In the last few recent years you have probably heard the lines "PC Gaming is dying" or "PC Games are a shrinking market" or something similar on various shows, websites and blogs. This is generally because, when contrasted to the console gaming market, PC gaming does not attract the numbers or revenue that it's less sophisticated and cheaper cousins permit. PC gaming has and probably always will be the most expensive platform for gaming. But for exactly how long? If PC Gaming is apparently supposed to be going round the bend, then from a competitive standpoint it must not have much life left in the old girl. It has been around the longest and as we all know, all good things must come to an end...
Or do they? Now, I don't want to get off on the wrong foot here. I do not 'dislike' console gaming in any sense. I have great respect for both the Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo franchises. To not have an interest and/or understanding of the technologies and feuds between these 'rival' companies would be detrimental to the area of work I hope to get in to in the future (i.e. Game AI). I do in fact have an extensive past console gaming history, starting off with a NES, then many years later a Playstation then PS2 and now recently intend to buy a PS3 simply for Tekken 6 and God of War III alone. I do in fact think that certain genres of console gaming are superior on home consoles than any other platform, including PC and handheld. These genres (fighting, racing, platformers) are usually done extremely well and, should I still be interested in them, would prefer to play them on console than anything else.
My issue however is with the current rise of games that should not belong on consoles being pushed and developed exclusively for them. As you can guess, I believe FPS games are one of them. The FPS was born on the PC, years before console gaming could even compare on a technical standpoint (which I will discuss later). Admittedly games like Wolfenstein 3D and even Duke Nukem were originally played using just a keyboard, but the birth of the keyboard and mouse control scheme was not too far down the track. In fact, I remember people playing both Hexen and Heretic using both a keyboard and mouse back in the day, a method of control I found utterly mind boggling. The truth is that no game pad or pointing device can compare to the simplicity, accuracy and speed of the keyboard and mouse for FPS games. The mouse to control your aim and the keyboard to control your avatar and actions is a perfect marriage of complete character control that no other game genre can boast of having. So if this is naturally exclusive to the PC, why are consoles now overriding it in terms of FPS popularity and titles?
Halo is a classic example. One of the first FPS games built for console. It worked! It was also incredibly slow, easy and watered down. That was fine for the time, yes. It did in fact bring some new gameplay mechanics that have changed FPS gaming for the better. One such mechanic is the now benchmark abilty to throw grenades through a simple press of a button instead of selecting them as a weapon (a.k.a. Half-life style). I may not entirely agree with this as I have been doing this in FPS games since TFC (and through scripts in HL1) but still, its seen as an improvement on traditional weapon design in FPS. But then you see more recent games like UT3, Bioshock and (dare I say) Borderlands which from what I have experienced and seen all/will bear a very console like feel.
I've met and talked to console 'fanboi's' who while I will admit are nice enough people, have some very ignorant and illogical views on the matter. One such fellow claimed that there is nothing he could not do on a console controller that you can do with a keyboard and mouse. When I asked "well how do you rocket-jump, flick-shot, reflex-snipe, bunny-hop and wall-climb with a controller?". These five abilities are considered to be skillful techniques and control mastery, bordering almost on instinctive play. I got a blank look and a query as to wtf they were. I asked him if he had ever played Half-life or Quake (old FPS titles most people have played) to which his response was that he doesn't play crappy last-gen PC games. I left the conversation at that.
I challenge anyone reading this to mimic the kind of activity seen in this video on a console with a controller:
Console FPS games are watered down, slower and more skill-less games compared to the ones of PC of yesteryear. You look at the differences between Quake 3 and Quake 4. Quake 4 was like many FPS games of today, built for both the PC and console at the same time. It was a fun game, from a single-player perspective. But the multiplayer was nothing like its older brother. It was slow, boring and weapons had enough firepower packed behind them that any lack of skill would still compensate a frag from a bad player. "Well this is ok, for consoles, I guess" was my initial thought. The average console controller was more sluggish, less precise and slower to use than a PC mouse, often with auto-aim features and larger hitscan/box targets to make up for a lack of precision. Even crosshairs were usually larger (i.e. Halo 1's 1/4 of a screen crosshair). But then I found out the awful truth.
Console FPS games are built to be slower. Yes even Halo. Halo on PC was faster, not by much (10%) but still, a speed increase none the less. Even the PS3 and PC versions of UT3 have this trait. This quote from Mark Rein ...
"When you play Halo on PC, you notice the difference too, yeah? This is also the reason why we don't have cross-platform play, between PC and PS3, because you have got to make some compromises for each platform. But you play Halo on console and you find that it's slower too, right…they have to be slower, because your fingers are just not as precise as your whole arm, right? To me the movement and speed as a console gamer is just right."
... I personally do not find to be re-assuring, especially considering the Game Developer's shift in focusing on console games over PC. Why are we taking a step back? Why are we making slower FPS games for a control scheme that does not really support them? Why does the PC gamer have to sit in the shadows, reminiscing of the glorious days when PC FPS was king, considered pro and skillful only to be fed console based badly done ports that are basically Half-life with a face lift?
The answer is money. Now, I dont have a problem with consoles getting FPS games in general, but I do find the stance certain game companies are having on the games they develop. Because consoles are cheaper, because companies don't have to push the boundaries of rendering technologies as hard and because they can make a shitty game and still guarantee some sales ... what possible reason is there to develop games for PC. At least primarily for PC and then console after, anyway? Atm, none. Which brings me to another point about console game development in general. It was never the platform in which you played games on that pushed the boundary of graphics, rendering and sound technologies. It was always the games! If games can be developed on a platform that doesn't change for 5-6 years before its newer model comes out, then the recycling of games engines, code and ideas become mainstream. THIS IS NOT A GOOD THING! Hardware today is far beyond what the most demanding games can manage and considering the most graphically advanced games engine (Crysis -2007) is approaching nearly 2.5 years of age, this gap is just going to continue. Even Crytek (makers of Crysis) have jumped along the console developer bandwagon and do you know what? CryEngine 2.0 looks worse on console than what CryEngine 1.0 looks on PC. CryEngine 2.0 on PC however looks great, but it could look oh so much better....
I am aware I am bordering on ranting here, but the technological progression of games technology is something I am passionate about. Video cards, frame-rates, overclocking and cooling have always been my secret geek fetish ... thing, and although in recent years it may have eased off, I am still interested in the field. Some people say that console games help to increase the efficiency in programming game engines, particularly when the platform starts ageing. This perspective is mainly true. It is also flawed. Code efficiency is usually about memory conservation and increasing the number of clock-cycles your game engine can run at (i.e. processing power required). Reducing the complexity of algorithms and refining them to be more efficient is always great, but this takes time, money and effort. Lots of it! I know because I have had to do it. I say this is flawed as I would rather my game programmers be making the next Unreal Engine or working on a more reaslitic shading algorithm than fucking around trying to make their game work on a 6 year old piece of plastic that you can pick up for less than $200. Its like seeing how many clowns you can fit in your clown car, when the maximum capacity is only 8.
Companies are simply in it for the money. This is fair enough, but horrible single-player storylines, dodgey gameplay mechanics and design choices for apparent AAA titles are unaccounted for in this day and age. The quality of games today suffers because of this game development perspective. Half-life for example was for its time above and beyond everything else in its field. Unreal Tournament and Quake 3? Still the best tournament shooters you can play competitively. You could even say the same for CS 1.6 if you are into the team-work, accuracy and realism based shooters as well. These games are all over 10 years old. I may be getting old, stuck in the 'good old days' but I still feel that gaming and PC gaming in particular is having its own shallow grave dug for it. It's potential is being ignored, its roots forgotten and its gamers either converting or simply losing interest.
"I guess they just don't make them like they used to. Fucking plastic pieces of shit"
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Lolwut?
Lul:
http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/09/left-4-dead-2-banned-in-australia/
Yeah..... that. Sometimes I really don't understand the motives of our government and its associated ratings board. If you ask me, this latest act of stupidity is merely a publicity stunt to make the general public believe that the current system "cares for the children" and that they are doing a fantastic job at not allowing harmful content get into the wrong hands. You know, 'cause little kids go out and buy these sort of things all the time. The parents aren't responsible for what their children are getting in to, oh no! Let's put the blame on the actual content itself, and make the 95% of responsible, correct-aged non-mentally insane people suffer because our ridiculous rating system doesn't have an R18+ rating. Yeah, let's do that!
Seriously, here are the facts. Young kids playing violent video games is a bad idea, I'm sure you couldn't find many reasons to disagree with that. So is young kids watching porn, movies with harsh language, extreme violence and drug use. The difference between movies and games is that despite the obvious realism differences, movies generally get an R18+ rating if they are believed to contain large quantities of any of the previously mentioned themes. Games, at least in Australia, are not. Instead they are banned, or require modification of the content to reduce gore/swearing levels. There is virtually (virtually lol) any porn or any serious drug use in publicly consumed games to pick on, and despite the media's attempts to expose such non-existent undertakings (i.e. the Mass Effect rampage) games are still seen to be pretty docile when compared to the movies of our era. But, when a game is viewed to have equal depictions of any of the previous themes, well then that's a big problem.
Below: Left 4 Dead 2 Survivors
The average age of a gamer is somewhere around 30, at least in this country. That is pretty damn old! Now admittedly, gamers in this country make up for a rather small demographic. In fact I am quite sure that gaming in general is still viewed in that very critical, cynical light by most people who are not involved in it (and don't understand wtf they are talking about). Still, the fact of the matter is that most people who are serious players of games ARE mature individuals. They have the ability to watch movies with violent or adult content and more than likely have in the past. One more product out of the literal hundreds of thousands on the market is not going to make any difference to their mental condition, which is probably more sane and aware of reality than most others.
The game in question, Left 4 Dead 2, is barely any different from its original. That has often been an argument running over various forums and boards about people NOT wanting to buy the game because it doesn't offer anything significantly new. However, the original was let through just fine, and its original is alot like a vast number of other games currently on the market (Killing Floor, CoD5: Nazi Zombies etc...). It is also very similar to zombie movie franchise 28 X later. The rage virus acts almost identically to the rabies infection in the L4D universe, except for the mutated zombies of course. Sure, L4D2 offers some slightly more personal hand-to-hand combat ...... but these are ZOMBIES FFS!!!! They have been eating people for days! If you don't either avoid them or kill them, they WILL kill you. You are not playing Bob the Butcher and going around slaughtering helpless civilians. You are the helpless civilian trying to survive. How can they possibly come to the conclusion that the game's environment and theme is immoral and inhumane?
Finally, and we come back to our original point here, the game is not meant for children. That's it! I don't know why they can't see this, but the game is not supposed to be bought by people 17 and under. Now I have known (and was for my own age) some very mature adolescents who obviously wont take a game like this seriously. But as far as anti-discrimination laws are concerned, its just easier to label an entire group than pick out select individuals, so stuff it. This game and game's like this are not supposed to be played by young people. Banning them is equivalent to banning porn because adolescents 'could' get their hands on it. The rest of the community has to suffer because of this stupid, ridiculous point of view. Either introduce an R18+ rating, or lose the respect and patience of sensible, mature and annoyed gamers in Australia everywhere.
I leave you now with a famous quote for the parents, from the robot Bender from the cartoon series Futurama:
"And so I ask you this one question. Have you ever tried simply turning off the TV, sitting down with your children, and hitting them?"
http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/09/left-4-dead-2-banned-in-australia/
Yeah..... that. Sometimes I really don't understand the motives of our government and its associated ratings board. If you ask me, this latest act of stupidity is merely a publicity stunt to make the general public believe that the current system "cares for the children" and that they are doing a fantastic job at not allowing harmful content get into the wrong hands. You know, 'cause little kids go out and buy these sort of things all the time. The parents aren't responsible for what their children are getting in to, oh no! Let's put the blame on the actual content itself, and make the 95% of responsible, correct-aged non-mentally insane people suffer because our ridiculous rating system doesn't have an R18+ rating. Yeah, let's do that!
Seriously, here are the facts. Young kids playing violent video games is a bad idea, I'm sure you couldn't find many reasons to disagree with that. So is young kids watching porn, movies with harsh language, extreme violence and drug use. The difference between movies and games is that despite the obvious realism differences, movies generally get an R18+ rating if they are believed to contain large quantities of any of the previously mentioned themes. Games, at least in Australia, are not. Instead they are banned, or require modification of the content to reduce gore/swearing levels. There is virtually (virtually lol) any porn or any serious drug use in publicly consumed games to pick on, and despite the media's attempts to expose such non-existent undertakings (i.e. the Mass Effect rampage) games are still seen to be pretty docile when compared to the movies of our era. But, when a game is viewed to have equal depictions of any of the previous themes, well then that's a big problem.
Below: Left 4 Dead 2 Survivors
The average age of a gamer is somewhere around 30, at least in this country. That is pretty damn old! Now admittedly, gamers in this country make up for a rather small demographic. In fact I am quite sure that gaming in general is still viewed in that very critical, cynical light by most people who are not involved in it (and don't understand wtf they are talking about). Still, the fact of the matter is that most people who are serious players of games ARE mature individuals. They have the ability to watch movies with violent or adult content and more than likely have in the past. One more product out of the literal hundreds of thousands on the market is not going to make any difference to their mental condition, which is probably more sane and aware of reality than most others.
The game in question, Left 4 Dead 2, is barely any different from its original. That has often been an argument running over various forums and boards about people NOT wanting to buy the game because it doesn't offer anything significantly new. However, the original was let through just fine, and its original is alot like a vast number of other games currently on the market (Killing Floor, CoD5: Nazi Zombies etc...). It is also very similar to zombie movie franchise 28 X later. The rage virus acts almost identically to the rabies infection in the L4D universe, except for the mutated zombies of course. Sure, L4D2 offers some slightly more personal hand-to-hand combat ...... but these are ZOMBIES FFS!!!! They have been eating people for days! If you don't either avoid them or kill them, they WILL kill you. You are not playing Bob the Butcher and going around slaughtering helpless civilians. You are the helpless civilian trying to survive. How can they possibly come to the conclusion that the game's environment and theme is immoral and inhumane?
Finally, and we come back to our original point here, the game is not meant for children. That's it! I don't know why they can't see this, but the game is not supposed to be bought by people 17 and under. Now I have known (and was for my own age) some very mature adolescents who obviously wont take a game like this seriously. But as far as anti-discrimination laws are concerned, its just easier to label an entire group than pick out select individuals, so stuff it. This game and game's like this are not supposed to be played by young people. Banning them is equivalent to banning porn because adolescents 'could' get their hands on it. The rest of the community has to suffer because of this stupid, ridiculous point of view. Either introduce an R18+ rating, or lose the respect and patience of sensible, mature and annoyed gamers in Australia everywhere.
I leave you now with a famous quote for the parents, from the robot Bender from the cartoon series Futurama:
"And so I ask you this one question. Have you ever tried simply turning off the TV, sitting down with your children, and hitting them?"
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Die one thousand deaths!!!
Holy shit. It's been months since I made a post here. I guess I haven't really played too many games recently, or at least ones that I should talk about in detail. However, I guess over the many months where I havn't said anything, sufficient time has been permitted for at least some form of discussion about gaming occurrences to formulate.
I spose I could start with Call of Duty: World at War, a game I said I would discuss in my last post. To be quite honest with you, I really just thought this as yet another CoD game, except not as good as the Modern Warfare direction they were going with in their previous title. I dunno, I think WWII has been told far too many times, and yet another FPS from the perspective of an allied "hero" is ground that is so familiar it is almost boring. Admittedly, some of the battles are interesting, especially concerning those crazy Japanese bonzai/kamikazi warriors, but still, I have fired enough rounds from a virtual thompson machine gun over the years to feed a small family. You know... if I like sold the ammunition... somehow. Shutup.
You can shoot zombies though. Ah yes, I feel they definitely have taken a page from Valve in this department with implementing a zombie shooting mode. It's decent, and has definitely generated some enjoyable online moments with uni friends Jeremy and Phil. I do seem to lag a bit though, but that's not really a problem. I do think some attention is necessary concerning the difficulty scaling, particularly towards the end. Certain weapons become rather useless and most of the time you end up dying simply because you have run out of ammo. The latter is sort of ok, but the adjusting of the Nazi zombies HP over time (read: dramatically increased) sort of destroys the believability. It should not take 6 shotgun rounds to down a zombie when not 10 minutes ago his mate died to the intentional friendly fire spread as I was shooting Ace Rimmer in the face on purpose. Matches usually end off with all of us sitting in a room shooting at the general image of a doorway with rayguns for the lucky few who have them, which, while not unenjoyable, sort of hinders the significance of all your previous activity up to this point. I would like to be using a different weapon, simply put.
Below: CoD5 - Many zombies were harmed in the making of this movie
Speaking of zombies, Left 4 Dead's new survival mode is an absolute blast. Well, it's not really new anymore, but when it first came out, it was pretty much exactly what the game needed. Ah yes, some classic moments have occurred in the many hours (hours?) that I and three others have sat in various locales, weapons pointing towards entry points where zombies are spewing forth. The most successful team has been myself, Jeremy, Al and Dom on the barn house map, where we survived for our first legitimate 16mins.
Below: Left 4 Dead - Zombie Slam
Lately I have been playing around with custom campaigns, some of which are pretty good. In particular, Death Aboard and Dam It are particularly well done, almost at the production level of Valve's default campaigns. I personally think that this gaming franchise decision has got to be one of the best made of late concerning PC gaming as, although it is not 'fresh', it is executed well enough to maintain appeal for a long time. I avidly look forward to L4D2, and unlike many people QQing on forums and game sites, will happily fork out the dough for more zombie killing madness.
Below: Left 4 Dead - Zombie gangbangs are freaky things
Now I would talk about Killing Floor via Steam, but I have yet to play enough of it online/with friends to form a proper opinion. Maybe next time. Instead, I will bring up a game that was both good, but a bit disappointing, Dawn of War 2. Now I don't claim to be great at strategy games. In fact I am pretty sure I am merely mediocre. Strategy games to me have always seemed more about knowledge and tactics and less about actual raw skill. Admittedly there is some micro involved, particularly in some of the more skill-renowned strategy games (i.e. Starcraft). However, knowing how to rush siege tanks early on to this point at the map consuming only X amount of resources in Y time is not as generically skillful as say accuracy in FPS games. You cannot perform the same move in a different strategy game with different mechanics, whereas your accuracy is always the same no matter what FPS game you play.
Anyway getting back on topic, I did really well in Dawn of War 2. At least in my opinion. And that to me is usually an indication that the game is a little too easy and does not have much depth strategy wise. Taking a company of heroes-esque style of gameplay and slapping on the 40k universe, I found myself face-rolling over everything I encountered. In fact there was only one unit in the entire campaign that gave me any form of challenge, and although I could not kill him, he could not kill me either. It is sort of like playing Diablo 2 with a squad of dudes (who can destroy parts of the environment) as the gear and stat point distribution systems do obviously lend to a RPG feel. Now admittedly I have not had the chance to play this game online, mainly due to the terribad internet connections I have had over the last few months (aka patches). However, for some reason I don't see myself doing too badly. There is definitely strategies in the game to master, but unlike other strategy titles, they don't really require any incredible ingenuity or foresight. It's a simple game, a dumbed down action oriented version of its former. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but for me it was not quite what I was looking for.
But then again, nor was Street Fighter 4. I can't remember what exactly got me interested in buying the game. Maybe a lack of fighting games in recent years did it, or that Tekken 6 is taking so long to come out. In any case, I originally bought it for PS3, but since I have moved houses (i.e. no longer have access to one) I recently traded it in for the PC version. The difference? Nothing really, just now I can vs people online, and fuck me dead, some people are bloody good. I don't usually do too bad if I am in the right frame of mind, but the good thing about SFIV is that it is not really a game you can sucessfully 'spam'. Tekken in particular is a game that suffers from this, where moves are simple to pull off and can do ludicrous damage allowing a noob to simply mash a controller with their face and do reasonably well. Yes, the many times I have fought against people doing this and lost is.... well only a few times, but it is something that should not be allowed in games of this caliber. The last time I actually did face off against someone in Tekken 5 who wasn't a button masher was with one of Jordan's friend, and the results were really quite entertaining (i.e. ridiculously close every time). Nevertheless, button mashers seem to be punished severely by SFIV as the difference between light, medium and hard attacks vary both the damage and global cool down between moves. For instance, if I was to perform a heavy attack which does high damage, and you were quick enough to block it, then you would then have a significant opportunity to do damage to me. A light attack however would not, but nor would it do much damage should it connect. It has a high risk vs reward game play element that I think works incredibly well towards balancing the game.
Below: SFIV - Attack of the leg monster!
Which then brings one to the always controversial topic of WoW. I actually don't really know what to say in this regard as things are pretty much the same. I raid, do heroics, pvp, get annoyed, stop for a few days and then am back in a few more. I guess one thing that has occurred of significance is that I have finally managed to convince myself to stick around to killing Kel'Thuzad in Naxxramas 25, something which was significantly easier than I was led to believe. It is incredible however to see just how much people's egos (including my own) affect their behavior when playing this game. No one thinks they are doing the wrong thing when they are, everyone is convinced their spec is the best and anyone else's is stupid, your dps is only higher than mine because your gear is better (and if it isn't then I keep my mouth shut), watch the tank healers because... you know... you weren't doing that originally anyway, etc. Sometimes I think WoW brings out the worst in some people. I guess I am beginning to see the game from a casual's point of view, that so called 'hardcore' players are really just glorified stat whores who get a kick out of high numbers and purple decorations. Again, one's ego can be a terrible thing...
Below: WoW - Kel'Thuzad's throne
Bah that will do. This is taking far too long. I will talk about my Honours/Thesis in a future post.
I spose I could start with Call of Duty: World at War, a game I said I would discuss in my last post. To be quite honest with you, I really just thought this as yet another CoD game, except not as good as the Modern Warfare direction they were going with in their previous title. I dunno, I think WWII has been told far too many times, and yet another FPS from the perspective of an allied "hero" is ground that is so familiar it is almost boring. Admittedly, some of the battles are interesting, especially concerning those crazy Japanese bonzai/kamikazi warriors, but still, I have fired enough rounds from a virtual thompson machine gun over the years to feed a small family. You know... if I like sold the ammunition... somehow. Shutup.
You can shoot zombies though. Ah yes, I feel they definitely have taken a page from Valve in this department with implementing a zombie shooting mode. It's decent, and has definitely generated some enjoyable online moments with uni friends Jeremy and Phil. I do seem to lag a bit though, but that's not really a problem. I do think some attention is necessary concerning the difficulty scaling, particularly towards the end. Certain weapons become rather useless and most of the time you end up dying simply because you have run out of ammo. The latter is sort of ok, but the adjusting of the Nazi zombies HP over time (read: dramatically increased) sort of destroys the believability. It should not take 6 shotgun rounds to down a zombie when not 10 minutes ago his mate died to the intentional friendly fire spread as I was shooting Ace Rimmer in the face on purpose. Matches usually end off with all of us sitting in a room shooting at the general image of a doorway with rayguns for the lucky few who have them, which, while not unenjoyable, sort of hinders the significance of all your previous activity up to this point. I would like to be using a different weapon, simply put.
Below: CoD5 - Many zombies were harmed in the making of this movie
Speaking of zombies, Left 4 Dead's new survival mode is an absolute blast. Well, it's not really new anymore, but when it first came out, it was pretty much exactly what the game needed. Ah yes, some classic moments have occurred in the many hours (hours?) that I and three others have sat in various locales, weapons pointing towards entry points where zombies are spewing forth. The most successful team has been myself, Jeremy, Al and Dom on the barn house map, where we survived for our first legitimate 16mins.
Below: Left 4 Dead - Zombie Slam
Lately I have been playing around with custom campaigns, some of which are pretty good. In particular, Death Aboard and Dam It are particularly well done, almost at the production level of Valve's default campaigns. I personally think that this gaming franchise decision has got to be one of the best made of late concerning PC gaming as, although it is not 'fresh', it is executed well enough to maintain appeal for a long time. I avidly look forward to L4D2, and unlike many people QQing on forums and game sites, will happily fork out the dough for more zombie killing madness.
Below: Left 4 Dead - Zombie gangbangs are freaky things
Now I would talk about Killing Floor via Steam, but I have yet to play enough of it online/with friends to form a proper opinion. Maybe next time. Instead, I will bring up a game that was both good, but a bit disappointing, Dawn of War 2. Now I don't claim to be great at strategy games. In fact I am pretty sure I am merely mediocre. Strategy games to me have always seemed more about knowledge and tactics and less about actual raw skill. Admittedly there is some micro involved, particularly in some of the more skill-renowned strategy games (i.e. Starcraft). However, knowing how to rush siege tanks early on to this point at the map consuming only X amount of resources in Y time is not as generically skillful as say accuracy in FPS games. You cannot perform the same move in a different strategy game with different mechanics, whereas your accuracy is always the same no matter what FPS game you play.
Anyway getting back on topic, I did really well in Dawn of War 2. At least in my opinion. And that to me is usually an indication that the game is a little too easy and does not have much depth strategy wise. Taking a company of heroes-esque style of gameplay and slapping on the 40k universe, I found myself face-rolling over everything I encountered. In fact there was only one unit in the entire campaign that gave me any form of challenge, and although I could not kill him, he could not kill me either. It is sort of like playing Diablo 2 with a squad of dudes (who can destroy parts of the environment) as the gear and stat point distribution systems do obviously lend to a RPG feel. Now admittedly I have not had the chance to play this game online, mainly due to the terribad internet connections I have had over the last few months (aka patches). However, for some reason I don't see myself doing too badly. There is definitely strategies in the game to master, but unlike other strategy titles, they don't really require any incredible ingenuity or foresight. It's a simple game, a dumbed down action oriented version of its former. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but for me it was not quite what I was looking for.
But then again, nor was Street Fighter 4. I can't remember what exactly got me interested in buying the game. Maybe a lack of fighting games in recent years did it, or that Tekken 6 is taking so long to come out. In any case, I originally bought it for PS3, but since I have moved houses (i.e. no longer have access to one) I recently traded it in for the PC version. The difference? Nothing really, just now I can vs people online, and fuck me dead, some people are bloody good. I don't usually do too bad if I am in the right frame of mind, but the good thing about SFIV is that it is not really a game you can sucessfully 'spam'. Tekken in particular is a game that suffers from this, where moves are simple to pull off and can do ludicrous damage allowing a noob to simply mash a controller with their face and do reasonably well. Yes, the many times I have fought against people doing this and lost is.... well only a few times, but it is something that should not be allowed in games of this caliber. The last time I actually did face off against someone in Tekken 5 who wasn't a button masher was with one of Jordan's friend, and the results were really quite entertaining (i.e. ridiculously close every time). Nevertheless, button mashers seem to be punished severely by SFIV as the difference between light, medium and hard attacks vary both the damage and global cool down between moves. For instance, if I was to perform a heavy attack which does high damage, and you were quick enough to block it, then you would then have a significant opportunity to do damage to me. A light attack however would not, but nor would it do much damage should it connect. It has a high risk vs reward game play element that I think works incredibly well towards balancing the game.
Below: SFIV - Attack of the leg monster!
Which then brings one to the always controversial topic of WoW. I actually don't really know what to say in this regard as things are pretty much the same. I raid, do heroics, pvp, get annoyed, stop for a few days and then am back in a few more. I guess one thing that has occurred of significance is that I have finally managed to convince myself to stick around to killing Kel'Thuzad in Naxxramas 25, something which was significantly easier than I was led to believe. It is incredible however to see just how much people's egos (including my own) affect their behavior when playing this game. No one thinks they are doing the wrong thing when they are, everyone is convinced their spec is the best and anyone else's is stupid, your dps is only higher than mine because your gear is better (and if it isn't then I keep my mouth shut), watch the tank healers because... you know... you weren't doing that originally anyway, etc. Sometimes I think WoW brings out the worst in some people. I guess I am beginning to see the game from a casual's point of view, that so called 'hardcore' players are really just glorified stat whores who get a kick out of high numbers and purple decorations. Again, one's ego can be a terrible thing...
Below: WoW - Kel'Thuzad's throne
Bah that will do. This is taking far too long. I will talk about my Honours/Thesis in a future post.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Thing with the thing
Well it's been ahwhile since I posted anything here. Over two months in fact. Bah, sif not.
I have recently become interested in some of the more casual PvE elements of WotLK, considering PvP and arena are (arguably) rather fail at the moment. Although I do enjoy Wintergrasp and the occasional battleground, Rogues can get really frustrating after awhile. Especially the ones that intentionally target/hunt you down for the entire match (easymode pvp). While most people seem to be complaining about the new arch nemesi, the Death Knight, I don't really consider them to be a problem for warlocks seeing as how they counter.... well pretty much everyone who isn't a DK or Ret Pally anyway. No, I think Rogues are enough for me to be annoyed about in PvP for any given time (past or future). Maybe Arcane mages to a lesser extent. Not being able to do anything while getting killed results in the same disgust and irritation as fighting someone who is effectively pressing 2-3 buttons the entire time.
Below: WoW - Wintergrasp
What was I saying.... oh yeah PvE. I have never really been that interested in PvE, mainly due to my impatience and annoyance at lazy/incompetent players. WoW is an easy game, but if I am dotting and wanding and still pulling agro off the tank then there is a problem. Yes, there is always the argument as to why I don't join a guild and/or find good players to roll with but the fact is I don't care about the game enough (or my characters) to warrant the time sink that such an action will do. Also, I don't like being obligated or like not doing what I want to be doing (....?) .
In any case, I have found myself doing so many heroic dungeons as of yet that I have lost count altogether. 165 badges worth, if you can measure it like that. Friend of mine has also achieved lvl 80 DK status and tanked a H Nexus run (reasonably well, I might add). Naxxramas and Sarth shall be next, and who knows after that? I might even ACTUALLY quit this glorious abomination of a game and do something useful instead.
Below: WoW - Suicide is your only option
But enough of the usual WoW ranting (seriously, the game is designed for ranting imo). FEAR 2. Bought, played it, finished it. Had a couple of weird nightmares about it too. Yes, I found FEAR 2 to be genuinely disturbing. But in a weird, good sort of a way. Having finished the original just before playing the sequel (turret level pissed me off), it was interesting to see how much the franchise had advanced both graphically, narratively and ... scareatively (?). I was expecting the same elevator/ladder/crawling out of the shadows techniques of making you jump which I am generally immune to. However what I got was a much more in your face, haunting process as Alma chooses you to torment (with good reason though). The ending was almost exactly what I thought it should be like and was rather shocked when it came true. The bullet-time slomo action ability did make the game rather easy however, finishing it on Hard the first time through dying about 3 times (via enemy soldiers). I would recommend the game to anyone who is a fan of FPS action, suspense/horror games (not survival horror), traumatic movies (some respectable scenes) or anyone just looking for a decent shooter.
Below: FEAR 2 - Not a violent game, by any standards
My Quake Live beta invite also came through. Free game, web-client based. I'm sure I've mentioned it before. Anyways, after a frustrating wait with this connection I managed to download and play my ranking match against a well tuned AI opponent who is designed to kick-start your stats and give you a tier/ranking. I came out with 15 frags and 0 deaths with 35% accuracy and a 5min-something game time. I have no idea where that puts me, but I can't actually check as the next stage actually requires you to download the full Quake Live client which is impossible for me at this point. Nevertheless, I reckon I will probably be giving this a good go when net here is restored to normal.
Anyway, time to get ready for uni. Doing honours and possibly tutoring this year. My supervisor for both is awesome, so it should be good fun. Recently bought Dawn of War II and will possibly try out Call of Duty: World at War in the next coming weeks. Until then.
I have recently become interested in some of the more casual PvE elements of WotLK, considering PvP and arena are (arguably) rather fail at the moment. Although I do enjoy Wintergrasp and the occasional battleground, Rogues can get really frustrating after awhile. Especially the ones that intentionally target/hunt you down for the entire match (easymode pvp). While most people seem to be complaining about the new arch nemesi, the Death Knight, I don't really consider them to be a problem for warlocks seeing as how they counter.... well pretty much everyone who isn't a DK or Ret Pally anyway. No, I think Rogues are enough for me to be annoyed about in PvP for any given time (past or future). Maybe Arcane mages to a lesser extent. Not being able to do anything while getting killed results in the same disgust and irritation as fighting someone who is effectively pressing 2-3 buttons the entire time.
Below: WoW - Wintergrasp
What was I saying.... oh yeah PvE. I have never really been that interested in PvE, mainly due to my impatience and annoyance at lazy/incompetent players. WoW is an easy game, but if I am dotting and wanding and still pulling agro off the tank then there is a problem. Yes, there is always the argument as to why I don't join a guild and/or find good players to roll with but the fact is I don't care about the game enough (or my characters) to warrant the time sink that such an action will do. Also, I don't like being obligated or like not doing what I want to be doing (....?) .
In any case, I have found myself doing so many heroic dungeons as of yet that I have lost count altogether. 165 badges worth, if you can measure it like that. Friend of mine has also achieved lvl 80 DK status and tanked a H Nexus run (reasonably well, I might add). Naxxramas and Sarth shall be next, and who knows after that? I might even ACTUALLY quit this glorious abomination of a game and do something useful instead.
Below: WoW - Suicide is your only option
But enough of the usual WoW ranting (seriously, the game is designed for ranting imo). FEAR 2. Bought, played it, finished it. Had a couple of weird nightmares about it too. Yes, I found FEAR 2 to be genuinely disturbing. But in a weird, good sort of a way. Having finished the original just before playing the sequel (turret level pissed me off), it was interesting to see how much the franchise had advanced both graphically, narratively and ... scareatively (?). I was expecting the same elevator/ladder/crawling out of the shadows techniques of making you jump which I am generally immune to. However what I got was a much more in your face, haunting process as Alma chooses you to torment (with good reason though). The ending was almost exactly what I thought it should be like and was rather shocked when it came true. The bullet-time slomo action ability did make the game rather easy however, finishing it on Hard the first time through dying about 3 times (via enemy soldiers). I would recommend the game to anyone who is a fan of FPS action, suspense/horror games (not survival horror), traumatic movies (some respectable scenes) or anyone just looking for a decent shooter.
Below: FEAR 2 - Not a violent game, by any standards
My Quake Live beta invite also came through. Free game, web-client based. I'm sure I've mentioned it before. Anyways, after a frustrating wait with this connection I managed to download and play my ranking match against a well tuned AI opponent who is designed to kick-start your stats and give you a tier/ranking. I came out with 15 frags and 0 deaths with 35% accuracy and a 5min-something game time. I have no idea where that puts me, but I can't actually check as the next stage actually requires you to download the full Quake Live client which is impossible for me at this point. Nevertheless, I reckon I will probably be giving this a good go when net here is restored to normal.
Anyway, time to get ready for uni. Doing honours and possibly tutoring this year. My supervisor for both is awesome, so it should be good fun. Recently bought Dawn of War II and will possibly try out Call of Duty: World at War in the next coming weeks. Until then.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Wall of text crits you for 10k
Well, the year is almost up and I am quite sure that I won't play any new games before the year's end. The exception might be the possibility of playing Little Big Planet, but honestly that can wait. Although I may give Guitar Hero: World Tour a go, it really isn't anything new in terms of gameplay and therefore not worth discussing at this point.
So, what's the point of this? Basically this year and especially in the last semester I have been rather occupied with uni work. As the purpose of this blog has changed and because of the various real-life distractions, I have not had the opportunity to document some of the better gaming experiences I have had in the last 11 months. That is of course until now. As the holidays are coming and because I leave for NZ in a few weeks, I find myself with more free time than I ever have had in the last four years. Because I plan on working in the gaming industry in the future, it is probably a wise idea that I at least critique the (new) games I have played completely (or enough to form a decent opinion on) this year. These shall be done in order from best to worse gaming experiences.
Left 4 Dead
By the far the most enjoyable game of the bunch, Left 4 Dead has united (at least) my housemates, both old and new, to form a squad of elite 'infected' killers. I say 'infected' as your targets are not classified as zombies, per se. Some shit about an airborne pathogenic virus similar in effect to an aggressive form of rabies. Whatever. The point is you shoot shit that runs at you with a group of people. You REALLY need to work together if you want to stay alive, which is where the fun factor gets interesting. It's not about killing the most infected or doing the most damage (although the stats do exist), but more about simply surviving the onslaught and reaching/achieving game objectives. You cannot do it alone. Versus mode online makes things even more interesting, playing as the infected. Perhaps even more cooperation is needed in this case. Honestly though, nothing beats spawning as a Boomer (big fat infected), spewing on a group of survivors from a balcony and watching the remaining horde literally rip them to pieces.
A problem with L4D however (and really not a problem at all) is that it is not very 'noob' friendly. By this I mean people who are still struggling with the basics of FPS games, such as circle strafing and snap-aiming. As my housemates and I play on Advanced/Expert difficulties, it gets rather difficult when beginners join our matches (games can be hosted publically). Carrying your weight in the 'squad' is critical to success and not doing simple things such as covering a reloading team mate or dispatching attacking infected quickly (without causing friendly fire) can be very detrimental over the course of a game. The lower difficulties do make this significantly easier and much less of a problem, but honestly the challenge aspect (i.e. surviving) is completely removed when you dumb it down. You want to play this game on hard-mode, with semi-competent friends who enjoy the challenge of surviving and helping each other out.
Below: Left 4 Dead - Flying Hunter Exposed
Crysis: Warhead
Purchased for me as a late b'day gift by a good uni friend Mr Hayes, Warhead was quite enjoyable. Although short, it was action packed and as beautiful as I remember it being in Crysis, over a year ago from now. What I love most about the Crysis games is that even today, nothing beats them visually in the gaming market. A beast of a computer will be crippled by this game on max settings which in my opinion is a positive thing. After all, it is games like Crysis which are pushing graphics technologies further.
Single-player in this game is pretty much the same deal as the original. You are a nano-suit equipped super soldier who is capable of turning invisible, jumping really high, moving very quickly and taking lots of punishment (though not all at the same time). You kill a percentage of the Korean army, then you kill some alien invaders (?) and then you kill both at the same time. The story is straightfoward and compelling enough, often revealing the darker side of the main protagonist Psycho, one of Nomad's fellow squad members from the original. Multi-player is a different ball game however. Now, I usually classify myself as an average FPS gamer, but seeing the online community that has developed around Crysis was quite astonishing. The average skill and creativeness of the players was far greater then I expected. Never had I been so pleased to be owned as much as I did in my first few online sessions. Though this could be related to the average age of the Crysis player being higher then that of most FPS games (it's an expensive-to-get-working game after all) it is good to see that at least some games today are not stagnating with immature incompetent fools. Yes I am looking at you Halo.
Below: Warhead GPU comparison (little difference)
Far Cry 2
Perhaps slightly less visually appealing than Warhead, but offering much more freedom gameplay wise, Far Cry 2 is the 'biggest' FPS game I have ever played. Covering nearly 50 square kilometres of African wilderness, FC2 puts you in the eyes of a mercenary hired to assassinate 'The Jackal', a foreign arms dealing warlord creating unrest amongst the various armed factions.
Anyways, to put it quite simply, FC2 was rather enjoyable to not only explore the various locales of the game world but also to greet the many denizens with hot lead, explosives and/or flames. The destructible environments (usually foliage and small wooden huts) are a benchmark in gaming, as never before have I seen fire modeled as realistically as it is in FC2. Affected by the revolutionary weather system (also a benchmark), fire sometimes becomes your greatest ally and most dangerous foe. Overall, FC2 was a relatively enjoyable shooter offering exactly what I had been looking foward to: open ended chaos in a fresh and beautiful environment.
There are some annoyances with the game though, particularly the case where EVERYONE wants to kill you. This can get irritating if you need to get somewhere quickly, or have gotten tired of culling the human population for awhile (which does happen). They chase you, on foot or in vehicle until you are dead. Your only option is to kill them. This gets repetitive and frustrating at times.
Another problem in my opinion is the re-playability. Having finished the game and been satisfied, I wasn't looking forward to going through once more on a harder difficulty and having to unlock everything again. Considering you only accessed some of the better equipment in the later stages of the game (big sniper rifle ftw), having to play the game with inferior weapons once more would be unbearable.
Below: Far Cry 2 - Meet the Pyro
WoW: Wrath of the Lich King
Perhaps the biggest game of the year, WotLK continues where Warcraft 3 left off in terms of story and lore. Having experienced the fruitless time-sink that was Burning Crusade, I was keen to get back into parts of the game that mattered and were familiar. Arthas, the Lich King, kicking his heels back in Northrend for the past few years has finally decided that he needs to take a crap. On his way to the much less glorious frozen throne of the toilet, he decides to stir even more shit up and declares war on the rest of the world. In a counter-attack measure (it's a trap you fools!!!) the armies of the Horde and Alliance decide to invade Northren instead, so you end up on a new frozen continent culling wildlife and stealing their clothes once more. You also get bigger, by 10 levels in fact, and get to slap some Deathknights in the face (as well as the other way around).
Now I am currently playing WotLK on and off as I type this so my experiences at end game are yet to be revealed. However, after three years, I do believe the WoW curse (if you could call it that) may finally be wearing off. As much as I enjoy both the PvE and PvP aspects of the game, I don't really think I am interested enough to take the game seriously anymore. Serious raiding has always been a big 'sif' to me as relying on other people to perform in that game is quite unbearable (some serious noobs play WoW). It also takes far too much time, scheduled time which I am not willing to commit to. Also sif. Casual raiding has always been a 'maybe', but considering the amount I did in BC (almost none) I don't see myself doing much of it at 80.
Below: WotLK - Laizar and Jerziah (Jeremy)
Arena is something I am sick of, not only for its trivialness but also for its still ongoing imbalance between classes. You hear the phrase "Wow is not balanced around 1v1" constantly as well as "WoW PvP is balanced in large groups", so I find it hard to understand why people are rewarded so tremendously for organised dueling in small groups in a box all day. As for battlegrounds, well I will just have to come to terms that the glorius days of BGs are over. They have become merely an honor farm fest for sub-par mediocre gear that no one takes seriously. Therefore a large number of people playing them are completely clueless with absolutely no idea of the strategies, tactics and teamwork that made them awesome of yesteryear. Personally, I blame the bloodelves.
Below: WotLK - Flying Mount and Arthas
What was I talking about? Oh yeah, WotLK. My experience with this expansion is still ongoing, but so far it has been alright. Although people have left, some have stayed. Mr Hayes has achieved DK status and is slowly leveling one, as well as another uni friend hitting 80 last week on her druid. A UQ friend will also be coming along soonish, possibly on a hunter..... so I'm not alone. Yet.... :(
Grid
Satisfying my need for speed, Grid fit the role perfectly. Not since NFS:U2 have I played a racing game that was original but also provides the adrenaline rush experience of frantic racing challenges. A significant shock from this game was the damage system. No longer could I use other vehicles as bumpers around corners, or shrug off vehicle damage without a hitch. Because your vehicle takes almost realistic damage to all components (steering, wheels, engine etc..) learning to drive properly but also pushing it to the limit is not only essential to playing the game, but also where the challenge factor lies. Success in the game means you get to know the brake very well and using it incorrectly will cost you dearly in the Grid campaign (reputation/money).
Below: GT5 Vs Grid Comparison
Speaking of the Campaign, this game is not bogged down with unrealistic and poorly implemented car 'upgrades' that you magically slap on to increase performance. No, instead you buy a vehicle that has its own set of characteristics that are required to be eligible for the races you are entering. Taking a souped up Ferrari to a Sunday cup is impossible, which is a good thing. The game does not focus on your ability to tweak your vehicle to pefection, but more focused on your ability to drive and drive properly. This is perhaps demonstrated better online when you see both the noobs and pros at this game either crashing into walls (and each other) or powersliding to victory.
Crashing is also insanely amusing!
Dead Space
Now I havn't finshed Dead Space, but I have played enough of it (and seen a housemate play it) to form a well versed opinion. It should be noted that when I do eventually get around to finishing it, this game will probably climb the rungs of this list (slightly). In any case, the sum of the story of the game is that you are an engineer investigating a mining ship that has lost communication (very similar to Alien/s and Event Horizon). On board this ship is a horde of alien-humanoid monsters, setting a very dark and scary setting for your simple engineering protagonist.
What's different about this sort of game is that you are not a hulking space marine decked in enough weapons to blow up a planet. Instead you are just your average joe blow trying to figure out what the hell is going on and how to get the hell off the ship. This said, Dead Space (so far) has not been as frightening as some of the other games in this genre I have played (F.E.A.R and Doom 3), but is definetly as creepy in a rather foreboding sort of way. Because you are not confident you can take down anything that you encounter, you seriously dread every corner and audio spike in this game as you know it could mean your death.
According to my housemate the game is relatively short, hence my reasoning to drag out my play time. Visually and audibly it is excellent, but I have noticed some of the texture samples seem a bit low. This could be due to the fact it was created alongside the console versions of the game and therefore suffered graphically because of the compensation for inferior video processing power/memory. Only a small quip, but sometimes it does detract from the immersion of the game when that rust scar looks like spilt tomato juice.
Below: Dead Space - Obviously its a screenshot of Deadspace
Probably the most impressive aspect of Dead Space is, funnily enough, dying. Having watched a development video about creating 'dread' in the game, it is quite true that "If you are gonna die (and die you will) then we might as well make it as damn enjoyable as possible". That said, getting your head ripped off and entrails dragged from your kicking corpse is quite shocking but at the same time rather awesome.
Also the lack of a HUD is unique and helps immerse the player quite well.
Gears of War 2
Unfortunately the console games that I have played this year just didn't cut it as well as the PC games. This has nothing to do with consoles as a medium, but more so the sort of games that I enjoy or want to play on them. Being over the childish platform games of yesteryear (pulled off incredibly well on consoles), my tastes in gaming have moved onto more serious and gritty genres. Gears of War is an example of such a game. By now you have either played the original or not, but what most people realise is that Gears of War is pretty much your standard space marine shooter. Yes, it does lack a decent story and well characterised protagonists, but if you are honestly playing this game for those reasons then you need to get your brain checked. This game is all about the combat, pretty much a Call of Duty game set in the future from a 3rd person perspective. Throw in lots of blood, a dash of guts, a few explosions and mix it with some frantic tactical shooting and chainsaw sculpting and you pretty much have Gears of War.
Mindless fun. That's it. You cannot really call Gears of War an equivalent shooting game to something like UT or Quake as it is far simpler and does not require even 1/2 the strategy. You run, you shoot, duck for cover, help your team mates and survive. That was the formula of the original and it hasn't changed a bit since, which is a good thing.
Below: Gears of War 2 - Chainsaws are excellent for solving arguments
Although I have not finished the game yet or played it on Xbox live (preparing to get dominated) I can say that it is a fun game. Perhaps not genre redefining, but it offers the experience I expected and is quite the blast with a friend in coop. Definetly not the thinking man's shooter, but that's not what you play this game for anyway.
One annoyance with this game, besides the inaccuracy of aiming with a controller, is your tendency to die instantly. This is usually caused from a rocket or large projectile travelling towards your arsehole which is unexpected due to the fact that you cannot turn around quickly.
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
Now MGS4:GotP is a great game .... narratively. The amount I played of it was enjoyable enough ... story wise. But that's really as far as I can praise it. Being a fan of the original on PSX and the sequels on PS2, I pretty much knew what to expect and what the game universe was set around (big machines that launch nukes). However the major problem with this game (despite being primarily narrtive driven) is unfortunately the revolutionized control scheme. In a way, this is not really the game's fault but more that of the average console controller.
I have said this countless times before, but you cannot (and should not) play these sort of games on console. Any game that requires you to aim quickly and with precision should by default be played on a PC with a keyboard and mouse (or alternatively on Wii). The exceptions of course would be GoW and Halo, possibly because they are pulled off better (read: simpler games). Holding down 4 buttons to aim and shoot a moving target from a distance using analog sticks is almost sickening. It isn't that difficult, per se, but it requires so much more unneccessary bull crap to pull off it is almost not worth it. The accuracy levels are more than halved and even though you can get good at it (I did) it just simply does not beat the simplicity and precision of keyboard and mouse.
Getting back on track, MGS4 suffers from this aiming aspect rather heavily. I usually know my way around a controller quite well (extensive past console gaming background), but the frustration of fighting the game instead of playing it was too much. I ended up trading this in to help pay for GoW2, such was the extent of my enjoyment. The game is a great looking game with well established characters, excellent audio and (as mentioned) a very in depth and compelling plot, but all of this is meaningless if the game is unplayable as it was for me. I don't know, maybe it's because I have gotten too use to the superiority of aiming with a mouse but I cannot transition back into the dark ages with any sense of comfort.
Below: Metal Gear Solid 4 - Aiming = chore
Well, there you have it. Probably the longest post I have done being a summary of the gaming experiences I have encountered this year, as well as my opinion of them. There have been others (Spore, World of Goo, Fallout 3, Red Alert 3 etc...) but I havn't experienced enough of them to form an accurate opinion on.
We shall have to wait for next year when Starcraft 2, Diablo 3 and Mirror's Edge (for PC) come out. At the moment however, there is simply nothing exciting.
So, what's the point of this? Basically this year and especially in the last semester I have been rather occupied with uni work. As the purpose of this blog has changed and because of the various real-life distractions, I have not had the opportunity to document some of the better gaming experiences I have had in the last 11 months. That is of course until now. As the holidays are coming and because I leave for NZ in a few weeks, I find myself with more free time than I ever have had in the last four years. Because I plan on working in the gaming industry in the future, it is probably a wise idea that I at least critique the (new) games I have played completely (or enough to form a decent opinion on) this year. These shall be done in order from best to worse gaming experiences.
Left 4 Dead
By the far the most enjoyable game of the bunch, Left 4 Dead has united (at least) my housemates, both old and new, to form a squad of elite 'infected' killers. I say 'infected' as your targets are not classified as zombies, per se. Some shit about an airborne pathogenic virus similar in effect to an aggressive form of rabies. Whatever. The point is you shoot shit that runs at you with a group of people. You REALLY need to work together if you want to stay alive, which is where the fun factor gets interesting. It's not about killing the most infected or doing the most damage (although the stats do exist), but more about simply surviving the onslaught and reaching/achieving game objectives. You cannot do it alone. Versus mode online makes things even more interesting, playing as the infected. Perhaps even more cooperation is needed in this case. Honestly though, nothing beats spawning as a Boomer (big fat infected), spewing on a group of survivors from a balcony and watching the remaining horde literally rip them to pieces.
A problem with L4D however (and really not a problem at all) is that it is not very 'noob' friendly. By this I mean people who are still struggling with the basics of FPS games, such as circle strafing and snap-aiming. As my housemates and I play on Advanced/Expert difficulties, it gets rather difficult when beginners join our matches (games can be hosted publically). Carrying your weight in the 'squad' is critical to success and not doing simple things such as covering a reloading team mate or dispatching attacking infected quickly (without causing friendly fire) can be very detrimental over the course of a game. The lower difficulties do make this significantly easier and much less of a problem, but honestly the challenge aspect (i.e. surviving) is completely removed when you dumb it down. You want to play this game on hard-mode, with semi-competent friends who enjoy the challenge of surviving and helping each other out.
Below: Left 4 Dead - Flying Hunter Exposed
Crysis: Warhead
Purchased for me as a late b'day gift by a good uni friend Mr Hayes, Warhead was quite enjoyable. Although short, it was action packed and as beautiful as I remember it being in Crysis, over a year ago from now. What I love most about the Crysis games is that even today, nothing beats them visually in the gaming market. A beast of a computer will be crippled by this game on max settings which in my opinion is a positive thing. After all, it is games like Crysis which are pushing graphics technologies further.
Single-player in this game is pretty much the same deal as the original. You are a nano-suit equipped super soldier who is capable of turning invisible, jumping really high, moving very quickly and taking lots of punishment (though not all at the same time). You kill a percentage of the Korean army, then you kill some alien invaders (?) and then you kill both at the same time. The story is straightfoward and compelling enough, often revealing the darker side of the main protagonist Psycho, one of Nomad's fellow squad members from the original. Multi-player is a different ball game however. Now, I usually classify myself as an average FPS gamer, but seeing the online community that has developed around Crysis was quite astonishing. The average skill and creativeness of the players was far greater then I expected. Never had I been so pleased to be owned as much as I did in my first few online sessions. Though this could be related to the average age of the Crysis player being higher then that of most FPS games (it's an expensive-to-get-working game after all) it is good to see that at least some games today are not stagnating with immature incompetent fools. Yes I am looking at you Halo.
Below: Warhead GPU comparison (little difference)
Far Cry 2
Perhaps slightly less visually appealing than Warhead, but offering much more freedom gameplay wise, Far Cry 2 is the 'biggest' FPS game I have ever played. Covering nearly 50 square kilometres of African wilderness, FC2 puts you in the eyes of a mercenary hired to assassinate 'The Jackal', a foreign arms dealing warlord creating unrest amongst the various armed factions.
Anyways, to put it quite simply, FC2 was rather enjoyable to not only explore the various locales of the game world but also to greet the many denizens with hot lead, explosives and/or flames. The destructible environments (usually foliage and small wooden huts) are a benchmark in gaming, as never before have I seen fire modeled as realistically as it is in FC2. Affected by the revolutionary weather system (also a benchmark), fire sometimes becomes your greatest ally and most dangerous foe. Overall, FC2 was a relatively enjoyable shooter offering exactly what I had been looking foward to: open ended chaos in a fresh and beautiful environment.
There are some annoyances with the game though, particularly the case where EVERYONE wants to kill you. This can get irritating if you need to get somewhere quickly, or have gotten tired of culling the human population for awhile (which does happen). They chase you, on foot or in vehicle until you are dead. Your only option is to kill them. This gets repetitive and frustrating at times.
Another problem in my opinion is the re-playability. Having finished the game and been satisfied, I wasn't looking forward to going through once more on a harder difficulty and having to unlock everything again. Considering you only accessed some of the better equipment in the later stages of the game (big sniper rifle ftw), having to play the game with inferior weapons once more would be unbearable.
Below: Far Cry 2 - Meet the Pyro
WoW: Wrath of the Lich King
Perhaps the biggest game of the year, WotLK continues where Warcraft 3 left off in terms of story and lore. Having experienced the fruitless time-sink that was Burning Crusade, I was keen to get back into parts of the game that mattered and were familiar. Arthas, the Lich King, kicking his heels back in Northrend for the past few years has finally decided that he needs to take a crap. On his way to the much less glorious frozen throne of the toilet, he decides to stir even more shit up and declares war on the rest of the world. In a counter-attack measure (it's a trap you fools!!!) the armies of the Horde and Alliance decide to invade Northren instead, so you end up on a new frozen continent culling wildlife and stealing their clothes once more. You also get bigger, by 10 levels in fact, and get to slap some Deathknights in the face (as well as the other way around).
Now I am currently playing WotLK on and off as I type this so my experiences at end game are yet to be revealed. However, after three years, I do believe the WoW curse (if you could call it that) may finally be wearing off. As much as I enjoy both the PvE and PvP aspects of the game, I don't really think I am interested enough to take the game seriously anymore. Serious raiding has always been a big 'sif' to me as relying on other people to perform in that game is quite unbearable (some serious noobs play WoW). It also takes far too much time, scheduled time which I am not willing to commit to. Also sif. Casual raiding has always been a 'maybe', but considering the amount I did in BC (almost none) I don't see myself doing much of it at 80.
Below: WotLK - Laizar and Jerziah (Jeremy)
Arena is something I am sick of, not only for its trivialness but also for its still ongoing imbalance between classes. You hear the phrase "Wow is not balanced around 1v1" constantly as well as "WoW PvP is balanced in large groups", so I find it hard to understand why people are rewarded so tremendously for organised dueling in small groups in a box all day. As for battlegrounds, well I will just have to come to terms that the glorius days of BGs are over. They have become merely an honor farm fest for sub-par mediocre gear that no one takes seriously. Therefore a large number of people playing them are completely clueless with absolutely no idea of the strategies, tactics and teamwork that made them awesome of yesteryear. Personally, I blame the bloodelves.
Below: WotLK - Flying Mount and Arthas
What was I talking about? Oh yeah, WotLK. My experience with this expansion is still ongoing, but so far it has been alright. Although people have left, some have stayed. Mr Hayes has achieved DK status and is slowly leveling one, as well as another uni friend hitting 80 last week on her druid. A UQ friend will also be coming along soonish, possibly on a hunter..... so I'm not alone. Yet.... :(
Grid
Satisfying my need for speed, Grid fit the role perfectly. Not since NFS:U2 have I played a racing game that was original but also provides the adrenaline rush experience of frantic racing challenges. A significant shock from this game was the damage system. No longer could I use other vehicles as bumpers around corners, or shrug off vehicle damage without a hitch. Because your vehicle takes almost realistic damage to all components (steering, wheels, engine etc..) learning to drive properly but also pushing it to the limit is not only essential to playing the game, but also where the challenge factor lies. Success in the game means you get to know the brake very well and using it incorrectly will cost you dearly in the Grid campaign (reputation/money).
Below: GT5 Vs Grid Comparison
Speaking of the Campaign, this game is not bogged down with unrealistic and poorly implemented car 'upgrades' that you magically slap on to increase performance. No, instead you buy a vehicle that has its own set of characteristics that are required to be eligible for the races you are entering. Taking a souped up Ferrari to a Sunday cup is impossible, which is a good thing. The game does not focus on your ability to tweak your vehicle to pefection, but more focused on your ability to drive and drive properly. This is perhaps demonstrated better online when you see both the noobs and pros at this game either crashing into walls (and each other) or powersliding to victory.
Crashing is also insanely amusing!
Dead Space
Now I havn't finshed Dead Space, but I have played enough of it (and seen a housemate play it) to form a well versed opinion. It should be noted that when I do eventually get around to finishing it, this game will probably climb the rungs of this list (slightly). In any case, the sum of the story of the game is that you are an engineer investigating a mining ship that has lost communication (very similar to Alien/s and Event Horizon). On board this ship is a horde of alien-humanoid monsters, setting a very dark and scary setting for your simple engineering protagonist.
What's different about this sort of game is that you are not a hulking space marine decked in enough weapons to blow up a planet. Instead you are just your average joe blow trying to figure out what the hell is going on and how to get the hell off the ship. This said, Dead Space (so far) has not been as frightening as some of the other games in this genre I have played (F.E.A.R and Doom 3), but is definetly as creepy in a rather foreboding sort of way. Because you are not confident you can take down anything that you encounter, you seriously dread every corner and audio spike in this game as you know it could mean your death.
According to my housemate the game is relatively short, hence my reasoning to drag out my play time. Visually and audibly it is excellent, but I have noticed some of the texture samples seem a bit low. This could be due to the fact it was created alongside the console versions of the game and therefore suffered graphically because of the compensation for inferior video processing power/memory. Only a small quip, but sometimes it does detract from the immersion of the game when that rust scar looks like spilt tomato juice.
Below: Dead Space - Obviously its a screenshot of Deadspace
Probably the most impressive aspect of Dead Space is, funnily enough, dying. Having watched a development video about creating 'dread' in the game, it is quite true that "If you are gonna die (and die you will) then we might as well make it as damn enjoyable as possible". That said, getting your head ripped off and entrails dragged from your kicking corpse is quite shocking but at the same time rather awesome.
Also the lack of a HUD is unique and helps immerse the player quite well.
Gears of War 2
Unfortunately the console games that I have played this year just didn't cut it as well as the PC games. This has nothing to do with consoles as a medium, but more so the sort of games that I enjoy or want to play on them. Being over the childish platform games of yesteryear (pulled off incredibly well on consoles), my tastes in gaming have moved onto more serious and gritty genres. Gears of War is an example of such a game. By now you have either played the original or not, but what most people realise is that Gears of War is pretty much your standard space marine shooter. Yes, it does lack a decent story and well characterised protagonists, but if you are honestly playing this game for those reasons then you need to get your brain checked. This game is all about the combat, pretty much a Call of Duty game set in the future from a 3rd person perspective. Throw in lots of blood, a dash of guts, a few explosions and mix it with some frantic tactical shooting and chainsaw sculpting and you pretty much have Gears of War.
Mindless fun. That's it. You cannot really call Gears of War an equivalent shooting game to something like UT or Quake as it is far simpler and does not require even 1/2 the strategy. You run, you shoot, duck for cover, help your team mates and survive. That was the formula of the original and it hasn't changed a bit since, which is a good thing.
Below: Gears of War 2 - Chainsaws are excellent for solving arguments
Although I have not finished the game yet or played it on Xbox live (preparing to get dominated) I can say that it is a fun game. Perhaps not genre redefining, but it offers the experience I expected and is quite the blast with a friend in coop. Definetly not the thinking man's shooter, but that's not what you play this game for anyway.
One annoyance with this game, besides the inaccuracy of aiming with a controller, is your tendency to die instantly. This is usually caused from a rocket or large projectile travelling towards your arsehole which is unexpected due to the fact that you cannot turn around quickly.
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
Now MGS4:GotP is a great game .... narratively. The amount I played of it was enjoyable enough ... story wise. But that's really as far as I can praise it. Being a fan of the original on PSX and the sequels on PS2, I pretty much knew what to expect and what the game universe was set around (big machines that launch nukes). However the major problem with this game (despite being primarily narrtive driven) is unfortunately the revolutionized control scheme. In a way, this is not really the game's fault but more that of the average console controller.
I have said this countless times before, but you cannot (and should not) play these sort of games on console. Any game that requires you to aim quickly and with precision should by default be played on a PC with a keyboard and mouse (or alternatively on Wii). The exceptions of course would be GoW and Halo, possibly because they are pulled off better (read: simpler games). Holding down 4 buttons to aim and shoot a moving target from a distance using analog sticks is almost sickening. It isn't that difficult, per se, but it requires so much more unneccessary bull crap to pull off it is almost not worth it. The accuracy levels are more than halved and even though you can get good at it (I did) it just simply does not beat the simplicity and precision of keyboard and mouse.
Getting back on track, MGS4 suffers from this aiming aspect rather heavily. I usually know my way around a controller quite well (extensive past console gaming background), but the frustration of fighting the game instead of playing it was too much. I ended up trading this in to help pay for GoW2, such was the extent of my enjoyment. The game is a great looking game with well established characters, excellent audio and (as mentioned) a very in depth and compelling plot, but all of this is meaningless if the game is unplayable as it was for me. I don't know, maybe it's because I have gotten too use to the superiority of aiming with a mouse but I cannot transition back into the dark ages with any sense of comfort.
Below: Metal Gear Solid 4 - Aiming = chore
Well, there you have it. Probably the longest post I have done being a summary of the gaming experiences I have encountered this year, as well as my opinion of them. There have been others (Spore, World of Goo, Fallout 3, Red Alert 3 etc...) but I havn't experienced enough of them to form an accurate opinion on.
We shall have to wait for next year when Starcraft 2, Diablo 3 and Mirror's Edge (for PC) come out. At the moment however, there is simply nothing exciting.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Yeah that
Yes, well, I'll keep this short. The last half of the last semester of the final year of my undergraduate studies at uni has been an absolute bitch. During this time I had to learn how to program DirectX shaders (lol) as well as make two games, one in Blender with Python script, and the other in Torque using C#. All up I have probably wrote almost 6000 lines of code. Oh the horror!!! I still see code in my dreams....
Anyway, I won't talk much about these games as I actually think they are pretty crap (by my standards anyway). I am a little annoyed at myself about certain aspects of them (code efficiency), but also annoyed at my team mates who I think didn't quite pull their weight in making them. It sort of wasn't really their faults, at least for 017 and especially early on when I was led to believe that Blender did not allow people to all work on the same file at once. This turned out to be false however, as I could easily import content from other .blend files when I tested it (not sounds/textures though). This made the delaying of content even more frustrating, considering it could and should have been done weeks before. Torque game wasn't much better, with team mates only really getting into gear towards the end (and it not really working out too well).
Anyways, enough brooding (terribly unhealthy for your mind and soul). Here are some screenshots of the two games I have been working on. I would upload videos of them on to youtube, but I don't think they deserve to be. I will let the pictures speak for themselves (cbf discussing them).
Below: Booyah - Forklift resource game
Below: Metal Fury - Network multiplayer tank shooter
Also at some point this semester I apparently made this video. Seems so long ago. Warrior... bladestorm etc...
Below: Deaded Mage - Bladestorm.
The new Left 4 Dead demo has also been a blast. Housemates and I have been waging war on the zombies of the apocalypse with much enthusiasm (although we could use a fourth player). The action based survival horror is quite the contrast to Killing Floor's much slower and foreboding doom like qualities (which is still fun in its own right). I believe I shall be buying this game as it is the sort of game that I have been busting to play for pretty much the last four years (or whenever Serious Sam lost its appeal). The number of humorous and downright awesome scenarios that take place are limitless. Well... there probably is a limit.
Below: Left 4 Dead- Lolwut?
Below: Left 4 Dead - Zoey is purty...
I would ideally like to talk more about the games I made this semester, as well as the others I have played recently (Far Cry 2, Dead Space) from both critical games design and technical perspectives, but I am still rather burnt out from uni and basically don't even want to think about it. Maybe next time...
Also, I have apparently finished my undergraduate studies. Whether I do honors next year or not still remains a possibility.
Anyway, I won't talk much about these games as I actually think they are pretty crap (by my standards anyway). I am a little annoyed at myself about certain aspects of them (code efficiency), but also annoyed at my team mates who I think didn't quite pull their weight in making them. It sort of wasn't really their faults, at least for 017 and especially early on when I was led to believe that Blender did not allow people to all work on the same file at once. This turned out to be false however, as I could easily import content from other .blend files when I tested it (not sounds/textures though). This made the delaying of content even more frustrating, considering it could and should have been done weeks before. Torque game wasn't much better, with team mates only really getting into gear towards the end (and it not really working out too well).
Anyways, enough brooding (terribly unhealthy for your mind and soul). Here are some screenshots of the two games I have been working on. I would upload videos of them on to youtube, but I don't think they deserve to be. I will let the pictures speak for themselves (cbf discussing them).
Below: Booyah - Forklift resource game
Below: Metal Fury - Network multiplayer tank shooter
Also at some point this semester I apparently made this video. Seems so long ago. Warrior... bladestorm etc...
Below: Deaded Mage - Bladestorm.
The new Left 4 Dead demo has also been a blast. Housemates and I have been waging war on the zombies of the apocalypse with much enthusiasm (although we could use a fourth player). The action based survival horror is quite the contrast to Killing Floor's much slower and foreboding doom like qualities (which is still fun in its own right). I believe I shall be buying this game as it is the sort of game that I have been busting to play for pretty much the last four years (or whenever Serious Sam lost its appeal). The number of humorous and downright awesome scenarios that take place are limitless. Well... there probably is a limit.
Below: Left 4 Dead- Lolwut?
Below: Left 4 Dead - Zoey is purty...
I would ideally like to talk more about the games I made this semester, as well as the others I have played recently (Far Cry 2, Dead Space) from both critical games design and technical perspectives, but I am still rather burnt out from uni and basically don't even want to think about it. Maybe next time...
Also, I have apparently finished my undergraduate studies. Whether I do honors next year or not still remains a possibility.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
It's Over 9000!!!
I've always had a strange relationship with the game World of Warcraft. For the most part, I enjoy the game. It provides a gaming experience unlike that of any other games or game genre that I currently play. It's fun, the combat is mobile, it runs smoothly on nearly any modern (ie. last 3 years) computer. The ability to perform fun activities with friends and accomplish stuff together is engaging and rewarding. Having had a slight addiction to it in the past, I do (when my account for it is active) currently classify myself as a casual WoW player. To hardcore, no-life players of the game, the term 'casual' would coincide with the term 'scrub', and it is for this reason that I hold my mild interest and enjoyment with the game with a certain pride and satisfaction.
However, sometimes I absolutely hate it. The PvP system is broken with trivial organised duels (arena) being the epitome and highlight of PvP achievement where two factions engrossing an entire world should be killing each other on epic battlefields. It doesn't have the emphasis on 'war' that I expected between the Horde and Alliance (unlike a recently released MMO) and in general, certain classes are significantly better in PvE and PvP than others. Sometimes I believe Blizzard have entirely lost scope on what they plan to do with the game and it is frustrating to see them make changes that are either illogical or make efforts or past accomplishments redundant (well not really the latter).
So the 3.0 PTR pre-WoTLK patch came out the day before my account became frozen, which means I have unlimited access to it until it goes live. Fortunately that means that I can't actually play on live servers as I should be doing uni work anyway. I did a few things, dps tests as destruction, affliction, fury, titan's grip fury, bladestorm, bladestorm titan's grib (lol!) and prot and was generally satisfied with the outcomes. PvP (ie. dueling) was a different story and rather laughable, people popping their new I-win buttons (including me) and seeing imbalance displayed in all its glory and numbers. While some of these are generally bugs, others, such as ret paladin burst dps (6 crits in a row with 483 resilience?) are apparently balanced and are quite possibly staying for live. Giving toddler's ferraris to drive is always entertaining, however.
Below: PTR warrior 41k+ autoattack bug
Below: Laizar and Razial's new looks in WotLK (maybe...)
But despite all this, the minor WoW activity I have engaged in after a few weeks break from it has got me thinking: how long will I be playing this game for? Already I have two friends who have both put foward their disinterest in the upcoming expansion, with another uni friend who, while keen, is generally not too concerned. I even find myself generally not overly excited, visiting forums less and less and generally not caring about whether locks/warriors are getting X and/or Y. Playing WoW just doesn't seem like something to be engrossed in anymore, or even something to consider a worthwhile time waster.
I don't think it's because I'm growing out of games. I think it's because my interests in the medium are shifting slightly, possibly towards more of the technical smokes and mirrors side. The technology you could say. On paper, WoW is an excellent matrix of mathematical precision, but visually it is ... just an average game. Not that there is anything wrong with that (hardware requirements anyone?). During this last semester of my last year, having to make two games and doing some (really bad) Direct3D coding has possibly shifted my interests towards a more technical perspective, which I think may be a good thing. A maturing, if you will.
So maybe when I try WotLK in November, as I certainly think I still will, I won't be as interested in obtaining the best PvP gear I can manage without being annoyed, and just play the game or not whenever I feel like it. Although there is nothing wrong with being hardcore and the best, or casual and average, I think being casual and average at WoW is a title that not even I want anymore.
After all, the only reason why I started playing it to begin with is to do something with friends and if that's not even going to happen anymore..... then sif.
Below: Jerziah and Laizar after a SM run.
However, sometimes I absolutely hate it. The PvP system is broken with trivial organised duels (arena) being the epitome and highlight of PvP achievement where two factions engrossing an entire world should be killing each other on epic battlefields. It doesn't have the emphasis on 'war' that I expected between the Horde and Alliance (unlike a recently released MMO) and in general, certain classes are significantly better in PvE and PvP than others. Sometimes I believe Blizzard have entirely lost scope on what they plan to do with the game and it is frustrating to see them make changes that are either illogical or make efforts or past accomplishments redundant (well not really the latter).
So the 3.0 PTR pre-WoTLK patch came out the day before my account became frozen, which means I have unlimited access to it until it goes live. Fortunately that means that I can't actually play on live servers as I should be doing uni work anyway. I did a few things, dps tests as destruction, affliction, fury, titan's grip fury, bladestorm, bladestorm titan's grib (lol!) and prot and was generally satisfied with the outcomes. PvP (ie. dueling) was a different story and rather laughable, people popping their new I-win buttons (including me) and seeing imbalance displayed in all its glory and numbers. While some of these are generally bugs, others, such as ret paladin burst dps (6 crits in a row with 483 resilience?) are apparently balanced and are quite possibly staying for live. Giving toddler's ferraris to drive is always entertaining, however.
Below: PTR warrior 41k+ autoattack bug
Below: Laizar and Razial's new looks in WotLK (maybe...)
But despite all this, the minor WoW activity I have engaged in after a few weeks break from it has got me thinking: how long will I be playing this game for? Already I have two friends who have both put foward their disinterest in the upcoming expansion, with another uni friend who, while keen, is generally not too concerned. I even find myself generally not overly excited, visiting forums less and less and generally not caring about whether locks/warriors are getting X and/or Y. Playing WoW just doesn't seem like something to be engrossed in anymore, or even something to consider a worthwhile time waster.
I don't think it's because I'm growing out of games. I think it's because my interests in the medium are shifting slightly, possibly towards more of the technical smokes and mirrors side. The technology you could say. On paper, WoW is an excellent matrix of mathematical precision, but visually it is ... just an average game. Not that there is anything wrong with that (hardware requirements anyone?). During this last semester of my last year, having to make two games and doing some (really bad) Direct3D coding has possibly shifted my interests towards a more technical perspective, which I think may be a good thing. A maturing, if you will.
So maybe when I try WotLK in November, as I certainly think I still will, I won't be as interested in obtaining the best PvP gear I can manage without being annoyed, and just play the game or not whenever I feel like it. Although there is nothing wrong with being hardcore and the best, or casual and average, I think being casual and average at WoW is a title that not even I want anymore.
After all, the only reason why I started playing it to begin with is to do something with friends and if that's not even going to happen anymore..... then sif.
Below: Jerziah and Laizar after a SM run.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Abominating!
Well then. After a very long break, I have decided that I will keep this blog thing going as it could be useful not only for expressing ideas and interests, but also as a viewable medium of work and critique by potential employers (if I ever decide to work in the games industry).
Several weeks ago now, I once again interested my housemates here to play a UT2k4 mod called "Killing Floor". Now, zombies are cool. I think you would find few people who disagree (and if they do they are crazy). Shooting zombies, on the other hand, is even better. Shooting a never ending horde of zombies with a group of friends, delaying your inevitable demise is perhaps one of the most enjoyable gaming experiences you can encounter. What is great about killing floor is that you really do need to work together to stay alive (reloading, healing, welding doors shut etc..) as well as providing enough tension, fear and action into the mix to not ever get sick of it.
Below: Killing Floor - Curiosity killed the zombie.
However, what is interesting from a game play perspective, is that Killing Floor is rather slow. You move slow, you aim slow and (surprisingly not frustrating) reload slow too. You have no crosshair (sticky tape on screen with dot kgo) and status effects such as disorientation, bleeding and/or getting mauled by a zombie all effect how accurately you aim and move. Usually I do not care for these sort of games that attempt to mimic realistic qualities of human biology and limitations. A game is a game and if you want realistic games then I suggest you walk outside for awhile. But, in Killing Floor, these qualitites only enhance the gameplay experience. If you can imagine a limping team mate desperately trying to reach the safety of your teams temporary barricade while you are steadily running out of ammo shooting past him at the advancing horde of undead, then you can understand the very panicy and tense gameplay situations Killing Floor offers.
Below: Killing Floor - Anticipation is everything.
Also, retreating to an escape route elevator after being overrun in a corridor only to have a zombie with a chainsaw emerge from it when the doors open creates the most interesting team mate reactions and profanity you can possibly bear witness to.
Anyways, leaving off with a zombie zerg feel, I present a Left 4 Dead trailer, a new game being patented and soon to be released by Valve. It should be pretty epic.
Below: Left 4 Dead - 28 Days... now.
Several weeks ago now, I once again interested my housemates here to play a UT2k4 mod called "Killing Floor". Now, zombies are cool. I think you would find few people who disagree (and if they do they are crazy). Shooting zombies, on the other hand, is even better. Shooting a never ending horde of zombies with a group of friends, delaying your inevitable demise is perhaps one of the most enjoyable gaming experiences you can encounter. What is great about killing floor is that you really do need to work together to stay alive (reloading, healing, welding doors shut etc..) as well as providing enough tension, fear and action into the mix to not ever get sick of it.
Below: Killing Floor - Curiosity killed the zombie.
However, what is interesting from a game play perspective, is that Killing Floor is rather slow. You move slow, you aim slow and (surprisingly not frustrating) reload slow too. You have no crosshair (sticky tape on screen with dot kgo) and status effects such as disorientation, bleeding and/or getting mauled by a zombie all effect how accurately you aim and move. Usually I do not care for these sort of games that attempt to mimic realistic qualities of human biology and limitations. A game is a game and if you want realistic games then I suggest you walk outside for awhile. But, in Killing Floor, these qualitites only enhance the gameplay experience. If you can imagine a limping team mate desperately trying to reach the safety of your teams temporary barricade while you are steadily running out of ammo shooting past him at the advancing horde of undead, then you can understand the very panicy and tense gameplay situations Killing Floor offers.
Below: Killing Floor - Anticipation is everything.
Also, retreating to an escape route elevator after being overrun in a corridor only to have a zombie with a chainsaw emerge from it when the doors open creates the most interesting team mate reactions and profanity you can possibly bear witness to.
Anyways, leaving off with a zombie zerg feel, I present a Left 4 Dead trailer, a new game being patented and soon to be released by Valve. It should be pretty epic.
Below: Left 4 Dead - 28 Days... now.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Mission accomplished.
Well then. It is done (for the moment). Overall I thoroughly enjoyed having this blog as it has allowed me to express and communicate ideas and opinions about games design, as well as explore the field in various ways. Before reading the 16 additional blog entries required for part 2, I would like to direct the reader to a post made a few weeks earlier stating the information contained within:
Blog Post Criteria heads up
This post basically just explains the situation of the posting format I have chosen and invites the reader to take each post as one of many possible criteria variations.
The 16 posts making up part 2 range from the post "Decisions decisions" to the most recent "One Frag Left". Everything prior to this group was for the previous part.
I am considering keeping this blog alive and continuing to fill it with ideas and/or general opinions on games and the future of the franchise in the years to come. We shall see, however.
Below: BOOOM!!!
Blog Post Criteria heads up
This post basically just explains the situation of the posting format I have chosen and invites the reader to take each post as one of many possible criteria variations.
The 16 posts making up part 2 range from the post "Decisions decisions" to the most recent "One Frag Left". Everything prior to this group was for the previous part.
I am considering keeping this blog alive and continuing to fill it with ideas and/or general opinions on games and the future of the franchise in the years to come. We shall see, however.
Below: BOOOM!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
