.... look at the gore!. Its not exactly common to talk about how great virtual gore feels, but honestly if your buying a shooter you shouldn't expect puffy smoke and flat ragdolls as your impact effect. There should be gore honestly, and it should be over the top. Its a silly, cheesy, and action packed shooter... don't be afraid of the M rating. It delivers home that idea that your guns make a solid impact, and it works well with grim dark themes some of these games set up. Wolfy here choose right to go all out in this department, and I'm very excited to see the gunplay deliver in every form possible.

1) Level Design and the general execution

I don't actually think much of this... but in all honesty it is the biggest, most important, and downright crucial part to getting me to truly adore your shooter. I don't think of it much, you can't see it in previews, but its there... always effecting the mood and opinion on a game, especially after your initial completion. I've seen quite a handful of shooters get practically everything on this list except this one detail down right, and it suffered in some way for it. Resistance 3 got held back pretty far on my top PS3 list for this reason, because the levels just weren't all that memorable or gripping. They were there, worked the first time, and occasionally I come back for the gameplay, but nothing in the events and level itself were all that great and this put a bit of a damper on it when I wanted to replay. Some parts I even despise. This could be said or even amplified for Bioshock infinite, and its the reason why I couldn't give it a GOTY run as it just lacked a feeling of value and replay after that original run. Meanwhile this is also why I enjoy some generic shooters as well or even play them more than a game that gets its mechanics right. I'm not exactly a COD fan, but I'll play and enjoy some designs of their games but what mostly keeps me around are the maps or certain campaign levels. Modern Warfare 2 had did everything on this list wrong and yet I kept coming back again and again and again even more so than some awesome mechanically sound games. Why? Because it had better and more entertaining levels, maps, and a feeling of more satisfying execution with what it had. Well... that and the modern military shooter routine was new back then and worn out now, but that's besides the point. Sneaking through cliffhanger just feels right. That level with the EMP and wolverines were a great "shooting galleries" as people would like to say. That one whee you're leading a tank's aim through a neighborhood with a wide view of exploration was just incredible! Oh, and then there's the forest level that is just perfect without any major scripts and the set pieces aim at just shoot outs. I kept coming back looking at small details, and challenging myself to find new ways to run through the level even knowing it had shallow mechanics to hinder that sort of attitude. I can still hate on the design for incorporating a ton of scripted junk and for being a generally linear and shallow game, yet I just can't stay mad at it if it keeps me coming back and remembering the levels I went through.

However what happens when you take this sort of amazing level design and throw it into a game with better traits? Well, its a ton better, that's what. Killzone 2 checks off most of these aspects given here and on top of that absolutely amazing level design and an interface that allows you to jump into any piece of it easier. I put over 30 hours of play time into a generically short campaign. It might have a couple shallow elements like regenerating health that put it on the Military shooter fence, Yet this is why it prevails over so many old school shooters.... it executes levels so perfectly in addition to hands down the best gunplay, multiplayer input, and an interesting setting with iconic enemies and thought provoking undertones. Resistance 3 might sound like a game that better appeals to me with full old school mechanics, aliens instead of humans, and crazier weapons and a more absurd plot, but because its level design feels a bit... flatter, I just never make a bigger deal of it than to say its a blast to play for the gameplay... and only in terms of mechanical depth and interest in rule sets. Meanwhile Killzone 2 and Modern Warfare 2 have me coming back with solid gameplay, and because I remember how cool X or Y level was set up, or had the perfect alignment of cover and enemies, or even though this is rare it may have had just the right set piece to make me want to go back. Resistance 3 did one thing right about its level layout.... minimal scripting. About everything else is just dull, which is sad as that seems to send the opposite message a scriptless shooter should be. Yet Alpha Prime, a $5 mediocre copy cat indie shooter, does both so much better and ends up hitting home on all 5 of these major marks now that I think about it. It might sound like I'm being hard on R3, but I do really love it. Its just that missing this one key mark... leaves me with a feeling of disappointment, especially if the gameplay itself was so good.

Of course there's also more than just if the level feels good. Was the game built for it right? Did it do everything well enough, feel well grounded, and present the ability to enjoy it all over again? Singularity was an awesome game, but didn't give me anything but continue or new game when it was all over. So I haven't touched it since I completed it. Bioshock Infinite was fun, but has a sloppy way to load up levels and on top of that is no actually broken in its control scheme so I can't replay that. Oh and a quick glance at its gunplay... enemies shrug off headshots, terrible execution there.  Yet Killzone 2, one of my favorite corridor shooters ever, lets me load levels by bits and pieces while executing some of the best gunplay, and level design I've seen and just enough enemy AI and options to give me some depth to it all. See why its one of my favorites? Yeah that's really nice. The sad thing is this last and most major key point is almost impossible to tell before you pick up the game. As much as I'm looking forward to Wolfenstien, this is one thing I'll have to go on out of a risk. Will it be successful in level design? Will it be fun to replay? I sure hope so.