Sacred 2: Fallen Angel Review

Sacred 2: Fallen Angel is almost difficult to review just because of the sheer amount of content in the game.  You can play for hours and hours and still not really make a dent in the overall scope of the game, but based on the amount of time I’ve sunk into the world of Ancaria I think I’m well equipped to dish on my opinion of the game.

Sacred 2 is, at its most basic form, a callback to the classic PC RPGs of yesteryear.  For the most part if you’re a fan of games like Diablo, Diablo II, Dungeon Siege and Neverwinter Nights you’ll have a good time with this game.  You get to choose one of six character classes with unique traits and skills, and play through either the dark or light side of the main story campaign.  Make sure you’re careful to pick a character you really like though, because the level cap maxes out at a staggering 100, so you’ll have a lot of time to bond with your digital self.

As with most RPGs the main gameplay is as follows: travel from town-to-town picking up quests from villagers and other NPCs, go bash in the skulls of some monsters, and return to said NPC to get experience to advance your character’s level and gain some loot.  The items you receive are rated on a star scale up to 5, with each additional star signifying an ever better item with more powerful attributes.  The reason this is important is because, as we all know, dungeon crawler RPGs are all about the loot.  If you don’t have a propensity for acquiring trinkets to maximize your character’s abilities then this game (as well as the entire genre) isn’t for you.

The graphics are somewhat discouraging for next-generation title.  The closest thing I can relate them to is Titan Quest on the PC, but that’s a 3 year old game.  Still, the comparison is apt as both the camera angle and character movements in both games are very similar.  Given the fact that the world of Ancaria is huge it makes sense to give them some leeway in the graphics department, but still there are better looking games out there.  The audio is another aspect that I have issues with – it’s very repetitive.  You’ll hear the same bits of music everytime you have an encounter with an enemy (a scenario which plays out roughly every 30 seconds) so you’ll probably be tired of the sound aspect of the game within a few hours of play.  The voice acting is also hilariously bad, but one could almost chalk that up as a feature of the game since it brings some nice comedic relief every now and then.

Where this game truly shines is in co-op multiplayer.  You can jump into an instance of the game with up to 3 of your friends and progress through the story as you would if you were playing the game alone.  Like most RPGs this is the way the game was meant to be played.  You’re able to jump in and out of games no matter what your progress is in singleplayer, given that you characters are no more than 10 levels apart.  From here you can progress through the campaign as you would normally, working through quests and generally helping each other out and once you finish up the session your character’s experience progress, items and loot are carried back into singleplayer.

My biggest problem with Sacred 2 is the platform.  As I mentioned above, it’s a traditionally PC RPG experience which has been ported to the console, and I think the Xbox 360 doesn’t do it justice.  Being able to use a keyboard and mouse instead of a controller probably would have made this game much more enjoyable to me, if only because clicking on the screen to have my character move is much easier than using an analog stick.  The game also chugs a bit when you’re in towns which may be a symptom of limited console hardware.

If you’re looking for an action RPG on the console then I’d have to say give Sacred a shot.  I know a lot of people have been much more glowing about it than myself.  However, I don’t think this is the type of game that someone who isn’t familiar with the genre will be into.  In the end I’d say that Too Human pulls off a console adaptation of the genre better than Sacred 2, so if you’re going to try Fallen Angel consider picking it up for PC instead.

“How To Make A Great Movie-Based Game” – IGN

Until relatively recently most gamers cringed when they heard about a new game based on an upcoming movie or similar franchise.  Because of the fact that movie tie-in games usually seem rushed out of the door and leave fans of the movie scratching their heads, the developers at GRIN were faced with the overwhelming task of making a game that lives up to the fanbase’s expectations while at the same time providing a fun experience to everyone else.  Hit the link below to check out an IGN article discussing how they went about making it all come together.

http://blogs.ign.com/terminatorsalvation/

(Courtesy of RocketXL)

Terminator Salvation Review

It goes without saying that the Terminator franchise has had its peaks and valleys, but I for one believe that the latest foray into the world of John Conner was quite successful as a movie.  So then, how does the game fare?  Roughly the same, I’d say.  Having completed Terminator Salvation on the Xbox 360 I can say that it’s a totally enjoyable experience, an exciting action thrill ride that coincides with the theatrical release very well, especially considering that the game’s plot is meant as a prelude to the events that occur in the movie.  Therefore, if you’ve already seen the film you’ll get a whole new experience with the game.

Terminator Salvation is a lot like Gears of War, in a good way.  Most notably in the control style – Salvation uses the same over-the-should vantage point for its gunplay, and even has a pretty interesting cover mechanic.  The best part about it is that with the ability to move precisely between various forms of cover you won’t experience the hassle of getting stuck to cover, or not being able to remove yourself from it as is common in Gears.  Secondarily Terminator Salvation brings Gears of War to mind because it’s just a straight-up fun action experience that doesn’t take itself too seriously and varies the gameplay enough to keep the player interested.  Although 3rd person shooting could be considered Salvation’s main course, there are several vehicle and defense scenarios which give the player enough variation to keep them guessing.

The audio and visual aspects of the game are spot-on.  You’ll hear the familiar Terminator anthem several times throughout, and nothing pairs better with mowing down Endos and Aerostats than that classic ballad.  All-around the music fits well, and the visual portrayal of a post-apocalyptic Los Angeles is surprisingly intricate and vivid.  The weapon load-out is sufficiently varied without becoming too encumbering: you get your standard M16-variant machine gun, a tactical shotgun, a light machine gun, a grenade launcher, RPGs and even a few different forms of grenades.  Though it may sound limited compared to other games’ abundance of weaponry I find that having just a few weapons to work with is optimal since, more often than not, the player just finds their favorite gun and sticks with it anyhow.

I do have a couple of beefs with the game, though.  First of all, it’s damn short.  You can blaze through the whole of Terminator Salvation in an afternoon without much difficulty.  This is coming from a guy who is notorious for taking longer to complete most games than many others do.  Also considering the fact that the achievements are pretty basic and there isn’t a whole lot of replay value, that initial 5 hours is probably the most you’ll want to get out of the game, period.  This shortcoming is somewhat remedied by a nice co-op mode, however.

All-in-all I’m not sure that I can safely recommend Terminator Salvation as a $60 purchase to anyone but the most hardcore Terminator fans.  If you’re interested in the game and are looking for a fun but brief experience, by all means check it out, but wait until the price drops a bit or pick it up as a rental and save your cash for a more substantial game.

Chronicles of Riddick : Assault on Dark Athena Review

I’ve had some time to spend with Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena and I have to say my overall impressions are very positive.  I was a bit apprehensive about playing the game because I wasn’t at all familiar with the franchise and I’m usually a little hesitant when it comes to games based on movies (and movies based on games, for that matter).  However, Assault on Dark Athena has a lot of fun gameplay elements and overall I’m very happy with the experience.

To review Assault on Dark Athena is really to review two games – both Assault on Dark Athena itself and the previous title in the series Chronicles of Riddick: Escape From Butcher Bay, which debuted late in the original Xbox’s lifecycle and was therefore missed by gamers such as myself.  Fortunately you don’t have to worry about playing a shabby Xbox port, because Tigon and Starbreeze Studios have completely remastered the game to bring it up to next-gen standards.  I have to say compared to native Xbox 360 games there is no noticeable difference in graphical fidelity, and the environments in Butcher Bay are rich and pleasing to the eye.  They did a great job of breathing new life into a game that was considered ahead of its time on the Xbox.

Gameplay-wise Escape From Butcher Bay and Assault on Dark Athena are part stealth/espionage, part first person shooter, and part puzzle-solver.  Though you’re encouraged to use Riddick’s comfort in shadows to quietly take out enemies in the dark, you can also run around blasting them if you so dare.  The puzzle elements of the game are almost a throwback to older PC adventure games like Myst or Monkey Island.  There are many times throughout that you’ll have to use your noggin to work through a problem in order to advance, and more often than not the puzzles provide just enough challenge to be fulfilling without being so difficult as to cause frustration.

The move from Butcher Bay to Assault on Dark Athena does provide some handy upgrades, but the overall look and feel of the series remains consistent.  Though the environments and textures are just as good in Butcher Bay as they are in Assault on Dark Athena, I noticed that the character models in the latter were a big improvement.  You can tell that a lot of attention was paid even to off-shoot characters and overall the detail is great.  Another cool enhancement comes in the form of hot keys for your weaponry.  If you want to, you can use a radial to browse all of the weapons you’ve collected, but in Assault on Dark Athena you can also assign your favorites to buttons on the d-pad for easy access.

The two games include a whole lot of replay value aside from the standard fare of achievements.  If you’re a fan of the Riddick franchise you’ll delight in the fact that you can unlock a whole bunch of bonus features by finding and collecting items such as packs of cigarettes and security key cards in the game.  Overall I have to say that it’s rare to find a singleplayer experience that provides as much content as Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena does.  Even if you’re new to the franchise like I was you’ll be able to jump in and enjoy the gameplay right away, and because Butcher Bay and Assault on Dark Athena have linked narratives you’ll get a consistent experience the whole way through.

If you want to learn more please check out my media post for ‘Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena’ by following this link: Game Reviews – The Chronicles of Riddick : Assault on Dark Athena and Sacred 2: Fallen Angel

Watchmen

So I literally just got home from seeing Watchmen and I figured it’d be best to put my thoughts down now.  The movie is one of the best representations of a book or comic series that I’ve ever seen.  In order to justify that they take their time with it and it clocks in at just under 3 hours including previews and such, but they utilize the time well.  Some of the most interesting aspects of the original comic to me were the historical elements behind the Watchmen group, and from the beginning the movie does its best to describe as much of that back-story as you need.  The only negative about that is if you’re unfamiliar with the story it might seem to skip around a lot.

I suppose my only other criticism about the movie would be that it spends a lot of time focusing on the setup, the backstory, the “why,” and less attention is paid to the “what.”  Some of the bigger setpieces in the graphic novel seem to fly by in the movie, but that’s more than likely just a result of the different narration formats.  When reading a comic or novel it might take you a whole day before you get through one plot line and in a movie it’s forced down to 20 minutes.

Rorschach, my favorite character in Watchmen, was executed perfectly.  In fact, the actor (Jackie Earle Haley) even looks like him almost identically.  They take their time and slowly develop his character by letting bits of pieces of his past and “prior work” slip, and by the end I think that even without reading Watchmen you’d get a good idea about Rorschach on the whole.  As always it’s really difficult to write about the plot much without heading into spoiler territory, so if it seems as though I’m dancing around the main subject here it’s because I am.  Just know that the characters in the movie are faithfully developed to their full potential, as was with the graphic novel (particularly Rorshach and The Comedian).

It’s not a movie I’d recommend taking your kids to see, at all.  There’s a reason they gave it an R rating – plenty of violence which nearly ushers a Saw movie to mind, and so when I noticed that there were a couple of kids in the audience I couldn’t help but cringe a bit.  It’s a superhero movie, yes, but not like you’ve probably seen before.  It’s gritty, realistic, and fantastic.  If you have any interest at all in the work of Alan Moore (V for Vendetta, From Hell) and especially if you’ve read and enjoyed Watchmen, I’d say you have to go see the movie.

In fact you probably already have, so I hope it was well-received.

Flip Mino HD review

Here’s my more formal review of the Flip Mino HD, in video form of course.  Check out my previous post by clicking here if you’d like to see the video quality.

Flip Mino HD Review Part 1

Flip Mino HD Review Part 2

Call of Duty : World at War Review

The hits just keep on coming.  This should be my last game review for a while since, for the most part, I’m caught up with my backlog.  Call of Duty : World at War has a lot riding on it.  It’s the most anticipated and most promising of Treyarch’s contributions to the Call of Duty franchise, and to be honest I have to say that it truly pays off.  With that said I’ve been a big fan of all of the Treyarch-developed Call of Duty games that I’ve played (I missed 1 or 2 of their original Xbox-era games) and I think that they get an extremely negative rap from a lot of people who don’t even take the time to play the games they negatively critique.

With World at War the Call of Duty franchise takes its first steps into the Pacific theater of World War 2.  This is something I’ve been wanting to see for years because it has never been done right, until now.  The game definitely delivers on the more grimy and ugly part of war, rather than the glory of victory associated with the war in Europe.  This “scary side of war” allows for a lot of unique elements to be added to the gameplay beyond storytelling – things like Japanese banzai charges, new cover mechanics for enemies (soldiers hiding in deep brush, or snipers waiting to pick you off from the top of a tree).  There’s also new weapons to play with, including the flamethrower which is always a crowd-favorite whether you’re playing multiplayer or through the singleplayer campaign.  The best thing about fighting in battles from the Pacific theater though, is just the amazing change of pace visually.  Going from demolished European cities to dense and lush jungle environments is a welcome breath of fresh air.

The game includes everything you’d want from a Call of Duty game.  Epic battles that make your speakers thump and your heart race?  Check.  Realistic locales, weapons and vehicles?  Check.  Nerve-wracking defense missions forcing you to fight to the last man as you pray for backup?  Check.  It almost sounds derivative at this point but it’s what I love about the series.  If you have any interest in World War 2 and the battles that took place all those years ago you should look no further, this is your game.  The story plays out on two fronts – first the Pacific theater, where you play Pvt. Miller of the Marine Raiders.  You go from being rescued on Makin Island to the Battle of Okinawa until you and your squad are left without ammo, aid, or any form of reinforcement as you’re pushed towards the breaking point.  The second part of the game (not the second half, since you play through these two phases round-robin style) takes place in Russia and Germany.  You play Pvt. Dimitri Petrenko of the Red Army as you and your comrades help to drive the German army back to Berlin.

There has been a lot of fuss about this second portion of the game.  A lot of people were upset when they heard that there would, indeed, be some action from the European theater.  I don’t mind it a bit.  Because the Pacific theater levels are so gritty and tense I think it’s important to switch the levels up a bit, and that’s exactly what the European levels do.  They’re both linked in that they tell a similar story (in both cases you’re a soldier that has been rescued by your comrades) and it varies things just enough that you won’t get burned out from one environment or the other.  The European side of the story also approaches the campaign much differently than we’ve seen in previous Call of Duty games, so it’s not as if old content has been rehashed.

The game runs great obviously.  That’s one of the most astonishing things about the Call of Duty franchise – the games always run at 60 frames per second and still have beautiful environments and textures.  The explosions and gunfire interact with the environment very nicely, creating some of the best particle effects I’ve seen in a game.  The Call of Duty control style is also the optimal way of playing a first person shooter with a controller.  Basically, they’ve nailed all of the important stuff, and the game feels, looks and sounds great.  All-in-all it took me about 8 hours to complete the single player campaign by myself, but I always like to go back through and play on Veteran (the hardest difficulty) so you can double that…not to mention the fact that you can play through with a friend, but I’ll get to that next.

So, multiplayer.  In my opinion the Treyarch CoD games have always had better multiplayer components.  After Call of Duty 4 came out I was a little concerned though, because CoD4’s multiplayer, with its leveling system similar to a roleplaying game, was extremely addicting.  Treyarch was able to deliver this same experience with all new maps and perks, not to mention weapons and even vehicles.  They didn’t stop there though, they even added a couple bonuses into the mix.  First, World at War finally brings co-op to Call of Duty.  You can play through the entire singleplayer campaign (minus a couple brief levels which were meant to be played with one player only) with up to 3 other buddies.  It works great and in my experience there’s absolutely no problems with lag.  They’ve also introduced a new multiplayer gametype altogether in the form of “Zombie Nazi” mode.

Zombie Nazi mode is unlocked when you beat the game, and once you unlock it you get to play not only by yourself but with friends as well.  It’s a pretty basic premise, and one that’s completely contrary to the rest of the game.  You’re locked in a house, zombie nazis are trying to break in, you want to keep them out.  There’s only the one level but it’s really fun to play, and the game is structured in successive rounds, with each round bringing more and more zombies for you to fight off.  Much like Left 4 Dead, it’s a blast.  That’s all I really wanted to say about World at War’s multiplayer because I’ve already written a post about it:

http://davekemick.com/blog/call-of-duty-world-at-war-preview/

The game isn’t perfect.  The story is kind of…well, worthless as harsh as that sounds.  It seems like the past few CoD games have tried to shoe-horn in a story.  I find this kind of unnecessary when it comes to World War 2 because the whole conflict in and of itself was a story.  I just like replaying and “reliving” the battles that went on, nevermind some attachment I’m supposed to have to the in-game characters above and beyond what I did already.  The story is serviceable, but not necessary and certainly not perfect.  My other gripe about the game is that the AI is dumb sometimes.  Every now and then you’ll see a Japanese or German soldier just standing and looking at you, not firing his weapon or anything, just watching.  Sometimes you can sneak right by a soldier and they don’t even really pay any attention to you – then all of the sudden you’re getting bonzai’d with a bayonet from behind.  Honestly though, a lot of the times the AI was acting dumb I was kind of happy about it.  They call the difficulty “Hardened” for a reason.  It’s hard. I’m sure I’ll be even more thankful on veteran.

Another problem is that good guys sometimes look like bad guys, and it’s hard to differentiate between the two.  This could be chalked up to the whole fog of war thing, but it can also be frustrating.  One nice thing is that, unlike previous games in the series the penalty for killing teammates doesn’t seem to be as harsh.  A lot of the time in Call of Duty 4 I’d accidentally shoot one of my AI partners in the heat of battle and the level would end, prompting me to restart from a checkpoint because Infinity Ward despises traitors.  That didn’t happen to me a single time during my play-through of World at War, and I know for a fact that I took out a couple of my teammates…always by accident, I swear.

So all in all this is a great addition to the franchise.  Is it better than Call of Duty 4?  I’d say yes, but I’m a sucker for a good WW2 shooter.  CoD4’s singleplayer campaign might have been a bit better but considering the entire package there’s no question in my mind.  World at War basically takes everything CoD4 did, turns back the dial 60 years, adds some sprinkles on top and serves up a nice hot dish of FPS soul food.  There’s no question that the multiplayer portion of the game, both competitive and cooperative, is the best of any game this season.  Gears of War 2 is fun and all but it just doesn’t have the hook that keeps me coming back to it everynight like World at War has.  The leveling system, the perks, the unlockables…not to mention 4 player co-op and nazi zombie slaying.  It’s the perfect package.

Plus the news only gets better!  An article went up on Kotaku today reporting that Treyarch is already working on downloadable content for World at War.  It seems that there’s a possibility that they’ll be “bucking the tradition” of just releasing new multiplayer maps.  Perhaps we’ll see some more zombie scenarios?  Or something entirely different?  Only time will tell.  You can read the article by clicking on this sentence.

So please do yourself a favor and at least try Call of Duty : World at War before you buy into the hype that Treyarch is “teh sux0rz.”  At least play the game for yourself (rentals are cheap these days) before you judge it…chances are good that you’ll get some fun out of the deal.  =)

Now Playing:
Jedi Mind Tricks – Walk With Me (Featuring Percee P)
LittleBigPlanet

Left 4 Dead Review

One thing before I get started, if you’re reading this and you live in the US – HAPPY THANKSGIVING!

Alright, let’s keep it rolling.  I have yet another game to talk about today, this time it’s Valve’s Left 4 Dead.  Now, I first have to issue a bit of fair warning.  For the most part I tend to condemn the behavior associated with “fanboys” of any kind – that is people whose loyalty to a game, developer, console, or company stays devout despite any wavering in said institution’s quality of product.  That being said, if there was any one developer that I could be labeled as a “fanboy” for it would probably be Valve.  Since Valve came about I’ve liked literally every game they’ve made.  I maintain that this is just a fact that they work really hard on their games and never let anything hit the market until it’s perfect, not to mention the fact that they tend to weave great stories into their games and, because they’re an independent developer, they have no fear of trying something different (the immensely successful Portal comes to mind).  The same could be said of Left 4 Dead.

As a testament to Valve’s openness to great yet unproven ideas, Left 4 Dead actually started as a mod based on Valve’s Source engine, but after seeing the great work the original team (Turtle Rock) was doing Valve picked the game up.  If you don’t know what Left 4 Dead is, it’s basically every zombie movie fan’s dream in video game form: four survivors are caught in the middle of the zombie apocalypse and are forced to rely on themselves and each other to make it through with their lives intact.  As a result of this simple concept the game is heavily based on 4-player co-op which is a total blast.  Honestly if you plan on getting this game but you’re not an online player I would have to say you’re missing out.  The whole point of Left 4 Dead is to play with some buddies.

The game is broken up into 4 chapters, each of which takes place in an entirely different locale.  The four chapters hold up on their own as individual “movies,” which further shows Turtle Rock and Valve’s commitment to tipping their caps to John Romero’s work as well as more recent films like 28 Days / Weeks Later.  They’ve gone so far to nail the movie vibe that upon completion, each act of the game presents you with credits which, rather than displaying actor information, gives you stats from that round of play.  Each movie is split up into 5 smaller chunks, and gameplay in these mini-levels is all about getting from one safe room through a pack of zombies to another safe room, with the inevitable hope for escape. As I said the levels vary quite a bit, whether you’re playing chapter one (titled No Mercy) wherein you’re trying to escape by chopper from Mercy Hospital, or my personal favorite chapter 4 where-in you’re attempting to be rescued by the army from a zombie-ridden Allegheny National Forest.  I have to say when I started chapter 4 and saw a sign for Allegheny Nation Forest I had to give the game 10 bonus points, just because that’s practically my back yard.   The point is the locales are varied enough that the environment never gets stale.

Graphically the game is pretty impressive.  The Source engine continues to amaze me, particularly the fact that despite its age it can still produce excellent-looking games via Valve’s revisions and improvements over time.  Left 4 Dead almost has a cel-shaded look at times, and a brutally realistic look at others.  You’ll go from looking at one of the game’s characters and think “jeez, this is one or two passes away from being a new class in Team Fortress 2″ to being attacked by a gruesome and disgusting zombie and thinking you’re watching a horror movie.  All around the environment and look of the game have been executed with precision.

The enemies, surprise surprise, are zombies.  This is a potential fault of the game because, despite the fact that killing zombies is fun, once you’ve killed 1,000 of them you might get a little fatigued.  Thankfully this potential problem is remedied by a repertoire of super zombies, each having their own abilities making them much more intimidating than your standard infected.  Whether you’re running away from a massive tank zombie, quietly sneaking around a witch zombie, or getting lassoed by a smoker zombie’s tongue you’ll always have a reason to keep on your heels.  Obviously this helps to create a great feeling of tension as you make your way through the game.  The coolest part of the game is the “director AI” which changes each level everytime you play it.  Basically the director AI chooses when to let loose a super zombie on you, when to unleash a zombie horde on you, and when and where you get extra weapons and ammo.  Because a level is different everytime there’s a load of replay value, which is good because all said the 4 chapters can be beaten pretty quickly.

That’s where I get to some of the negatives of the game.  The chapters are short.  If you move slow through a chapter it might take you as long as an hour, but if you really step it up you can make it through a chapter in a little over 20 minutes on an easy difficulty setting.  So what that means is that the entirety of the game’s campaign can be as short as 2 – 4 hours.  Obviously that’s kind of disheartening.  Still, the director AI gives plenty of incentive to play through the game multiple times (as I have) without getting tired.  There’s also a competitive multiplayer campaign where you can play as one of the zombies and try to thwart other human survivors.  That being said, for a $60 release I would have liked to see another chapter or two.  I’m assuming that the idea is to release new chapters as downloadable content down the road, and once that starts to happen I’ll be a lot more satisfied about the game’s length.

Another complaint I’ve heard is that you can’t zoom, or use iron sights with the weapons.  Personally I think this is a meaningless complaint for a few reasons.  First, there hasn’t been a single Valve game using the Source engine that I can think of that has used a zoom feature where it wasn’t absolutely needed (i.e. for sniper rifles, or guns with scopes).  Second, I’d say 90% of the combat in Left 4 Dead takes place from within 5 feet of the character.  You generally find yourself surprised or in the middle of a horde of enemy at such a close range that there’s really no reason to have iron sights.  Lastly, the one gun that actually makes sense to have iron sights/zoom, the hunting rifle, does.

All-in-all I have to say Left 4 Dead is my “unique” game of the year.  You haven’t played a game like this yet.  Sure some people might point to Dead Rising and say that they’re basically the same type of games, but aside from the fact that they both have zombies in them, they aren’t.  L4D is a purely cooperative experience that must be played with friends, and will give you a ton of memorable moments to remember as you play.  Don’t believe me?  Just watch this short video that’s been circulating the internet, it’s pretty funny and completely representative of a good round of Left 4 Dead (NSFW, there’s a few well-deserved F-bombs thrown):

So if you’re looking for something a little different this year, something that’s pretty unique and extremely fun, give Left 4 Dead a shot. If you’re still not sold and concerned about the length of the game you could always wait a few months and pick it up when the price drops a bit.

Now Playing:
Dropkick Murphys – Boys on the Docks (Live)
Call of Duty : World at War

Gears of War 2 Review

Okay so we’re making some progress on the deluge of games coming out lately!  Last week I did my review of Fallout 3, and today I’m going to talk to you about Gears of War 2.  It goes without saying that Gears 2 is one of the most popular titles that has come out this year, and it’s certainly a goliath when it comes to Xbox 360 exclusive titles.  The Gears of War franchise is fast approaching and overtaking the Halo franchise’s position as Xbox system-seller, and for good reason in my opinion.

Gears 2 was one of those games that just is.  What I mean by that is it’s an immensely popular game that you know you’re going to buy if you’re a gamer with a 360.  It’s like how football fans regard the superbowl.  Sure your team might not be playing but chances are you’re going to watch regardless.  In that way I wasn’t really excited for Gears 2.  I knew it was coming, I knew I was going to play it because I had it preordered, but I was more interested in titles like Left 4 Dead and Call of Duty : World at War – games that were shaping up to be great but didn’t exactly have the “blockbuster” tagline that we’ve come to associate with Gears of War.  It may be because of my hands-off approach, but I have to say I’m splendidly surprised by Gears.

The biggest critique you may have heard about the original Gears of War was that it was a bit repetitive, and not just from a gameplay aspect.  Not only was a lot of the combat the same throughout the game, but the environments were near identical.  That’s right, the good old gray and brown palette that had become associated with so many Unreal Engine 3 games from the early bit of the engine’s lifespan also plagued the first Gears of War.  I’m happy to say that Gears of War 2 is completely different in this regard.  Barring the first act of the game which plays out in areas that are similar to the first, the game’s environments are of a much larger range representing many different colors from red fire to blue snow, and even a bit of green forest thrown in for good measure.

Epic didn’t skimp on varied gameplay, either.  You’ll find yourself in a lot of different scenarios, most involving riding in huge vehicles or…well, on mythical beasts.  The point is you won’t get tired of the same old ‘take cover, shoot locust’ gameplay over and over.  The game features some huge setpieces and as implausible as they are they’re damn fun levels to play.  I think what surprised me the most about the game was how long it was, and especially the fact that they kept the gameplay varied and interesting enough that it didn’t get old.  There are a couple boss battles that put those from Gears 1 to shame, a competent storyline, a few new characters and of course the old standbys.  Epic has also added much more fun-to-play boss fights for the most part.  All told it took me at least 8 hours to complete which is nothing to sneeze at, especially when you’re playing through with a co-op partner who has already beaten the game rather than playing alone and having to figure things out as you go.

On to multiplayer.  As I just mentioned 2-player co-op is back, and that’s definitely the way to play through the game.  There’s nothing better than playing together with a buddy, and just like Gears 1 there are plenty of scenarios baked into the game with cooperative play in mind.  After that you have the more traditional competitive deathmatch-style multiplayer, which I have to be honest I haven’t exactly played much of.  I find that if I’m looking for a competitive multiplayer experience I tend to put in Call of Duty : World at War rather than Gears 2.  I have no doubt that the competitive multi is fun unless they’ve departed greatly from the first game which I played a ton of, but I find World at War to be exceptional.  Last but not least (and this is all-new for Gears 2) you get a 4-player cooperative “horde” mode, in which you and 3 of your friends can fight off up to 50 waves of enemies that are progressively more and more difficult.  It isn’t cooperative play in the most traditional sense, that is to say it’s not story-related and the horde mode has nothing to do with the Gears 2 campaign, but it’s surprisingly fun nonetheless.  I was able to make it through all 50 rounds and that alone took around 5 hours to do.

So what can I say really?  Gears of War 2 is the cheesey action movie game of this holiday season.  The story and dialog are laughable a lot of the time, but the gameplay is fun enough to keep you coming back for more.  Also the game is damn pretty, and that never hurts.  Is it game of the year?  Not mine.  Is it a game you should own if you have an Xbox 360?  Of course.

Now Playing:
Kamelot – The Shadow of Uther
Call of Duty : World at War

Fallout 3 Review

Before I start into the actual post, let me first apologize for completely slacking last week.  I didn’t put up either of my usual 2-a-week text posts, or my video post on the weekend.  Honestly I don’t know what happened.  Monday night (when I usually write Tuesday’s post) I was busy, same thing on Wednesday night when I write Thursday’s post, etc. etc.  Like those excuses?  Anyways, it seems like there’s been a drought when it comes to tech news lately, unless you consider layoffs as news, so I might start focusing on the gaming scene a little more.  After all, there’s a ton of games to talk about.  There’s been a blockbuster title every week for the past month, so I figured I’d do some quick-fire reviews of some of them.  As always, no spoilers.

I’m going to start with Fallout 3.  Fallout 3 was a game that I was a little concerned about when going into it.  I remember even remarking to a friend that it had the biggest potential to be the “letdown of the season” – it seemed like there was a hell of a lot of hype devoted to it and, for whatever reason, I couldn’t justify it.  The hype must have worked though because when I was in GameStop preordering my holiday games it slipped out of my mouth despite not really intending to play it.  It definitely wasn’t on my must-play list.  Thta being said, and this may be because I had somewhat low expectations, Fallout 3 turned into my surprise game of the year.  Keep in mind that when I say that I literally mean the game that has surprised the most, not necessarily the best game of the year.

My main concern about Fallout 3 was the combat system.  To me, the V.A.T.S. system seemed really gimmicky, and although it was labeled as an additional feature I was concerned about it being required rather than optional to use.  As it turns out, V.A.T.S. (Vault-Tec Assisted Targeting System) is really cool.  If you haven’t played Fallout 3 yet, I’ll run it down for you.  Basically it’s a targeting system which lets you freeze the game, pick the points on the enemy you wish to attack (each is labeled with a percentage, this is your chance of hitting whatever body part) and then you effectively play again and you watch your character shoot at the enemy in the places you chose.  It’s surprisingly hard to describe despite the system’s simplicity, but needless to say it’s pretty fun to use.

I started out very hesitant to use V.A.T.S., but eventually I solely relied upon it to take down the enemies.  Still, even though it’s cool, I can’t help but think that it’s a band-aid on a larger issue.  Fallout 3’s engine (the same as The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion) isn’t really built for ranged combat.  Even in Oblivion I had some issues using a bow instead of the standard sword and shield setup.  The same thing carries over into Fallout 3, but because the game is almost implicitly centered around gunplay the problem is much more accentuated.  For that reason I can’t help but think that Bethesda put int V.A.T.S. not as a cool feature, but as a fix for the problematic in-engine combat.

As expected the game world is fantastic.  It’s the closest experience from an atmospheric standpoint to S.T.A.L.K.E.R. that I’ve ever had.  It’s not quite as good as S.T.A.L.K.E.R., but it’s damn and given the game’s size that’s a huge accomplishment.  Without going into too much detail the game takes place in Washington D.C. after it has been decimated by a nuclear war.  Some time has past since the bombs fell, and the world is appropriately desolate and devastated.  Along with that the story is very good, which is essential.  A lot of people has criticized the game’s ending but, given the wealth of side quests available, I appreciated the story being concise and somewhat short.  I played all but one of the quests (including side-quests) and it took me over 80 hours to complete this game, so if you’re concerned about the length of the game you shouldn’t be.

So overall, without having played Gears of War 2 or Call of Duty: World at War to completion, I can say that Fallout 3 is one of my games of the year.  It’s almost a shame that it came out during the busiest time of the year because I would have loved to devoted more time to exploring the world of Fallout 3.  I have to highly recommend this game.  Go pick it up!

Now Playing:
1UP Yours Podcast
Call of Duty: World at War, Gears of War 2