Review: A Planet Lost and Found
Capcom started off this generation strong, with early announcements of new IPs in Dead Rising and Lost Planet, and it was as if the hype for one title boosted hype for the other (both titles were also under the supervision of Capcom star Keiji Inafune). The two games were somewhat of a pair of twins, both action titles with impressive graphics, and with enough of an original concept in each of them to make them stand out on store shelves. And while both were instant hits in retail upon their release, Dead Rising managed to become a cult-classic in the minds of many, while Lost Planet seems to have become “just another shooter” that failed to hold onto a larger audience. Going into these games, I myself thought that Dead Rising would be my preferred title of the two as well, but after hours spent with each game, there’s practically no doubt in my mind; I’m in love with Lee Byung-hun. [Rest of the review after the jump]
Licking my wounds
My Hero
Well I’ve finally done it, after hours and hours spent slamming away number after number on a keyboard, mouses clicked ad infinitum, liters and liters of various liquids consumed (and then spent), I’ve finally finished StarCraft: Brood War. It feels sort of like a half victory, as with this final mission, I had just about lost all patience and read through various walkthroughs hoping to find the way. Fortunately, a good part of the victory was through my own improvisation and strategy (as what I was told to do was not quite as strong in execution as on paper). But in the end, it feels as if a huge weight has been lifted off my body, never again will I look at that game and mutter to myself “Oh right…”
The last mission clocked in around 3 hours on the in-game clock (which continues from the time of a reloaded save), but in reality I would say I spent around 10 hours on this one single mission, if not more. Amazing isn’t it? I’d say that’s a testament to the game’s overall quality, but I might also be insane. BTW Zerg air 4EVA!!111!
Aside from production values, I’d find it very difficult to put on paper what exactly is so enchanting about the game-that I could put so much time into something that seemed so futile-but even when I remind myself that I’m playing a 10 year old game, it doesn’t seem to matter. I think the developers deserve a lot of credit for crafting their universe, albeit a somewhat derivative one, where most everything fits into place and just kind of works. Not to mention the player finds themselves getting emotionally invested in a bunch of the characters. And it also feels damn good sweeping away what was once someone’s base.
There’s not much else to say about it than that, it’s been 10 years after all. I’d definitely consider it a part of my personal canon though. It’s one of those games where when I’m wondering why it is I love games so much, I think of SC and a little smile comes on my face.
Boy do I want to play something ridiculousy actiony right now…Praise the lord for the skate 2 demo tomorrow.
Tides of Darkness
[NOTE: To my blog readers, please tell me if the images on the side appear blurry or unfocused, the page no longer renders properly for me in Firefox but looks fine in IE7]
————————————————-
A day after the terrible news from 1up, GAF looks like a post-crisis zone right now, trying to salvage what’s left after a terrible incident. It’s actually on GAF that a few of the 1up employees announced that they had been laid off and it’s there that there’s been tremendous support for these unfortunate people. There’s since been threads created that were dedicated to the preservation of the entire podcast archive from 1up (via plainly in the open torrent links) as well as links to the various twitters and blogs of now ex-1up staff.
What I’m getting at here is just how strongly some of these people have touched the gaming community and the invisible bonds that have been forged. Jeff Green wrote a fantastic article on what really has changed here, it’s not ownership but the entire substance of a website and its strong community following. In response to the previously mentioned Sam Kennedy post, the one trying to highlight the positives of the transaction, Jeff had a some words in response:
[This is from Sam Kennedy's post:]
“We’re still the same 1UP, and we’ll still be producing the same content…we always have”[Jeff Green in response:]
Well, no, you’re not, and no, you won’t. You’re not the same 1UP because you just lost a gigantic chunk of what made 1up 1up. It may go on, it may in fact produce great things, but it won’t be the same. All that a company ever is is a mix of specific personalities. That’s all it is. Period. When you remove people, it may go on, but it’s never “the same.” Saying it’s the same is a disservice to all the people who just got canned. And, no, you won’t be “producing the same content” because those responsible for some of the most popular and distinctive content–the 1up Show, the podcasts–no longer work there anymore.
Couldn’t have said it better. By the way, Jeff Green was former Editor-in-Chief of the late Ziff-Davis publication Computer Gaming World/Games for Windows magazine. He was also really popular in the community for hosting GfW Radio, but shortly after Ziff canned the magazine, he went to work with EA. Just a fantastic voice on the press side all around.
It might seem silly to be grieving for the uncertain future of a once great website, but as someone who plans on getting into this side of the industry, it affects me a little more personally. Like plenty of other gaffers, the guys at 1up have given me plenty of laughs over the years and their strong example has helped push me forward and given me something to strive to. Listening to those podcasts was like meeting up with some good buddies for a few hours a week, and they’ll surely be missed.
As for UGO, I briefly glanced at the main page and all I could think of was “Gamepro much?” Its motto is: “Lifestyle for gamers” and mixed in with gaming content are such highlights of a gamer’s lifestyle as “Best Bond Girls” and an article on extreme sledding. If it weren’t for the harsh economic times, I’d think the remainder of the 1up team would be worse off. If 1up.com is completely absorbed into UGO (as opposed to retaining its own editorial direction and content-focus), than the lights have gone out completely.
Thoughts: Does GTA deserve GotY?
When I look at the list of nominess from all the big sites-GTA has won GotY so far on GameTrailers, Spike, GiantBomb, and surely more to come-I realize that I missed out on a ton of the big hits from this year. It seems wrong to say that perhaps GTA doesn’t deserve the big award (considering I didn’t play a bunch of the competitors) but it wouldn’t feel right to say it deserves it either.
The game did have its share of amazing for sure: it was successful in all its flashiness, did a great job at capturing the various parts of New York City, had some well-done setpieces to give the action some flavor, and there was witty dialogue mixed in throughout. I remember those amazing setpieces well (like the assault on the construction site, or the abandoned building on governor’s) but what about all the hours of gameplay that surrounded these moments? Much of it was shallow, sometimes pointless, and other times boring. It was as if Rockstar North was so obsessed with placing the player in the shoes of a real life gangster’s day-to-day that they perhaps forgot that the gangster’s life is full of tedious, uneventful BS (which they captured). And as is probably the reality, the majority of time is spent performing those uneventful activities as opposed to all the “glamourous” stuff spread throughout.
GTA occasionally feels like an art house game with how guided it is by a single vision, but like many art house productions, it gets ahead of itself. One of the biggest disappointments I had with the game is the in-game radio, which in previous titles was often fantastic. But with IV, the developers went so obscure and experimental that I would switch from station to station and find nothing that I liked. It may have given the game some “underground” value but what about the rest of the population who loved all the cheesy hits in Vice City? There’s not a single Top 40-ish station in the game and that is a major false step. And then there’s the driving model, which the player will eventually adjust to but then come back later and hate it all over again. Would it have been such a failure to go with more conventionally accessible controls such as the Burnouts, Need for Speeds, PGRs, etc. rather than the “baby the brake button” style that we see in IV? As to what they were thinking ending the game in New freakin’ Jersey when the game is inspired by New York City? I’d really love to know.
For all its finer points, the game was set out too much to impress on production values and experimentation with the III formula rather than impress with the sheer fun of the overall gameplay (which is what fans of the III-based games originally loved the games for). I imagine Rockstar has a lot of work to do in recapturing all the mindshare they’ve lost, but in reality, I don’t imagine they really care what the people who “didn’t get it” really think.
Reaction: Dead Space demo-”Good show” EA
I’ve kept the skate. demo on my 360 HDD for nearly a year now but I can’t say I’ll do the same for Dead Space. There were three immediate red flags about the demo that warned me it would be a sloppy job. 1. It was terribly small for such an important game (less than 400 megs) 2. Given a subtitle of “Dismemberment” and 3. It was released a few weeks after the game had already been out.
From what I can tell, EA was basically releasing a “proof of concept” stage in lieu of a more traditional demo approach but they still could’ve done a way better job than this. You’re immediately dropped into the game with a lazy controller layout screen to get you “familiar” and a brief comment from an audiolog telling the player character to dismember enemies if they want to survive. And that’s about it. Without being able to look at the layout again (it’s not in the options menu), I couldn’t figure out how to reload (Aim up+A, so simple!), and didn’t even realize I could switch guns till after I had died a few times. They also don’t tell you about the inventory aspect that allows you to refill your health partially. IT’S LIKE EA IS DOING A META-COMMENTARY ON HOW IT MUST FEEL TO BE DROPPED INTO AN UNKNOWN AND HOSTILE SPACE. A DEAD SPACE.
As to the dying? Well in addition to not telling you how to do anything, you’re also brought into a room and immediately swamped with multiple enemies-and from multiple sides-who will more than likely kill you. By the way I might as well tell you that your health is a bar parallel to the character’s spine, the demo left that little part out. The room is ridiculously tight so you can’t run away forever (and it seems you have to fight to progress anyway). After the 5th or 6th time, I got past all the bad guys, you’re told to go somewhere else. When you open that door, a humongous creature is waiting for you and instantly kills you. And then it ends.
A trained player could likely finish this sequence in 2 minutes to give you an idea of it’s lenght. With what this demo presents, I might be better off going to someone who’s played the game already and asking their opinion rather than judging it based on the demo. A good amount of people may be completely turned off by the immediately ridiculous difficulty that is presented to them, although I’m sure the full game is more appropriate about scaling it up. And it fails to convey any of the themes the greater game presents like isolation or terror. Instead, all I felt was frustration. The demo simply gives me no idea at all of what to expect from the entire game.
In a world of kiss-ass journalism, I’m going to say it straight. What the hell were you thinking EA?
Great minds think alike
A quick post, but I just wanted to acknowledge this quote from Jeremy Parish over in a recent post on his 1up page.
These days, I’d rather play a game that aims high and falls short than something that shoots for an easy target, because you’ll usually find some good ideas in the wreckage of an ambitious project that went off the rails.
It’s in regards to Chrono Cross, whose ambitions overextended its reach, and other games of that ilk. I’m mostly of the same opinion, as a game with good ideas is more likely to etch a personal space in my mind, whereas a game of polish will eventually end up being replaced.
I was deeply interested in Alone in the Dark, up until the whole, it sucked thing. It very much gave me an Indigo Prophecy/Fahrenheit vibe, which was a game with numerous problems yet one I’d consider a favorite and always looking forward to going back to. Unfortunately it’s becoming more difficult to take chances on more experimental titles with most games coming out at the $60 dollar price point. Mirror’s Edge is pretty packed with interesting and fresh ideas, but at 7 hours for $60, I’m not knocking down walls to get my hands on a copy.
That is the basic conundrum that a lot of experimental titles are facing these days. There’s very few significant new IPs that chart highly every year and if it is a new IP, chances are it’s not too attached to an out of this world premise. People buy the Halos and Gears of Wars because they can readily expect some quality and polish. Occasionally it’s warranted (Call of Duty 4 sold spectacularly), but for all of those cases there is a matched case of the ridiculous sales of GTA IV compared to the much less impressive sales of Crackdown (which many would say was a more interesting and expectation-breaking game).
Experimental titles often are the only ones that keep the medium moving steadily forward and they’re needed for everything else to succeed. Hell the first Halo was probably pretty experimental back when it first came out. And Final Fantasy VII? It’s got plenty of hate against it now, but it was a major shift in direction that ultimately gave new life to the genre. So should a friend one day recommend you the new Gears, give him God Hand as part of the exchange. You’ll both come out winners.
Reaction: Left4Dead Demo
I’ve been in eager anticipation of Left4Dead for as long as I can remember and everything about it pointed to me liking it. Co-operative, a zombie/survival horror affair (although it was difficult to tell from footage whether it’d be scary at all), Valve was sponsoring the title-they later bought out the developer, always a good sign-, and Valve has been pretty successful with everything they’ve done even if it didn’t involve Half-Life. Team Fortress 2 was one of the most enjoyable pick up and play experiences I’ve ever had with a game, and while I’ve yet to give Portal a full run-through, there was more than enough lavish praise given to it last year.
In the past few months my interest has waned however, as the in-game footage came off as repetitive, predictable, and majorly lacking of that Valve polish. Now I can’t give my impressions of the PC version as it could very well play out like a different game, but for such a unique premise, the 360 version hasn’t done much to impress me. First off, the controls seem almost randomly assigned (LB is crouch, B is reload when just about everyone uses X, I can’t remember what RB does if anything). More importantly, the gunplay neither feels satisfying nor do I feel like I’m fully in control. Say what you want about duel analogs, but they’ve certainly felt sharper than this. Isn’t this game a shooting affair? The explosives usually don’t seem worth going out of the way for as well.
Now if I were to post this on GAF, sure as hell first thing they’d ask me is what difficulty I’m playing on. Some would say anything but expert isn’t worth playing on. In addition, one run through on difficult can play easy as day while the next is a pain in the ass with everyone going down left and right. Is it all in my head or is the AI director maybe too wavering for it’s own good? The demo is easily more entertaining when everyone is struggling as it forces the players to do things outside of shooting another zombie, maybe protect a friend about to be attacked or revive a teammate. So basically from what I’ve gathered, the game is more entertaining when your teammates are incompetent or rookies? Just play a single player round with the overly diligent team AI and you’ll see how uninteresting this game can be. I know the AI director is supposed to arrange the game to be as flexible as possible and keep the player on their toes, but is fighting the Tank at this point in a level really that much more interesting than the other time you fought it? Unfortunately it’ll still attack you roughly the same way and a change of scene can’t completely change the experience.
I won’t dismiss Left4Dead just yet, the PC version could be a whole other animal, but I can’t quite see this game sitting next to the other Valve masterpieces when we all look back 5 years from now. There’s plenty of potential here and the title seemed able to innovate, but when the core game just doesn’t come off too fun, it’s hard to see any lasting significance.
