Game Reviews

Wikileaks

2010-12-07T23:19:00.004Z

For those who aren't aware of the Wikileaks media explosion that it currently under way, you're missing probably one of the most important show downs of the 21st century. More details can be found on wlcentral.org and at the Guardian, but in summary here is what has happened.

On Sunday 28th of November, Wikileaks (formally of Wikileaks.org but now currently, amongst over a thousand other domains, at Wikileaks.ch) began publishing over 250, 000 leaked Cables from American embassies around the world. This was accompanied by 5 news papers including the Guardian in the UK, who were also given the leak. These cables covered a number of things including criticism of the UK strategy in Afghanistan, that the US government was spying on the UN and that NATO had drawn up a plan of defence against Russia. For more information, I once again point you towards the Guardian website or on on the Cable gate search engine if you want to explore the cables themselves.

This naturally provoked the American government to condemn the site, claiming it was endangering the lives of Americans and setting back diplomacy years. Things then escalated with prominent US politicians calling for Assange - the founder of Wikileaks - to be assassinated. Pressure was applied to companies to drop Wikileaks.

And so they did, Amazon, who were hosting Wikileaks, kicked them of their server, Paypal suspended their account, everyDNS.com dropped their domain so you cannot get to the site from www.wikileaks.org any more and most alarmingly the French government threatened to take action against any company hosting the site in France.

Most recently, Assange has been charged with rape and is currently in court proceedings to extradite him to Sweden. Simultaneously, the American government is looking for laws to prosecute him relating to the leaks.

That is a rough overview and I strongly recommend reading additional things on it as it is an exciting story if nothing else.

The debate regarding whether the leaks should have been released has drawn different opinions. Personally, I am not convinced they are a good thing because some of them will set back key diplomatic relations years. For example, NATO plans against Russia will probably eliminate any chance of nuclear disarmament any time soon. Diplomacy, like all discussions between people, need some secrecy. Even your closest friend won't know everything you think about them. What is not said is an important aspect of communication.

However, this is more a criticism of whoever leaked the documents than Wikileaks, and it certainly isn't the important story to this issue. In fact, most of the leaked documents are basically irrelevant and their importance is probably overstated at the moment.

The rape charges are similarly irrelevant. Irrespective of whether this is an elaborate government conspiracy or Assange being guilty of a very serious crime of which there is little room in my heart for forgiveness, the American government has no right to try and shut down any site at all.

I am also not convinced that some of the counter-actions taken by internet enthusiasts is acceptable. For example, tracking down the two people who have excused Assange of rape and conducting a crowd sourced investigation in to them is at best morally questionable. Sure, it has turned up some quite interesting results, but if it hadn't it would be a serious invasion of privacy in to two victims.

In my opinion, the rape charge is a separate issue. Yes, the case is being conducted suspiciously and at a very coincidental time, but that doesn't instantly mean that Assange is innocent and the accusers guilty. I feel that Assange must be found innocent of these charges and put them behind us. If it seems like he was found innocent simply because of internet pressure that will be far more damaging.

The key issue is the threat this appears to be on freedom of speech. Irrespective of the content published, the American government shouldn't be leaning on companies to try their best to stop Wikileaks broadcasting and they certainly shouldn't be considering arresting him or even assassinating him.

The entire world seems to have gone mad. Sure, the content is damaging and I can understand why the US government is annoyed to have had it leaked, but surely no government claiming to believe in freedom of speech can do anything like prosecute him.

I am sure there are plenty of readers who agree with me and the American government, that actually this leak is not beneficial to anyone. However, I would hope that you all agree that this is irrelevant to the real debate: should a government be able to stop a website that is communicating content which is damaging to said government. For me, the answer is a resounding no.

If it is for you to, I implore you to take action: email your MP, persuade people that freedom of speech is at stake and this is the real debate (as opposed to the actual leak), boycott services that cave in to government demands (though that does make Christmas complicated without Paypal, Amazon, Visa or Mastercard!) and spread the word. I don't know if Assange is guilty of rape, though the circumstances seem quite odd, but I do know that he isn't guilty of treason against the American government and I do know that Wikileaks must be allowed to continue.

On a side note, there is some evidence that Twitter is actively stopping #wikileaks trend, it is certainly receiving more tweets per minute than any of the listed trending topic (though their is apparently a more sophisticated formula behind trending). Either way, follow #wikileaks to keep up to date with all the half rumours and latest news.

Umm, Fable 3?

2010-11-02T13:24:00.003Z

Long term readers of this blog will know I am a massive fan of the Fable series. While many people did not like Fable 2, I have written at length about how I thought it was a truly fantastic game (that said, looking back through my posts, I have written considerably less than I remember writing... maybe I should do a look back at some point...)

So your probably wondering why there has been no coverage of Fable 3. The sad truth of it is I haven't played it. My excuse is legitamate, I am at university and do not have a 360. As a result, I am saving it until Christmas (where I will be back at home). I am currently avoiding all press and reviews on the game, so I have no idea how it is being received. Believe me, when I get to play it, I will be blogging about it.

On a simmilar note, I will eventually write my review for Civilization 5 but my life has been a bit hectic for the past month.

Civilization 5 IS coming to Macs

2010-09-26T15:52:00.003+01:00

I can confirm (to a reasonable extent) that there will be a Mac version of Civilization 5 and we are hopefully not far away from its release. In every Civ 5 mod there is a file called the modinfo file. It contains, among other things, the description of the mod and who made it etc. It also includes a property called . To me, that seems pretty conclusive evidence that a Mac version is on its way.

You heard it here first, Civ 5 for Mac!

Civilization 5 LAN fix

2010-09-26T15:22:00.002+01:00

As you can probably tell from the lack of live updates, I am enjoying Civilization 5. Posts coming soon about things I liked and don't like. However, in this post I am going to explain what I had to do to get LAN play working with one copy of the game licensed to one Steam account. My copy was from Amazon but I believe this will work with Steam versions as well.

I am not sure if this counts as piracy but I don't think anyone would buy more than one copy of the game to play the occasional game at a LAN party so it isn't costing anyone any sales...

The problems I had were:

Game not showing up in the LAN screen
Game stopping on the "Retrieving Host Information" screen

Solution: To solve the first problem, make sure Civ is allowed through all of your firewalls (no special ports, just add an exception.

If you are having the second problem, each computer needs the Steam account to have a different nick name (read below for details)

First you need to choose a host computer and put your steam account on this computer in to offline mode. Then with each extra computer do the following

In Steam, open up the friends window and change your nickname to a unique name/name of the player on that computer
Switch Steam in to offline mode (Steam>Go offline...)
Start Civilization and go to LAN (in Multiplayer)
Hopefully at this point, Windows will ask you if you want to allow Civilization 5 through the firewall, click allow (this should resolve the first issue). If it doesn't prompt you, just add the exception through the Windows Firewall exceptions list

Do this for each computer setting them to a different name each time. Now go online on the host computer and change the nickname to another name. Open Civ, add Civ to the exceptions list and host the game. All players should now be able to join.

Nb, there doesn't appear to be a save option in LAN at the moment. Fortunately the game appears to auto-save every turn so just make sure you end your turn before quitting. I am assuming this is a mistake and will be patched.

Civilization 5 Live Blog

2010-09-23T23:47:00.006+01:00

Civilization 5 tuned up today and I am just waiting for Steam to allow me to activate it (at midnight). I will be live blogging impressions tonight and will pick these up after work tomorrow (and before you say, yes I know this is a bad idea).

I have played the demo and I really liked what I saw though I have some reservations. I will be playing as Arabia on a normal map with normal pacing. Also, if anyone wants a game, let me know.

Most recent updates are at the top

[01:44] The game is opening, and there are 100+ achievements, because, honestly, the game wasn't addictive enough
[01:38] 1 hour and 38 minutes after Civ 5 was meant to go live, disk users can now install Civ, which is what I am doing now, planing on playing no later than 2. We'll see how that goes. Approximately 30% of the way there
[11:59] All set to go

[11:50] 10 minutes to go!

3DDS Missed a trick

2010-06-28T11:45:00.003+01:00

I have had exams and so my E3 coverage has been, well, missing. The Fable 3 trailer was absurdly over-the-top dramatic and Portal 2 looks amazing, but today I am going to write about the new DS that has a 3D screen.

Everyone says it works fantastically and not having to wear glasses is a massive achievement for Nintendo. Put simply, 3D won't take off until this becomes standard. No one is going to wear special glasses to watch normal TV.

Having said this, I think Nintendo missed a trick with this DS. Only one of the screens is 3D, the one that isn't a touch screen. They said it was because finger prints could mess up the 3D effect. Fine, but I think more importantly touching a 2D display would break the illusion of 3D.

However, what is the first thing people try and do when they see 3D: reach out and touch it. And they could have done this with the DS. The lower touch screen could also have tiny cameras that could detect the positions of your fingertips. If they did this, you would be able to interact with objects in 3D.

Not only would this reinforce the illusion of 3D, it would open up huge game play possibilities. Up till now, most video game puzzles are limited to operating within a 2D environment. This is because both our vision and interactions have been limited to 2D. As soon as games throw in a 3rd dimension, the puzzle becomes frustrating because you can't interact with it in a natural way.

However with a 3D, err, interaction screen, you could do all sorts of puzzles that would have otherwise been very difficult to convert in to a game. It could also have educational purposes, particularly with 3D vector questions (as you can tell, exams have taken over my mind).

I am still unsure about Kinect, and MS massively missed the point when demonstrating their kart racer game. In real driving you have to hold something. Without anything in your hands, the experience (I believe) will feel flat and bland. They could have at least done something cool with it, like accelerating with your feet, to make it feel more like real racing. I was also disappointed that there wasn't any information on how Fable 3 plans to make use of it.

The Civilization 5 Combat System

2010-04-07T14:49:00.004+01:00

Civilization 5 is scheduled for later this year and already significant changes have been announced. Aside from the fact the game is now hex based, the biggest changes seem to be related to how the combat will function in this game. Crucially, you are only allowed one unit per hex, demolishing the standard Civ strategy of "stacks of doom" where you put all your troops in one big pile and advance them towards cities. Further, you are not allowed to leave troops in cities; instead, cities will require long and drawn out sieges. The idea behind this is to reduce the city centric wars that exist in Civilization 4.

The single unit per hex rule combined with the ability for ranged units to fire over hexes implies a much more zoomed in game. This would appear to be a move to make combat more tactical and less about numbers of units. If you can set up an effective choke point, it doesn't matter how many troops your opponent has, you just have your best unit block the way with archers behind them.

Also, there is talk of things like flanking bonuses for bringing your troops round enemies (though quite how this will work is unclear: will you have to point your troops in a specific direction?). All of this tactical layer sounds neat in principal. Wars have never held much attraction for me as they are too much of a slog towards the end of the game and I am not good at rushing. Hopefully the changes will make the wars more engaging.

If they are hoping to move the battles away from the cities the key thing they need to work on is making battles outside of a city beneficial. In Civilization 4, war was a serious thing. It wasn't permanent, but it had lasting diplomatic consequences with the AI and human players would rarely back down after a quick fight. Therefore, if you went to war, you could expect to be at it for quite a long time. The only thing that would justify the costs would be taking enemy cities. I think the early game could be more exciting if armies frequently clashed to capture resource points or territory. It would even fit with the time line, I can't imagine cave men had peace treaties with neighbouring tribes? As it stands, to capture enemy territory you have to capture the city that is creating the border, which seems a bit drastic for a small territory gain. And if Civ 5 make capturing cities harder, wars could just become and rare but final element of the game, no skirmishes, just total war.

My other concern is that it will be too much micro managing. Civilization is not a war game. War is a required part of the game play, but it is not the only part. By keeping it simple (as they have done up till now) it was assumed that your generals on the ground were managing your archers etc. and you just explained to them what you wanted to capture while you managed the economy, diplomacy and politics. How is having to position your archers behind your axe men going to fit with the pacing of the game? Will it heavily favour people who are prepared to do all this micromanaging?

The game is going to bring back advisor who will help you manage your cities, but I have never liked trusting the computer with tasks, particularly when it is optional and particularly when I enjoy managing my cities. Besides, that just means that those with the most patience will just manage it all and get an advantage at the cost of the pacing of the game.

Obviously, details are thin on the ground at the moment and I don't really know how any of this stuff is going to work.

Stop the Press: Correction

2010-03-17T23:35:00.003Z

I have just been alerted to a factual error in my (very) recent review of Blue Toad Investigation Files for the PS3. I have updated the review with the correct information, but in the interest of on-line journalistic integrity please find the updates summaries here along with my apologies at the error.

I initially stated that one episode would cost £6.29 and that all six would be £9.99. This is not the case. Episodes 1 and 2 will cost £9.99. Episode 3 is currently free. Episode 4, 5 & 6 will also be bundled for £9.99. All six can be purchased for £19.98. See my updated review.

On a totally unrelated note, I forgot to mention that John Cleese, from Monty Python and Fawlty Towers will be performing for Fable 3. How awesome is that?

Blue Toad Murder Files

2010-03-17T15:46:00.006Z

Blue Toad Murder files is a downloadable puzzle board game for the PS3. The game is good with a really impressive mixture of puzzles, if a slightly off pricing model

Each episode, of which there are six, contain twelve puzzles. Despite this large number, they feel different from one and another and there is a nice balance between difficulty. None of the puzzles feel cheap and they include word, logic and spatial challenges which means everyone will be good at something.

In fact all the game play works really well. Four players can play with one controller. It takes the board game ethos of letting you choose how competitive you want to play. If you have younger players you may want to work together so they can do the more challenging puzzles, but the game includes plenty of scoring you so you can play against each other.

The great unmasking is also good. You have to be paying attention for the entire episode to be able to correctly identify who is the criminal. The developers have got the balance just right: you don't have to make any unimaginable leaps of genius, but equally it isn't blatantly obvious who it is; in all of the first three episodes at least one of us got it wrong each time.

The exaggerated town and over-the-top story are mirrored in the voice acting and art style. The narrators voice, whilst initially funny, starts to grate as he does a lot of talking. The characters are amusing with a very British sense of humour (there is even a Basil Fawlty-esque character) that give the game plenty of personality.

My main criticism with the game is how it is priced. There are (going to be) six episodes. Each episode has a self contained mystery to solve, but there is an over-arching conspiracy-theory of a plot to link the six. The idea is you can buy just one episode or the entire series. In principal this is a nice idea, letting you see what it is like before shelling out for the full thing. However, the pricing model simply does not reflect this idea.

[This is updated from the original review, see this post for details] The pricing is complicated: episodes one and two together are 9.99, the third one is currently free and the final three will be bundled for £9.99 unless you buy them all for 19.98. Confused, I was (hence the error). Let me do the maths for you: it is no cheaper to buy all of the bundles than to buy it in one hit. So just do that, which will let you try it out first. It is a really baffling price model, which considering the company is trying something new with the episodic content format is a shame.

They are enjoyable and if you are looking for a nice family game, £10 is great for three individual episodes. Though they have very little re-playability, they are fun enough to justify the price. I look forward to playing the final three, which are scheduled for the 8th of April. Because of the price scheme, you should get the first three soon (as the third one is only free for a limited time). I will review the other three when they are released.

This review has been updated to include factual corrections relating to the (quite) complicated price scheme. For full details of the changes, please view my correction post. Veteran Gamer believes in journalistic integrity and apologizes for this.

Mass Effect 2

2010-03-12T19:01:00.006Z

Masss Effect 2 has numerous issues, especially with the combat, that will frequently anger you. But I can forgive all of these simply because it provides one of the best single player story driven experiences I have ever played.

Clearly, I love this game, so let me pick apart the problems and then point out why I don't care. The combat, for me is the biggest sticking point. For an elite commando, the controls feel clunky and unresponsive. The cover system will have you jumping randomly in to and out of cover and team management still leaves a lot to be desired. Your team seem to largely ignore what you say and it is impossible to explain any marginally complicated plans as you have to maintain eye contact with what you want them to do. I don't expect Rainbow Six level of control, but in its current state, it feels utterly pointless. Co-operative might help to alleviate this problem and would certainly add to re-playability, but it is sadly not present.

The game also has this stupid resource collection mini-”game” that makes no sense in the context of the story and is so dull you will think it's a huge practical joke. The long loading screens also make a return. At the very least they could give you access to your menu so you can read all the information on the back ground while you wait.

However, none of this matters one ounce to me. I have already written too much about the story but I really did love it. The way all your choices, failures and successes are so beautifully woven in to the end provides a compelling experience. The intricate characters, complete setting and quality voice acting made the entire experience a real treat. You were emotionally invested in the characters from about 20 minutes in to the game right up until the dramatic conclusion. The game is really good at making you feel the weight of responsibility as commander and caring for your team in a genuine way.

In conclusion, it is pretty clear that I loved this game. Yes, it has a half broken cover system, long load screens and numerous other problems, but I don't care. I keep using the word “experience” and that is exactly what this games gives, an experience that is worth putting up with all the problems twice.

Story & Mass Effect 2

2010-03-10T18:17:00.003Z

I have finished my first run through of Mass Effect 2 (review will be up soon) and it has been one hell of a ride. In this post I will be talking about the story, and more importantly, the delivery of the story. I will try to avoid ruining plot turns, but I am with the faction that says good story can't really be spoiled, so consider this a warning if you want everything to be completely fresh. When I wrote this, I hadn't actually finished the story, so don't worry about ending spoilers.

Mass Effect's story is fantastic for a number of reasons. The actual plot isn't actually one of them, it's fine, but it's just standard science fiction stuff. However, Bioware does the other parts so well: the characters are deep and diverse, the setting is complete with really interesting inter-race relationships and the voice acting is stellar (inter-stellar? Ed.).

However, as great and important as all that stuff is, I want to look at how Bioware have handled the dynamic nature of their story. What makes this story so great is that you are emotionally invested in it; that's why I loved Fable 2 despite it having a clichéd story.

Some games seem to think that, because books contain good stories, a book is a good model for a game story. There is definitely space for this kind of game, but I don't think that is the way to go if you want story to be central to your game. By making the stories more dynamic, the experience becomes more individual and that, for me, is what made me become emotionally invested in Mass Effect 2. With all this talk about stories, let me tell you a story.

In Mass Effect 2, there are a group of missions called the loyalty missions. You have to complete these to earn the loyalty of a specific crew members. One of your crew is an elite assassin who has a terminal illness. He recently discovered that his son, who he has kept in the dark about his line of work, just discovered what his father does and has now decided to become an assassin. Obviously, his Dad doesn't want this for him and wants to go and stop him. So you find out about what his target is going to be. You then split up, you tailing the target. Unfortunately, I lost the target in a crowd when he went through a door. We then ran to the apartment of the target to try and save him. Just as we get there we see his son shoot the target and run away. You have failed: a politician who may have changed the city for the better lies dead, a son has entered in to a life of crime never to be seen again and the father will die with the weight of that on his head, and it was entirely your fault. There is no restarting or trying again, just responsibility: if I had been better, this could have been avoided

Suddenly the game is personal, you have let down someone on your team and there is nothing you can do. Whenever you talk to him, he is miserably and dejected. You had one shot and you screwed it up. Mass Effect had this to some respect, but with Mass Effect 2 they have really ran with it. Failure and success aren't necessarily linked to restarting and the consequences of failure and cleverly woven in to the story.

The best books are the ones where you find yourself forming an empathy with the fictional characters. And this is what Mass Effect 2 does so well, you feel the pressures and responsibilities as a leader of a team. These are your decisions, your team will stick by them, but you must live with the consequences. And knowing that things can go wrong, like in the case of that loyalty mission, provides that pressure that forces you to care about what you say and do.

Your relationships with the crew also enforce this idea. For example, I accidentally led two of my crew on, hinting (and then out right declaring) that I liked them. The decision there was of course what I said. I could have told one of them we should just be friends, keep stuff professional, but I didn't and now, despite trying to be a positive role model for my team, I may have created a massive divide.

The speech system is another thing I really like about the game. Part of this is again down to the quality of the writing. However, the way what you say can have real consequences and that you can say the wrong thing at the wrong time gives it so much weight.

You won't know the consequences of what you are going to say and while the game does help you a little bit, it isn't always clear which one is going to be the most beneficial. I am sure there are people who will criticize it because sometimes it isn't even clear what you are going to say or the limited options means you can't say what you want to say. However, to me, this makes perfect sense. Frequently in life we are not able to say what we want to say, things go wrong, we mean to comfort someone but we end up antagonising the situation.

Of course, all this isn't just good design that most games ignore, this requires a huge amount of effort. I saw some unreferenced statistic saying that Mass Effect 2 contained 20 000 lines of dialogue, similar to about 20 films. The game didn't cost 20x as much as a cinema ticket, and so it would be unreasonable to expect this standard from every game. And like I said, there is plenty of room for the linear you-can't-make-mistakes stories like Halo's, just don't expect me to write a piece on the story of said game!

A crazy week or so - your Veteran Gamer news update

2010-03-04T23:26:00.004Z

A news post on all the stuff that has been going down. It has been a bizarre week (give or take a few days) for the games industry, so I figured I should probably write something about it. After this, I promise to deliver my Mass Effect posts along with a review (and a review of a little PS3 downloadable game called Blue Toad Investigations).

Starting with the AppoclayPS3 (kudos to whoever came up with that). If you missed this, for 24 hours every single fat PS3 bricked. As it turned out, it was to do with the internal clock, which got confused as it thought that 2010 was a leap year. Fortunately for PS3 owners and Sony, the problem resolved itself when a new day dawned. Clearly Sony had no idea to fix it: they provided virtually no updates on their twitter stream (never a good sign) and the fix was wait until the next day.

Then Valve took centre stage, hinting at two separate things. Firstly, a mysterious patch to Portal meant that if you picked up and walked around with the radio, you could pick up encrypted signals. Which, if you are far clever than me, lead you through some Morse code clues to a BBS (a bulletin board system). The other cool Valve related story is that Steam is coming to the Mac. Whilst it hasn't been announced, the pictures give a pretty clear story...

Since starting writing this and thanks to an internet failure, Portal 2 has actually been confirmed and it will have co-operative too. Stay tuned for more details.

Then things started to get nasty. Activision, publisher of the $1 billion grossing Modern Warfare 2, has sacked the two leads at Infinity Ward (the developers of Call of Duty), Jason West & Vince Zampella. As always happens when nobody knows anything, the internet went crazy. However, as the dust has settled details are emerging. More recently, the two ex-employees have filed a law suit against Activision.

The basis behind their case is that the reason they were fired was not actually strong enough to justify getting rid of them and instead was timed so they would not have to be paid royalties for Modern Warfare 2.

The other key aspect is West and Zampella challenging Activision regarding the ownership of the Call of Duty IP. If they are able to satisfy the court that they still own the IP, then they could stop Activision from releasing further Call of Duty titles until the matter has been resolved.

Some of the stuff in the court documents, if true, is very scary:

"Activision conducted the invesigation in a manner designed to maximize the inconvenience and anxiety it would cause West and Zampella. On little notice, Activision insisted on conducting interviews over the President's Day holiday weekend; West and Zampella were interrogated for over six hours in a windowless conference room..."

It goes on, that is the stuff of nightmares. Kotaku has posted the full script and it is a scary read. This cannot be allowed to go on, publishers cannot attack their staff like this. The IGDA (independent game developers association) is broadcasting its board meeting this time, hopefully they will discuss this and what they plan to do. You can watch it at GD.net next Friday.

Fable 3 and Civilization 5

2010-02-20T22:33:00.006Z

My two favourite franchises, Civilization and Fable, are both receiving sequels this year! Fable 3 we already knew about, however the Civilization announcement is new. Please note, Civilization 5 is different from the previously announced Civilization Facebook, which should also be coming out this year.

Fable 3

I mentioned that Peter Molyneux would be demoing and talking about Fable 3 at this years X10. The key things to take away from it are:

Traditional RPG levelling and health systems have been cut
Like your character, your weapons will now change according to how you use them
There are two continents
The expressions wheel has been replaced by something called touch, though the details are still hazy as to how it actually works
The game will support but not require Natal. How the game will use Natal has not been announced

One thing that Molyneux did say is that they are still not talking about the second half of the game, where you have to rule a country (beyond a few hazy details like you will have a treasury and you will have to decided how to spend the countries money). Judging by the inclusion of a second continent, I would imagine there will be some kind of diplomacy/military conquest.

The weapon development is quite interesting. Basically, as you use your weapon, it will become more powerful and specialised. If you kill innocents, it will constantly drip blood, killing certain types of creatures will cause it to develop a certain appearance. The cool thing is, you can name your sword and then trade it online. Which means you will have actual legendary swords that you have to try and track down. The problem with this is of course the fact the game exists in sub-perfect world; optimal swords will be found and mass produced, flooding the market and near-breaking the system.

The other good thing is they are doing co-operative properly. You can use your actual character. Naturally, it being Fable, I am now super excited for this game.

Civilization 5

Details are still very vague at this point. Probably the most significant change is the move from squares to hexagons. They also said that there would be indirect attacks from units like archers. This all suggest, along with the screen shots, more tactical combat (placing your archers behind swordsmen type of thing) and less stacks of doom.

They also commented on improved diplomacy, which is good. For me, I found the biggest problem with Civilization 4 is that there is little reason the interact with the other nations, particularly in the end game when military victory is far too much of a grind to be seriously considered. Which is a shame as I have always liked the idea of combined military arms.

On that note, one thing I would like to see is a more inter-nation interaction during the end game - taking the UN idea to the next level. For example, maybe requiring nations to work together to overcome an flu epidemic or global warming. Something to force nations to consider each other, rather than just becoming isolationist and pushing for the space victory.

The only other thing specified was improved online, which is good, particularly if they introduce things like clans, leagues and experience points. Civilization 4 had a very robust multi-player, but little incentives to keep you playing which made it feel a bit dry.

Two very exciting announcements for my two most anticipated games of the year. Keep an eye of this site for updates as we approach their release (Civ 5: Fall 2010, Fable 3: Before Christmas)

Darksiders [Xbox 360]

2010-02-14T13:55:00.008Z

Darksiders starts off as a weak, bloody version of Legend of Zelda but by the end is serving up interesting puzzles, fun combat and even a little compelling narrative. Providing you are prepared to put up with the opening couple of hours, there is a polished and clever adventure to be had.

The biggest theme in Darksiders is improvement. The game starts of really dreadful. The combat is incredibly boring and yet the game insists chucking you against hundreds of enemies; fighting them becomes a massive chore. When you get to a puzzle, it is mind numbingly simple, usually hitting something nearby to open a door. The environments are drab grey. The only promise of interest, humans running from angles and demons as the two super powers fight out a massive war on earth, dies out when you realise that the main game is set when the two powers are in a stalemate and all the humans are dead.

However, as the game progresses, everything gets better. You learn new moves and the combat is challenging enough so that you have to use them. By the end of the game, you are skilfully diving in with an attack and shooting back out as they come back at you. You use all your moves to great effect and fighting is really rewarding.

The puzzles follow a similar pattern. After the initial few hours, they become really rewarding. The puzzles are all logical and instead of feeling like you spotted the trick the designer wanted you to, you feel like you worked it out and it is your solution to a problem. Some of them follow the Legend of Zelda method of using your latest tool, but others require you to apply everything you have learnt so far and a little imagination. The only draw back is sometimes, especially in some of the boss fights, there is little feedback to indicate if you are doing the right thing, which is disheartening.

Even the story improves. OK, it never gets great, and the way it is delivered is poor: the game feeds you virtually no story line through out the whole game then at about 85% of the way through, it gives you two massive cut scenes one after the other which deliver the entire story. However, it is almost compelling and by the end, your previously boring character has a much more defined personality. The story is very confusing, partly because of the bulk delivery, but the ending is quite neat (hopefully a 4 player co-operative sequel?)

I had a lot of fun with this game. It presents some really cool locations later on, even if you feel you have visited some of them before (the sand dunes, for example, mimic the sand dunes in Legend of Zelda). It looks good, the game loads smoothly when travelling between environments and although the controls aren't perfect, the combat works well.

Zelda fans will have a great time with this game and I would highly recommend it to anyone who has the time to get past the opening section.

This review was based on a promotional copy supplied by the publisher.

A Fable 3 announcement

2010-02-09T18:26:00.003Z

In an interview with Peter Molyneux, the legendary designer said he was going to make an announcement at X10, a Microsoft conference on the 11th of February. He said the announcement was going to "upset people".

Obviously, I don't know what it is. However, given that we know Fable 3 will use Natal in some respect, I would not be surprised to find out the announcement is that Fable 3 will require Natal. He also said that he thought it was "the right thing to do". Given his support for Natal, and the fact that Natal's success depends upon high profile games being released on it, this would appear to support the theory.

I'm of two minds about Natal. I am still struggling to see how it can be used to enhance game play interactions. Sure, it is technically impressive, but the whole emotion recognition thing that Milo was doing isn't magic. That requires impressive software as well as impressive hardware. I fear this means that more likely than not, Milo-style interaction is going to be a rare phenomena rather than the norm. Natal is going to be a lot of money to buy and a lot of money for developers to develop for. Given there is a certain sense of the Wii reign coming to an end, I suspect developers will be weary about jumping on the next band wagon until it has been proven viable.

Obviously, I can't help but be excited anyway.

In other news, I have finished Darksiders and will post a review hopefully before the end of the week. Then I am on to Mass Effect 2, which so far has been amazing.

Crispy Gamer

2010-01-25T23:15:00.003Z

Some of you may have heard of a gaming news site called Crispy Gamer. Earlier this month, the upper management laid off all of the writers. Quite aside from the fact this obviously sucks for all those involved, this was one of the best gaming sites out there, with thought provoking and excellently written articles on various different topics. They employed a collection of very talented writers that, regardless of whether you agreed or not, always drew you in to a good debate.

It had the feel of more of a Sunday news paper rather than Gamespot. Instead of just covering the latest news stories and blockbuster reviews, it examined topics such as the No Russian mission in Call of Duty or the punishing difficulty of demon soul s. It also had a light-hearted video section, the the most useful review score system ever and even a comic strip.

As you can tell from this rambling love letter, I will sorely miss the writers on this site and will make a concerted effort to follow them, wherever they go.

What I am worried about is what this implies for digital games journalism in general. Presumably the reason these writers were let go was because it was not financially viable to keep them on. Crispy was funded by adverts, and while there was hardly a shortage of them, it is difficult to believe they were making a fortune out of it.

Talent writers want decent pay. I am worried that there isn't enough money to pay for talented writers and the only option is to turn to people like me who are just desperate to write about games.

To be fair, this is not limited to games, or even digital media. All news outlets are struggling to deal with this era. Advertising is becoming worth less and less as we all become attuned to just ignoring it. Someone needs to come up with a viable business model for journalism because no one seems prepared to pay for it any more.

Avatar - We are across the uncanny valey

2009-12-19T16:37:00.003Z

I just got back from seeing Avatar, and wow... just wow. If you have been living under a rock, Avatar is a 15-year-in-the-making epic directed by the apparently mad James Cameron (of Titanic fame, no other). It is amazing.

Sure, the story is fairly standard, the character development is predictable and some of the dialogue is weak. However, that somewhat fades in to insignificance in the beautiful backdrop that is Pandora.

Cameron gets what makes a good film, it is more than just a good plot- that's a play. It is more than interesting characters, that's a book, it is about the imagery. It's about affecting the viewer through the visual elements. I could explain to you just how AMAZING this film looks, because it is breathtaking, but it is the way that Cameron uses the stunning technology that makes this film what it is; what separates it from the equally technically impressive Transformers 2.

The world that is created in this film is so believable that when you see a strange creature, your initial reaction is "that cannot be real", like when you watch BBC documentaries of wonderful creatures, instead of accepting it as blatant CGI. The world that Cameron has so masterfully created is both bizarre and believable; technology and imagination working in tandem.

Through this world Cameron is able to hang a basically average story and make you care. You find yourself hating the humans attacking this world where there is still so much to find out. It makes you sympathise with the indigenous people, juxtaposing the cold, technology dependant environment of the humans with the self sufficient, natural world of the Navi.

The story is so completely inseparable from the presentation that, while I can say if you wrote a book with the same plot it would fail, I think to say that the film fails because of the story and hence the film is merely a technology demo is to miss what a film is - the combination of story and camera shots. Avatar is something that you have to experience on the big screen, loud and in 3D. It is the first time in a long time where I have walked away from the cinema feeling that the £10 price was justified. A must see for all.

Games I missed in 2009

2009-12-12T13:59:00.004Z

Well it is that time of year where all the year review posts begin. I WON'T be doing any decade look backs for a number of reason. Most importantly, technically the decade ends next year! Further, this is the first and only decade which I have actively played video games, so I won't have anything to compare it against. Also, the time span is so great and technology has changed so much that it would be diminishing to any title to say that they can be compared on the same scale.

I believe that even Game of the Year awards are a bit pointless as there are too many different ways of comparing games and no one game is going to come out on top of all the others in everything. Instead, I plan to do a post of great, important or otherwise noteworthy games of 2009 and this post, the games I wished I had got round to playing (and hopefully will at some point) but didn't.

Batman: Arkham Asylum

Like everyone else, I started out dismissing this game simply because it was based on a license. However, time and again I hear positive things about it. For example, I recently read an interview with the developer on Crispy Gamer where they talked about combining different gameplay elements seamlessly. I love the idea of a game that combines action, stealth and sleuthing. In fact, everything about the game sounds really interesting, from the story to the gameplay. The art style and even the combat engine. Great to see a decent license-based game.

Assassin's Creed 2

Assassin's Creed was one of those games I probably should have played but I never really got round to it. My limited time with AC2 was very positive and apparently the developers mixed up the single player so it is less repetitive. The in game world is gorgeous and even with my short time, I was desperate to see more of it.

New Super Mario Bro's Wii

I love the original Mario's, I have a weird love of challenging platformers (odd as most other games I enjoy are often nearer the easy end of challenge). I think this is partly because in 2D, absolute perfection is possible. In 3D, there are too many variables for everything to be spot on, but in 2D, there is a correct time to jump, a correct time to stop sprinting etc. Judging by the reviews of this game, it is classic Mario with multiplayer. Sure, people say that playing co-operative is annoying, but the competitive is where it is at. Finally I can race people head to head on 2D Mario levels - that sounds like something I will enjoy.

Brutal Legend

A strategy game on a console? After Three Moves Ahead covered Brutal Legend, I was sold. I have always quite liked the idea of a strategy game where you control someone on the field, and if Tom Chick says it works, then I am giving it a shot.

inFAMOUS and Uncharted 2

I am a sucker for open world games, particularly ones that give you moral decisions. So I was disappointed that the two most talked about open world games this year were PS3 exclusives. Given a chance, I would probably play them to death.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2

Enough has been written about this game already, so I won't bother. Suffice to say that at some point, I should probably get it.

Ok, so what did I miss on my miss list? Any other important titles that I should have played? To do this, you need to know what I have played, so stay tuned for my 2009 round up of what I did play.

Why you should probably get Solium Infernum

2009-12-02T22:42:00.005Z

Solium Inferum is a turn based strategy game produced by Cryptic Comet, a one man indie outfit. It is seriously addictive and the more you play of it, the more you appreciate the beauty of the design. Every little thing is connected to seemingly everything else, nothing is without its caveats and no decision is straight forward.

The basic premise of the game is that you are in Hell, the devil has gone away and someone needs to rule. You and up to 5 other archfiends must compete to build up prestige prestige through insults, demands, vendettas, surprises and general nastiness. The winner is the person with the most prestige when the game ends. Unless someone storms the capital of hell and holds it for 5 turns. (I told you everything had a caveat)

First off, I'll mention some of the things that are drastically different from any game I've played. Firstly, you can only do two things per turn. Unless you capture certain places or buy certain things (Getting the idea? Always with the caveats). This includes gathering resources, purchasing new units, initiating diplomatic actions and of course, moving and fighting. This means that for every thing you choose to do, there are countless other things that you would quite like to do. As a result, every decision requires deep thinking and planning.

Another really noteworthy feature is the diplomacy. As the game is set in hell, everything is very cut-throat. However, it is also heavily regulated. You cannot simply march in to someone else's territory and claim it as your own (yup, you guessed it, another caveat: unless you have played a specific event that means they are excommunicated from the council). You must either make a demand or insult them. If you make a demand, then they can either refuse, at which point you can declare war. However, they can just concede to the demand, and there is nothing you can do and you must wait a couple of turns before you can make another demand. If you insult them, the ball is in their court, they can either accept the insult or refuse it and then they can choose the terms of the vendetta.

Even the vendetta is not as simple as it sounds. You can choose a straight vendetta, where you then set your objective (capture X hexes, destroy X legions or capture X places of power). However, you can also challenge them to one on one combat. One of the things you can bid on at the market (yes, you can't buy anything, it is all a massive auction open to all players with only one of each unit, relic, manuscript etc.) is a hero unit called a Praetor. These can be attached to your legions to make them powerful or used in one on one combat. This means you can have no army, no adjoining borders and still crush the opponent. As the game is a battle for prestige rather than territory, the fact that you won't capture any territory is not an issue.

Now no doubt you found all that very confusing. That is because there is too much for me to explain in a single post. Instead, what I hoped to have done was revealed the strategic depth that this game has. It is not without its flaws. The AI is not very challenging at the moment (although it has already had improvements since the game came out last week!) and the multiplayer is limited to Play be Email, which is OK, but a bit of hassle. It also has no in game tutorial, few hotkeys and even fewer tooltips which makes learning the game a pain.

Having said that and despite what everyone else is saying, I didn't actually find the game that difficult to get the basics down. Unlike Hearts of Iron 3, where I felt simply overwhelmed by everything I didn't understand, this game allowed me to introduce myself to new concepts when I felt ready. Sure, some things are weird and very different from many other games. However, the games theme is so interesting and so effectively spread throughout the whole game, from the flavour text to the artwork, the names and places, that it is a real joy to spend time in the game learning things. At the very least you should download the demo, it runs under Windows and Linux. Vic, the developer, has said he trying to get a Mac version out, but can't guarantee it.

So please, go ahead, download the demo. I might try to do a beginners guide to it at some point, but I want to feel like I understand everything before I try to do that.

Why I am hyped for Solium Infernum

2009-11-22T19:28:00.003Z

Any Twitter followers will be aware that I am looking forward to a indie turn based, card based, hex based strategy game called Solium Infernum. I am looking forward to it for a number of different reasons, but this quote from a live blog at Quarter to Three by Ben Stones pretty much epitomises it:

"SI isn't ... a game about making loose pacts to not attack one another. It's a game in which the players are all beholden to a set of strict political rules that govern their interactions, and each tries to twist the rules to their favor without actually breaking them. It's a give and take sort of deal where there are very granular consequences for everything that you choose to do.

For example, one diplomatic action you can choose to do is spend a number of your Prestige points to insult one of your opponents in front of the Conclave. If you do this, the Conclave's rules of conduct take effect and govern how your opponent can react. If they accept the insult, they lose face, and you get your original Prestige investment back, as well as an equal number of Prestige points from the insulted player. The other player can also refuse the insult and force you to lose your Prestige investment at no cost to themselves, but if they do, then they are required to claim Vendetta against you, which means that they have go to war for a certain number of turns. In that time period, they must achieve a certain objective (capture X number of Cantons, capture a certain Place of Power) or they lose Prestige (usually more than they would have lost if they had just accepted the insult).

So it's more of a back and forth, action and reaction sort of diplomacy, governed by rules. In that respect, it's not at all like Diplomacy."

I cannot wait, I will definitely be writing something about it when it comes out.

The perception of games and why it needs to change

2009-11-14T11:38:00.003Z

Hello, just a quick post. I just posted on my sister blog, Botworks, a article on the public perception of games and why I think it needs to change. It is a topic that means a lot to me and I would really appreciate you guys to have a read and let me know what you think.

(Normal posting to return soon hopefully with a review of Forza 3, which I am still digging)

Forza Motorsport 3 First Impressions

2009-10-31T12:49:00.003Z

I recently got Forza Motorsport 3 for the Xbox 360. As it is a racing game, I am completely hooked and will be for some hours to come, so you might well say my impressions are highly positive. However, while the game makes a few significant improvements over Forza 2, the game is far from perfect.

The biggest improvement is probably the calendar. While they seem to have misunderstood some of the things I was talking about when I said I wanted a calendar, it solves one of the massive problems with Forza 2: the whole single player feeling like a giant grind. Because of the calendar format, the game accepts failure and encourages you to keep going on regardless. No longer are you stuck on the same races to try and unlock some other ones, it doesn't matter how well you do, the game will give you more races in different cars and different tracks.

The other really big improvement is the track variation. There is a huge variety in the tracks, from windy villages set in stunning vistas to high speed circular race rings and everything in between. There are even point to point tracks up steep mountains. This is a huge step up from Forza 2 where the track set felt very restricted: either go in a dull looking track, or a dull-to-drive track.

The visual improvements are noticeable on the cars and on the tracks, but there are still a few areas that really grate the eye, such as the audience. However, the biggest problem is the loading screens. Is that really the price I have to pay for the amazing looking tracks, and isn't there some sort of compromise?

The multiplayer also feels a bit like two steps forward one step back. It is considerably easier to get in to a decent and competitive game. However, they seem to have stripped some of the features that made the multiplayer in Forza 2 so compelling such as tournaments and pink slip racing (where you bet a car on the outcome of the race).

There are numerous other gripes I could make such as the lack of dynamic weather, the misleading number of tracks (most of them are just sections of other tracks), the rewind feature - which I plan to write more about soon, still not being able to do split screen online and a poor music set list. However, it is a fantastic racing game simply because the people at Turn 10 have got the racing feel down to an absolute tee. Even with the rewind, races are incredibly tense experiences where you really feel like the slightest mistake could send you spinning.

Drawn to Life - The Next Chapter [Wii]

2009-10-28T10:03:00.005Z

Drawn to Life is a platformer with a drawing mechanic that appears both in light puzzles and in decorating your world. The game draws (no pun intended) on a number of other games including flash mini-games you could find on Miniclip. However, I feel that the combination provides an enjoyable and varied single player experience.

The platforming is, on the whole, good. I could gripe about the controls, which don't feel quite as right as Mario. However, the game makes up for it with nice level design that provides a couple of new platform elements mixed in. One of my favourite bits was when you were trying to get down through a maze of trampolines that bounced you up whenever you touched them and you had to use your wings to glide you through. It put a different spin on a mechanic you had been using for the past few levels.

In the game you are invited to draw a number of things. These can be either puzzle elements or elements of the game world. Drawing parts of the world is quite a nice gimmick and makes the world feel your own with your wacky flowers and your bizarre spiders. However, each time you want to draw something, you must sit through a loading screen which really slows down the pace of the game.

You must also draw things to solve puzzles. You won't be stuck on any one of the puzzle for long and quite often they can be beaten using a brute force approach. However, they are quite rewarding. When you draw in to the world, your drawings take on properties based on where you have drawn them. For example, there is one colour where what you draw obeys the laws of physics so you must first build foundations for whatever you need. As I said, they aren't real head scratchers and a lot of the challenge is in the execution but they are still fun.

The game also has some vehicle sequences which are silly but highly entertaining. They require no thinking and minimal skill but they are an absolute blast to play them and provide variation from the platforming.

The single player is respectably long, coming in at about 10 hours. Each level is surprisingly long, normally about 20 minutes. This means that you will feel like you are exploring them. The drawback is, at that length, you never really feel compelled to try and beat your fastest time for them, which reduces the replayability. Each level has loads of coins hidden throughout them and some can be really challenging to get. However, the game doesn't distinguish between the really hard coins and ones that were simply on your path, which means there is no real satisfaction is collecting them.

The game does feature some multiplayer, however it is not worth the time it takes to load. It features 3 almost identical minigames with finicky controls and no replayability. It is a shame the game does not have any co-op, even if it was more like Super Mario Galaxy's as it means the game has virtually no replayability.

Technically this game is acceptable. The long loading screens are a massive pain, and the games graphics aren't going to blow you away. However, it integrates your artwork in to the game well. Sometimes things are a little small and lack the contrast required to make them easily noticeable. The drawing tools are fairly easy to use - even if some of the buttons are a bit small - and provide plenty of options. If you are a perfectionist, there are some things which you will irritate you like not being able to draw a perfect circle.

Overall, this is a really nice game. The lack of decent multiplayer is quite a considerable floor, but the mixture of platforming, puzzle solving and car driving makes for an enjoyable single player that will entertain and challenge most age ranges. The technical floors are a pain, but it is a quality title in many other respects that they can be overlooked.

Civilization: Facebook

2009-10-22T00:09:00.002+01:00

It has been announced today, that a persistent version of my favourite game, Civilization, will be coming to Facebook. Without a shadow of a doubt this may be the most dangerous combination ever known to man. While I am not a Facebook user, social networking sites are super addictive, and we all know the powers of Civilization. I expect to see this game banned in many countries under the drug regulations act.

In all seriousness, I am always unsure about persistent games, but if any game is going to turn me one way or anther, it will be Civilization. I cannot wait and will certainly be signing up for the beta.

Halo 3: ODST

2009-10-16T19:34:00.007+01:00

As many of my readers will well know, I regard Halo 3 as the perfect console first person shooter. It certainly isn't my favorite game, but that is merely a matter of preference. It does everything so well, from a fantastic to single player to an easy to use, pick-up-and-play multi-player with incredible depth. I could go on. However, this review is about ODST, the half game built off Halo 3. It, regrettably, is not anywhere near as good.

Halo 3:ODST has 3 main components: the campaign, Firefight mode - a co-op mode similar to Horde, and Halo 3 multiplayer with three new maps. You will get all this and the Reach beta for £35.

The campaign was advertised to be a new way of playing Halo 3. Bungie promised a dark story delivered in a novel way, more tactical game play and gritty characters. However, the campaign is dull, short and, particularly near the end, highly repetitive.

You play the part of "The Rookie" a voiceless, faceless entity who walks around a miserable and absurdly dark (in the literal sense) city finding random clues which transport you back to your other, less likeable but equally flat, squad mates. These missions are very much traditional Halo in style except the combat does not seem as fun.

As you have far less health, you cannot simply charge in a-la Halo. However, instead of making the combat more tactical, it simply makes it less enjoyable. It becomes a grind as you take out one enemy at a time, wait for your energy to recharge then take out the next.

The game often feels like it is having an identity crisis. It wants to try and be a more tactical slow paced shooter, which the combat system doesn't seem to support. The permanent health simply does not work with the auto-save system. If you have an auto save that leaves you with no health, and there are no health kits about (or worse, you have to protect some thing which is driving away from you), you are stuck.

The campaign has numerous other problems, ranging from a broken co-op respawn system in one level to copy-and-paste level design towards the end. However, for me, the fundamental issue is it never gets exciting. Everyone remembers the Covenant level in Halo 3 when you had to take down two scarabs, everyone remembers the Hornet sequence, the tank sequence and everyone remembers the end of the last level driving off the exploding Halo ring in a Warthog. There were loads of points were you heart was racing with the whole experience.

There are no such points in ODST. The only "oh...cool" moment was when you blow up a bridge, and even that was decidedly underwhelming. This is epitomized by the closing sequence - killing the same old enemies that you have been killing for the past 8 years. You find yourself willing it to be over, despite the campaign coming in at under 8 hours. You have to fight off not 1, not 2, not even 3 but 4 ship loads (and checkpoints aren't guaranteed between any of them) of covenant before you can finally close the damn thing.

The whole game is over mercifully quickly, but with an unacceptably large proportion of your time walking round the city and getting lost as you must navigate with a stupid 3D map in a world which is so dark that even your night vision has trouble in some areas.

The one good thing I can honestly say is, when you are able to turn your night vision off, the sky is absolutely amazing. In fact, a lot of the environments are some of the best in Halo yet. The city environment is one that is underused in Halo universe and the game portrays an excellent sense of post-invasion desolation

So once you have finished the campaign you can play Firefight; a cooperative mode for up to 4 players fighting endless waves of Covenant. You actually have to unlock some of the levels, which is very un-Bungie like. This mode is really good. Not because Bungie have done anything to help themselves, simply because Halo combat is fun. It's OK on your own but the multiplayer is intense. Vehicles, tons of grenades and a wide variety of enemies really set this Horde copy cat apart from Horde et al.

So it is a real shame that it has some really basic problems. Things like no saving/continuing mean that each time you must go from the start. Given that to get a half decent score requires about 1 and a half hours, it is as much an endurance challenge as a skill challenge to get far. There are a few pet wishes I have - Forge, play as Master Chief, choosing weapons and skull settings - which are a nuisannce, and most of them are things that Bungie normally do really well. However, by the far the most annoying (and the thing that Bungie is best at) is Matchmaking. The game gets really good with 2 people and the fun just increases as you add more people. However, I don't know 4 people with ODST, let alone have 4 people who are all on at the same time to play Firefight for a couple of hours. I do not know what was going through Bungies mind when they decided to not include Matchmaking for a mode that so obviously needs it.

Which leaves us with the final element; 3 new maps plus all the maps released via Xbox Live Marketplace since Halo 3s launch. If you don't have any of the maps, this is fantastic, but for me, it is 3 maps that are, well, fine. They are Halo maps, they don't stand out as awesome maps like Avalanche or Sandbox, but they were perfectly enjoyable to play on.

Maybe I am being harsh on this game because it is Halo, if it was any other game, maybe I would be pleased. But given that they want a full price for a game where they already had the engine and have been sitting on for 6 months, I think I am being perfectly fair.

If you own Halo 3 and all the maps, this game is simply not worth £35 or even £25. You (and I) can hope they release the maps and Firefight as DLC for ~£15. If you don't own any of the maps, then you should certainly consider it; but only if you plan to use the maps. If you don't own Halo 3 (*shock*), then get Halo 3 because the campaign really is a lot better and there are plenty of maps to be getting started with there. Bungie, I am disappointed.

Hearts of Iron 3

2009-10-09T16:54:00.006+01:00

When I wrote my first impressions for Hearts of Iron 3 a couple of weeks ago, I didn't sound very pleased with the game. Which is a first when it comes to new games. Normally I start liking it then go off them when I realise a couple of days later that actually it is boring and repetitive.

In truth, my negative impressions didn't disappear the day after I wrote that. Hardly a time went by without me cursing the game numerous times. Playing it became a chore. I only persisted for three reasons:

Troy Goodfellow, a reviewer I respect greatly, said it was good
The concept filled me with a buzz, I wanted to be a commander in a massive theatre of war
I had spent money on it, I wasn't about to chuck it away

However, as you may have guessed, I am now thoroughly in to the game. It is far from perfect, and there are still plenty of elements I curse for just being so stupidly convoluted. However, I now feel comfortable that I am playing it right, and hence write a review.

However, I won't be attaching my normal scoring system to this review like I do with every other game I have ever reviewed. The reason is simple, the score will be completely different depending on who you are. I am not going to lie to you, if the concept of the game does not fill you with excitement you will never get in to the game. Even if it does, you will still need a large amount of patience. Even then, the game is far from perfect. For this reason, I shall not give the game a score. For some of you, it would be an 8.5 whilst for others it would be a 0.

As I have said, the game has numerous flaws. These range from frustrating glitches, poor memory management (the game will lag, unless you are running some kind of super computer, I have 4GB of RAM, which should be more than enough), and plenty of user interface floors.

Getting an overview of what is going on is nearly impossible. The game does a poor job of choosing what information you need to see (like provinces being taken) and what is utterly irrelevant (like minor research developments). You have to manually choose what information you want displayed and how, which simply isn't practical. When you are going through the game for the first time, you don't know what will be important. However, you neither want to be overwhelmed or missing out on key bits of information. I felt both of these as getting in to Hearts of Iron.

They have implemented a fantastic system to break down your troops in to divisions and then companies then brigades, but offer no group selection other than drag and drop, meaning that divisions serve no practical purpose. They also allow you to put theatres or divisions under control of generals. However, it is neither obvious how you do it, nor is it clear if there are disadvantages for using less talented generals.

You start the game with numerous units, but the game lacks a clear overview screen so you must spend the first 45 minutes of any game going through all your units so you have a clear idea of what you have and where they are. I found that unless you are prepared to micromanage everything, your units will not be organised in to any kind of hierarchy and you will simply move

The game gives you control over loads of things, but each screen is overwhelming when you first look at it, with only the ever tempting "Give AI Control" element making sense! Fortunatley, the most important screen, the production screen, where you choose what to build, is fairly intuitive and helpful tool-tips clear up any confusion. However, one of your tasks is to split your resources between various different things through sliders. However, between a bug that means they reset every 5 seconds if you don't close the screen or pause the game, and the fact that there is simply not enough options for controlling them (for example, I want to be able to set some of them to track their minimum value) it becomes a frustrating balancing act, and takes you away from the fun of the game.

Despite all that, once you understand what is going on, the game is fun. Managing your troops and conquering the world is great, once you have got over the oddities of simple things like selecting and transporting troops etc. Because the game models things like supply routes, you have so much more freedom when it comes to strategies. Doing things like encircling your enemy as they run out of supplies make you feel like a real war general. And when the enemy does the same to you, dropping in supplies by plane or using the last of your troops supplies to make a mad dash to re-establish routes creates a real sense of war that no game I have ever played has managed. The World War 2 feel is captured perfectly and the boxes that look like you would find on a generals map help the war aesthetic.

So in short, a really interesting grand strategy game hides behind numerous problems that means this game is going to be a big time investment to get in to. Frustratingly obvious things that seem so simple to fix really detract from the whole experience, even after you have got in to it. As I said at the beginning, you will only get past the huge learning curve if you really want to. If you want a light grand strategy game with immediate rewards, play something like Sins of a Solar Empire, which is much more instantly gratifying. However, if thinking about managing supply lines, moving vast armies and playing the diplomatic game in the epic setting of World War 2 fills you with excitement, then there is a really interesting, deep and rewarding game here.

It it worth noting that the manual is particularly useful and, at time of publication, the game is not cheaper on Steam than at retail shops. As such, if you are going to get it, I strongly recommend purchasing it in real life. I am hopefully going to write a very short noobs guide to getting in to Hears of Iron 3 over the next week.

Peter Molyenux Interview - Fable 3 to use Natal

2009-10-05T17:12:00.002+01:00

Peter Molyenux has given an interview (which you can view here, first 30 seconds or so in Dutch, but the interview is in English)

Among other things, Molyenux states that, while Fable 3 will use a standard Xbox 360 controller, it will also make some use of Natal, Microsoft's forthcoming camera controller. As I said when Fable 3 was originally announced, I think the Natal element will be in communication. I think it is clear from their work with Milo that Lionhead believe they can make some sort of communication model work in Natal. Also, given that Fable 3 requires you to start a revolution and run a country, talking to people could be central to the actual gameplay. You only have to look at real politics and see that charm and good public speaking skills can be more important than actual policy.

Obviously, Fable 3 is still some time away, and Peter does have a tendency to promise things which don't wind up in the game. None the less, I am already excited about this release.

Forza Motor Sport 3 Demo

2009-09-30T23:01:00.002+01:00

The Forza Motor Sport 3 demo is out on the Xbox Live Marketplace, you should probably go grab it now.

For me Forza Motor Sport 2 had 3 main problems:

1) Too linear and repetitive single player
2) Bland racing environments
3) No weather effects

While the demo does not include any single player out of race experience, previews have talked about a race calendar, so number 1 looks like it should be fixed.

The demo definitely does show improved racing environments! Obviously they picked the most stunning track, but it really is impressive. I don't think I have ever seen such a graphical step up in a sequel that is on the same generation. However, I have seen no mention of weather anywhere, so I am guessing that is still missing.

The big new feature is the rewind feature. At first, I was over the moon and impressed at such a bold decision for a realistic racing sim. However, as there is no limitation and no (visible) penalty for using it, it encourages perfectionism.

In Forza, it is very easy to mess up, a slight misjudgement can ruin your car and lose the race. Before, this meant a restart, which was incredibly frustrating. With such a high chance of failure, one might expect minimal punishment, so the rewind is a step in the right direction.

However, part of the fun is fighting back. With the rewind system, I can see players (me) using it more and more frequently for less and less serious crashes. This will slowly eat away at my sense of satisfaction and even race excitement. If it was limited per race, then you could avoid the frustration of a slight mistake causing ruin without meaning that every lap will be perfect.

Overall, it was pretty good. There was only a limited selection of cars, one track and no multiplayer, so you don't get a huge feel for the game. The interior views do nothing for me. I find it claustrophobic (I think you need a massive TV for it to be really good) and much prefer driving in the out-of-car view, so for me that was a waste of money. Hopefully the matchmaking will be more sophisticated, as I remember trying to get a game in FM 2 to be a pain. All in all, it was pretty much what I was expecting, if you are in to racing games, I am guessing that this game is going to fill you need for cars and provide an enjoyable racing experience. Expect a review some time around Christmas (hopefully before).

Dawn of War 2 - Chaos Rising

2009-09-21T17:32:00.003+01:00

The first expansion pack to Dawn of War 2 has been announced. It will feature, amongst other things, the Chaos Space Marines. For me, I was really hoping for the Imperial Guard, but I am hardly surprised by their choice; Chaos was a frequent demand and they should fit in with the current races online.

The expansion pack will also include some new units. This is fine if it doesn't upset the very carefully balanced multiplayer. Personally, I thought the multiplayer had enough units, the last thing I need is a bunch of redundant units I need to try out; or worse, that totally unbalance the whole thing.

It will also include a new single player campaign which, given how much I enjoyed the first one, is something I am looking forward to. My worry is that the novelty will have worn off and the missions will simply be repetitive A to B jobs. However, as you can carry through your characters, there should be a continued sense of attachment to your troops.

It is also worth noting that this is different from the previously announced Last Stand, which will be a free add-on coming out this October. This includes a new co-op mode similar to Horde mode in Gears of War 2.

The full stand alone expansion pack will be out in Spring 2010, when I will surely buy it. Until then, Dawn of War 2 remains one of the few games I actively play online, so if you are up for a game, my live ID is theTHK123 and my Steam ID is thk123.

On a side note, I went to see Coldplay at Wembley on Saturday (19th September) and they were really good! You can view all my videos on youtube.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 thoughts

2009-09-15T16:53:00.003+01:00

Activision are calling this the biggest video game launch ever. While I am not sure I quite agree with that (err, Halo 3 anyone?), Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 certainly is the biggest launch of the year, even with Sims 3 and Halo: ODST. So what am I expecting from it?

Call of Duty has always been a reputable series, bringing a slightly arcadey feel to the World War 2 theme that Medal of Honour could never quite manage. However, its real fame came in the form of Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. While I was impressed with the action packed single player, the thing that stood out from the start was the multiplayer. A couple of years on, the game has stood the test of time and easily rivals Halo for number of dedicated multiplayer gamers. The innovative level system has inspired many first person shooters and really was the key to making the game play addictive.

This was demonstrated by the sales of Call of Duty 5. While this game was handed back to Treyarch, developers of Call of Duty 1 and 3, they used the Call of Duty 4 engine. The game was perfectly respectable, but it was very similar to Call of Duty 4, in spite of the different settings. Its nazzi zombies mode was interesting, but the game was not radically innovative like Modern Warfare was.

It was around this time that Activison announced that there would be a new Call of Duty game every year, with Infinity Ward and Treyarch taking it in turns.

This brings us back to Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, the first Infinity Ward sequel to Call of Duty 4, scheduled for release on the 10th of November. For me, this game is pivotal to the future of the franchise. If Infinity Ward can keep the game play fresh and different from Call of Duty 4, then I believe the franchise can survive 2 or maybe 3 more instalments. However, if the single player gets shorter due to the reduced developement time and the multiplayer offers little over 4 and 5, it is difficult to see everyone abandoning the current iteration every year for what will essentially be the same game.

Hearts of Iron 3: First Impressions

2009-09-07T17:15:00.003+01:00

I got a new game a couple of days ago called Hearts of Iron 3. It is developed by the little known Paradox Interactive (Most famous title, Europa Universalis and, more recently, East India Company). The game is a grand strategy game set in World War 2. You can control one of any (and I mean any) country in World War 2. I have never really played any grand strategy games (except maybe Sins of a Solar Empire, depending on how you classify it) and so I found the scale intimidating. A grand strategy game is a strategy game where you are in charge of every large-scale thing, from managing divisions of troops to diplomacy and espionage without touching the troop to troop control or even squad to squad.

Having to manage hundreds of units across a huge map is challenging but the pace is slow enough that is manageable. However, when you throw in supply lines, production management, technology, diplomacy and espionage, it is very difficult when each screen is confusing and new. It isn't that there is too much to do in the time you've got: at the slowest pace, there is rarely enough; it is simply that it all requires a lot of focus to fully understand what all the sliders, boxes and columns mean and their various effects.

And I am not going to tell you that after two days I find it easy. None the less, the game does a lot to help. All of those screens can be left to an AI. I don't know if it is competent, but it allows me to focus on working out other things. You can even divide up the map and leave control of areas to the AI. Also, to the games credit, by default a lot of your country runs with very little player input so you can just move your troops around if that's what you want. The problem with this is, I just can't really resist playing with everything!

The hierarchy is central to the game, particularly in how you divide control up with the AI and how to manage supplies. This is something I like a lot in games, I like knowing how things break down. However, this game lacks the visual clarity to make it really clear what is going on. There are three levels to it and they require geographical knowledge of your chosen country. Keeping track of all this can be difficult, and isn't helped by the lack of an overview screen, which could help immensely.

The interface has a few other issues and the relentless pop-ups alerting you to everything from irrelevant technologies discoveries, vitally important battle results and various other stuff is overwhelming when you are trying to do something, like control your troops.

I hope I can figure this game out because, due to the sheer amount it models (weather, transport etc.), there should be plenty of opportunities for developing interesting strategies. I have always held a secret belief that I could conquer more than Hitler, so once I figure out stuff, I look forward to my world conquest.

On a side note, if anyone has this game and fancies a multiplayer game, give me a week and then post a comment or something.

Fable 3

2009-09-04T23:16:00.003+01:00

A few days after me making a prediction that Lionhead were working on something big, Lionhead announce Fable 3!

Fable 3 will put you as King or Queen in the land of Albion. The game is set not long after Fable 2 and you will be playing your hero's son or daughter. Hopefully this means the game will use your actions in Fable 2 to shape the world that Fable 3 is set in. The press release hints at some election campaigning, where I would assume you can either promise good things or beat people in to submission. It also suggests that you will be controlling policy. It is unclear what kind of game this Fable will be, given these strange implications. However, the employment includes combat animators so I think it will still be an adventure game, at least in camera perspective.

I think it is fairly safe to assume that it will use Natal in some respect. What I hope happens, and would build on from the AI demo at E3, would be you have to talk to your people. This would certainly be a significant step up from Fable 2, where you had to communicate in sign language. If the E3 demo was not staged, then it is not inconceivable that you could give speeches etc. However, given that it almost certainly was, maybe not. All I hope is that I don't have to do the walking in real life.

Fable 3 is scheduled for release in late 2010, which probably means early 2011 which is still 2 years away. This will probably wind up being the game that sells Natal for me. Stay tuned for more updates.

A new Lionhead Project?

2009-08-16T12:53:00.002+01:00

Just a quick post, but I think Lionhead are working on something. This is hardly an announcement, I don't think anyone thought they were just sitting around. Obviously they have the thing they are working on for Natal. However, be it that or be it something else, I think we are going to hear something about it soon.

Firstly, they have a new website (which is at the moment, at least on my computer, very laggy and likes to crash for no apparent reason). Each day it has had a different quote from famous historic people. Also, they are recruiting a lot of new people, most notably programmers on contract working on high profile Xbox 360 game. The fact that they are on contract suggests that they are approaching the finish rather than just starting. Finally, I think if there were more Fable DLC, we would have heard about it by now.

All in all, I think we will see an announcement fairly soon (I hope) for something unexpected. I don't think it is their AI project thing because that has little do with history and I can't see them needing a Technical Combat Designer to help create creature combat animations for a game where the demo showed the player drawing a fish for a little girl (call it a hunch).

Anyway, on holday tommorow so another expanse of no posting, sorry.

Red Faction: Guerilla

2009-07-24T15:08:00.004+01:00

When I first saw this game I thought it was going to be some solid lowest common denominator entertainment. However, what you actually get is a surprisingly deep, if a little repetitive, respectably long single player. For me, this is the spiritual sequel to the original Mercenaries and a worthy purchase if you are looking for something to play over the summer.

The main selling point of this game is the impressive physics engine, so I should probably start with that. Exploding stuff is fun. Sometimes the buildings feel a little fragile and yet remarkably can stay standing on a single support. None the less, the demolition requires thinking and it is rewarding when they come down. The fact that every man made structure is destroyable and stays destroyed makes the world come alive. Destroy a bridge and you will see people having to drive round it, for example. I was a little surprised to discover you couldn't destroy the rocks (that was, after all, the main selling point for the original Red Faction) but fear not, there is not a shortage of things to destroy.

However, that is far from the only link to Mercenaries, which also had loads of permanent destruction. The single player takes place in a large explorable world with plenty of driving. The single player is a lengthy experience that will take about 15 hours to complete with plenty still to do. In some ways, the game play can get quite repetitive and you spend far too much driving around. While there is a wide variety of types of missions, they most boil down to exploding buildings and driving vehicles. However, the vastly superior (in numbers and weapons) enemies force you to use the map in imaginative ways to try and get in and out as quickly as possible.

That is probably the single players greatest strength. For the most part, you do feel like a guerilla using hit and run tactics. It is a pleasant change from the normal one man army who defeats everything. The learning curve for the single player is also excellent and towards the end of the game it is very challenging.

In fact, the single player experience does load right, an interesting world to explore, collectibles with in game rewards, a believable population, nicely paced game play and climaxes coming at the end of each area that you liberate. However, one of my favourite parts to the experience were the demolition challenges. In these you get a limited set of equipment and within a set time you must destroy a building. These required a lot of thinking, with some of them being very challenging.

However, the single player is not perfect. For me, the biggest let down is the story. For once, the actual story has not really been overused. For most games it is a complete evil you are fighting. However, in this, you are basically fighting a corrupt power. However, I think the game does a poor job of turning you against them. Straight after the tutorial they kill your brother. This would, in theory, turn you against them. However, the developers go to early, you don't really know or care about your brother. I think there needed to be an extended period at the start where you were helping the Red Faction without going on all out attack on EDF (Not sure how they would stop this being boring). That way, when they kiled your brother, you cared. Also, they could use this time to show the EDF abusing their power.

The ending is a bit of a let down (aren't they all!). The climax comes right before the final boss battle, which just feels tacked on and lame. I also thought that they could have done something more interesting with the world after you had finished it; immeditatly after I defeated the EDF, I got called to intercept one of their couriers.

None the less, overall the single player is one of the better experiences in recent memory. The audio and visual presentation is fantastic and the world presents a suprisingly large amount of variety when exploring.

The game has two types of multi-player. The online multiplayer does nothing for me. The jetpacks do make combat an interesting experience but the game isn't about to supplant Halo. It is perfectly functional but things like 3 shot rocket launchers and proximity mines feel unbalanced and frustrating. It also doesn't really make full use of things like destruction to set it apart from other games. It just feels like an online mode that was there because a game should have online, not because they had anything special to add.

However, the game also includes a "pass the controler" mode. Yes, that is right, a take it in turns multi-player which you probably haven't seen since Worms on the PS1! However, it is suprsingly good. Basically, you have to destroy more than your opponents in a time limit. However, to make things interesting, all of your actions use time as well. So, swinging the hammer will take 3 seconds off your time. Therefore, it is key to think about your actions. In one game, for example, I rigged a tower to fall on top of a building to score more. The forthought required for this is a rare feature in any multi-player games and reinforces my point there is more to this game than meets the eye.

In conclusion, I really like Red Faction. The single player is long, challenging and interesting. Whilst the story won't do much for you, some excellent pacing and an interesting world make is a must if you are looking for something to play over the summer. The explosions make for an interesting focus to the game. Sometimes it needs more variety, but for the large part, it is highly entertaining.

The multi-player is not fantastic, but it isn't bad. There is nothing in the online mode to keep you, it is basically a standard online experience with some unbalanced and frustrating weapons. The pass the controller mode, on the other hand, is really good. Although I am sure that given enough time, you could work out exactly the dominant explosions, when you first start it with somone else, it is entertaining, different and plays to the strengths of the game.

This review is based on a copy of the game supplied by the publisher

Sims 3

2009-06-30T18:11:00.009+01:00

I have an admission to make. I have never played the Sims before. Therefore this review is probably unique, as I am coming to this game anew. It is a very difficult game for me to review as it is difficult for me to know where it is the game letting me down, and where it is me not enjoying the basic premise of the game.

One of the most significant improvements to the game is the introduction of an explorable city. Technically, this is very impressive. You can zoom right in and watch what your Sims are watching on their TV and zoom right out to see the entire neighbourhood without even a whiff of loading screen.

The graphics do help you in to the Sims world. The audio sounds good and when you zoom in all the way, you can really get inside your Sim's world. There is nice audio variation, and the whole world looks and sounds very believable. Your Sims, for the large part, act believably, moving around and communicating convincingly .

The game also introduces the “moodlets” system. A moodlet is a symbol which shows a single emotion affecting your Sim. It tells you the impact it is having, what is causing it and when it will go/get worse. For example you might have a tired moodlet, which says that the sim is very tired, making him 30 less happy, and in two hours time, he will become extremly tired. These are very good at showing instantly what is affecting your Sims and what you need to do at making them happier.

Both of these features help to minimize the barrier between our world and the world of the Sims. This is very important as the game's main pleasure come from the reality TV style game play of watching the lives of these characters. If you were constantly reminded of the virtual nature, it would be hard to relate to the characters.

However, the technical improvement come at a cost. The game takes a long time to load at the start. On my reasonably powerful computer (4GB RAM, 2.4Ghz x2 processor, 256Mb graphics card) it runs fairly well on low-medium settings. However, fairly well is the important part, it hardly feels lightning fast. Furthermore, I had to turn down the settings, as it was running at an inconsistent frame rate. For what is meant to be a casual game, I find this surprising.

My only criticism as a first time Simer would be working out what I should do for my first game. There are a number of choices at the start. I chose to make a family of four, which turned out to be rather ambitious for my first game. I also, foolishly, randomly created all but one of my characters and ended up with a mother who hated children and the outdoors. I also felt there should have been more guidance when choosing where to put your house. I ended up living in a very expensive part of town meaning, leaving me no money for improvements.

One of my favourite parts of the game is creating stuff. Building houses is fun as it is easy to do. However, I found that often there wasn't enough money to do it. Also, as what you made had to be practically useful, you couldn't have as much fun as you could in Spore. For content creation, I much preferred Spore's creators, which were so much easier to make interesting things. I also prefer the way you made styles to go on Spore creations, as I felt it gave you more freedom.

Another element that I though was superior in Spore was the online connectivity. One of my favourite parts about Spore was the fact that other people's creations were integrated so well in to your universe. In Sims, to get other people's stuff, you actually have to leave the game. There is no “Visit a friend” where you take your Sim's to someone else's game, which would have worked well. For me, this is a major disappointment. There is a load of potential for community building in this game. For example, you can create movies, so why not have it so that you can go to the cinema and watch other peoples creations?

My other major problem with the game may just be because it is a Sims game. For me, the actions are quite repetitive. I don't enjoy deliberately messing things up - I never made disasters in Sim City, so for me the game is just about doing things right. But then, when I am playing at my best, things run smoothly, and that is it. I do get attached to my characters, but not a lot. They annoy me as much as make me smile. They get unnecessarily angry when people get in their way, which stop me relating to their lives. It is nice when you build up a family and get a sense of continuity, but the day to day challenges frustrate me, rather than entertain me.

I also think the disasters that upset their lives lack variety. The shower breaks, the sink breaks, the oven breaks. You never get neighbours who start fighting in the street, or major crime or anything. Maybe it is because I am not the target market. But for me, the game gets repetitive if I play it how I want to play it. While I do get pleasure from seeing their lives run well, it is not enough to combat the repetitiveness of the rest of the game.

For me, that is probably the biggest problem. The gameplay is repetitive and lacks any substantial rewards to keep me going. At the end of the day, I haven't saved the world, or won a battle. I have just got another day older. This game does a lot well. There is plenty of variety within the jobs, the world looks great, the Sims interact with each other really well. The depth is really impressive. You have so much control other things like organising parties and days out. However, I did not feel like I can ever spend enough time or money on the parts I enjoy; building my house, organising parties, having nicely running families and instead find myself putting up with the repetitive area's of the gameplay. However, I am prepared to except that the Sims is not aimed at me, and therefore my thoughts on the gameplay are unfair.

However, I don't think my thoughts on the lack of multi player integration are. I am surprised by the barriers put in the way of content sharing and the lack of online play. The technical issues also surprise me, given the target market, casual gamers, will not have a super computer or want to spend the time messing around with graphic settings to get the right balance of frame rate and appearance.

In conclusion, I don't think Sims is for me. However, even if it was, I don't believe that it has as many features as similar games such as Spore, which I do enjoy.

This review is based on a review copy supplied by the publisher.

Project Natal = new console?!

2009-06-13T13:10:00.003+01:00

It is rumoured that Project Natal – Microsoft's new motion camera and voice recognition hardware - will launch with a new console. This is a shocking revelation if Microsoft really is going to be releasing a new console. This announcement, assuming it is accurate, is highly disturbing.

In the article, they talk about how games will be developed for both platforms, with the new platform having slightly superior graphics. This has a number of implications. Firstly, the already expensive business of producing HD games is going to get a whole lot more expensive. Ok, so the hardware is going to be similar, and it won't be double production costs. None the less, it is going to cost more, even if it is only one and half times more.

And what do developers get with this increased cost, certainly not increased sales. It isn't like there is a market waiting for this console. Think about it, casual gamers, who would be lured in by Natal would prefer to buy the (presumably) cheaper Xbox 360 with Natal. The traditional gamers already own a 360 and the best case scenario is that they will ditch the 360 for the new box. Net gain in customers due to the new console, 0.

This increased cost without increased profit might contribute to the safe-bet game market. We will see more sequels and less new IP. We might even see increased cost in games across the board (Microsoft, I don't imagine, would want new Xbox games more expensive that 360 games, and Sony and Nintendo might be tempted to follow suit).

Speaking in really predictive terms, this may speed up the inevitable, piracy on consoles. One of the reasons the PC market is shrinking compared with the console market is piracy. It is assumed that piracy on console is impossible. Nothing is impossible for a pirate. Given time, all the consoles will be cracked, the market will level out and new anti-piracy measures will have to be taken. Increasingly expensive games may act as a catalyst to the process.

And then you start hitting other problems. Sure, at first the new games will look slightly better on the new console, but hey, us 360 owners don't mind, our games still look fine. But then developers start investing money in making new games look great for the new console. There are a couple of levels that don't quite run at 60FPS on the Xbox 360. No huge deal, they were epic levels. Then it starts appearing in places where it matters, online. New Xbox owners will get a lag free (read: advantageous) experience, whilst 360 users have to lag along. Then 360 owners have to start installing games to get them to play. They have to start turning down graphics options in game if they want a solid 60FPS. Remind you of any other dying piece of hardware (in terms of game sales). Oh yeah, the PC!

It is very early days, this console hasn't even be confirmed. None the less, I play console games because everything just works. As a gamer, I prefer RTS's to action games and FPS's are better on the PC (except Halo 3, which I enjoy loads, but not because it is on the console) None the less, I play a huge amount of console games because everything on the PC is a bit iffy, even though my PC is good. This development, however, represents a trend (along with patches) towards the PC for consoles. Hopefully I am over-exaggerating, but consider this a warning.

E3 - Nintendo Press Conference

2009-06-03T21:39:00.003+01:00

Due to technical issues and my review copy of Sims 3, I did not watch either the Sony or Nintendo conferences live. I have since watched the recording of Nintendo's (I'll watch Sony's tomorrow). Here are my thoughts on said conference.

It was really lame. I don't even mean what they were announcing, which actually had some nice games, which I'll come to in a minute. What it was really lacking was any glamour, excitement or show pizazz that make E3 E3. In actual fact, I am more excited about a forth coming Metroid than ODST, but when Microsoft announce something, they are so much better at it. Everything that they announced at their conference, felt like a huge thing which you could really get excited about, as you can tell from my coverage of it. With Nintendo, even with their big announcements, I found myself falling asleep. The whole conference was poorly presented and, unlike Microsoft, did not make use of multiple presenters, instead relying on Reggie and the stupid ski woman from last year.

It was like they forgot what E3 was, a chance to show off your best. They did precisely what Microsoft said they weren't going to do, talk about sales. Seriously, it is so dull. The who press conference lacked excitement or charisma. It felt like they hadn't even tried.

So if you could keep yourself awake through the dull presentation, you were rewarded with some interesting game announcements. Admittedly, they had nothing on Microsoft. There is a trailer for a new Metroid game. It is unclear even what perspective the game will take place is, with shots that seem both in the first person and side on. Once again, Nintendo let themselves down by not having a play demo or anyone talking about the game. They said there were some surprises for Metroid fans, but they didn't say what. Nintendo, this mysterious thing doesn't work! Give us something.

They also announced a sequel to Super Mario Galaxy which looked identical to the first, but providing the level design is just as good, then that will be good. Once again, there was no demonstration of the game or explanation or anything.

They also announced a new Mario game (they made 4 Mario related announcements, if your keeping count) where the main feature is 4 player co-op. It looks quite interesting, and back to basics Mario style platforming. It looks like it could be a lot of fun when you get four players together. No doubt it won't use online, which is a shame, so it will stay as a fun party experience.

They also demonstrated Wii Motion Plus, a heart beat monitor, and Facebook on DS, but I wasn't fussed by these. Wii Motion Plus was out did by Natal and should have been in the Wii Remote in the first place.

There was no Zelda announcement (except for DS), a short video for the Conduit and very little to keep my attention. I am sorry Nintendo, I stuck up for you last year and the year before. I have stood by the Wii when all my friends have turned away, but that was pathetic, I am so sorry, you have failed.

E3 - Microsoft Press Conference

2009-06-01T14:20:00.046+01:00

Well, I unbelievably forgot all my E3 predictions beyond the announcement of Forza 3, which is pretty much a given anyway. The Microsoft press conference is scheduled for 18:20GMT tonight. You can watch it live on Gamespot. I will be posting thoughts here as the conference starts. The one thing I am desperately hoping for is Metal Gear Solid for the 360, although I am not optimistic.

The other major thing to look forward to at this conference is Peter Molyenux. The very fact that he has been given as slot means he must have some announcement. I think it is one of three things.

A big addition to Fable 2 - most likely
Fable Wars - a RTS based on the Fable franchise - not likely
Fable 3 - I think it is too soon to be announcing anything at E3, even less likely

The big addition, which I think is most likely, will be akin to Halo 3: Recon. It will use the same engine as Fable 2, which will allow them to release it before the next E3, but will be a whole game. What I suspect they will do is, it will be about your child. As those who have already seen the future, you will know that your child is destined for great things. What I think they might do is create a game set 20 years after Fable 2. The world will be based on what you did in Fable 2. It will magnify the decisions you made and the character you became and alter the world accordingly. For example, if you have been corrupt, everyone would be poor. This would be similar to how the world changed after the training section, except on a larger scale.

As for an RTS, I think it is possible, but not very likely. Peter has talked before about new technologies which allow them to animate many unique things at the same time, the kind of technology required for an RTS. However, it seems unlikely they would have any where near enough work to show.

As for Fable 3, while there definitely will be a Fable 3, I think it is too soon to announce it, E3 2010 maybe.

Skip to the conclusion

Updates

Conference thoughts
[14:20] - Conference starts in 4 hours
[18:25] - And we are off
[18:30] - No, I can't get the stream either...
[18:40] - Finally got a feed, except it's the Beatles!
[18:42] - MS say no charts, is that because of bad sales?
[18:46] - At first, I thought it was just a Wii Fit board, but to be fair, it moves on the ground, which is a huge improvement. But seriously, stop using celebrities, it's so annoying
[18:49] - CoD trailer, already seen, still looks pretty cool
[18:56] - CoD game play footage shown. Looks very CoD 4ish, some nice environments and some gimmicks to make you feel part of the story. Oh yeah, and plenty of action. Should be good for the CoD fans
[18:57] - Urgh, Final Fantasy - not my cup of tea I'm afraid
[19:03] - Ooo, Epic Games, give that man I microphone
[19:05] - Ooo, a Xbox version of Metroid Prime made by Epic, awesome!
[19:07] - Free racing game! Otherwise I wouldn't care
[19:10] - L4D 2?! That better be coming for PC!
[19:11] - Sam Fisher, the new Jack Bauer?! I just wish they could go back to Chaos Theory days
[19:18] - Forza 3!!!
[19:20] - Rolling cars! And interesting environments
[19:21] - They are right about the painting community, I know people who are obsessed
[19:24] - That was awesome... They just did this crazy video of car stunts
[19:25] - Halo 3: Recon footage, they've brought the big guns out early
[19:27] - Stealth gameplay nice...
[19:28] - Certainly an interesting way of telling a story, sounds quite cool
[19:30] - 22nd Sept ODST will drop, new secret project!
[19:32] - Halo 0 presumably, guess Microsoft couldn't resist (Actually called Halo reach and is coming in 2010)
[19:35] - Don't know what to make of this game, Alan Wake, the fact that it is being presented by the writer is quite positive, too early to say I think
[19:38] - MS clearly have high hopes for it, that was quite a long demo. Looks quite Resi Evilish, coming in Spring 2010
[19:39] - Music is coming to Xbox Live, I bet it's not in England...
[19:41] - Yay, being included for once, except I bet it is only for Sky subscribers or something stupid like that :(
[19:45] - I don't care about these things... but coming up is Peter Molyneux!
[19:48] - She is almost as embarrassing as that person from Nintendo last year, except I feel pity more than anger. But yay to Twitter!
[19:50] Big announcement coming up. Oh my word, MGS4!!!!!
[19:51] - OK, not MGS 4, but still, better than no Metal Gear Solid
[19:52] - Don't know who Raiden is, I have never played MGS in my life, how embarrassing
[19:53] - Motion controller for the 360? Wait... Me... the controller?
[19:55] - Why is it with new control schemes the adverts had to be SO embarrassing. Still, looks technically impressive
[19:46] - Tony Hawk just got outplayed...
[19:58] - Life Experience is quite impressive, but like the Wii, it will need games to make use of it
[19:59] - Stephen Spielburg as taken the stage, thank goodness it isn't Peter Molyneux
[20:03] - Take those stupid glasses off NOW!
[20:05] - Nintendo, consider yourself challenged. I imagine these demoers are over-exaggerating things and helping it work, but still looks pretty impressive. And that was a cheap shot at Nintendo
[20:11] - On the second thoughts, that sounds like quite a lot of effort for most games...
[20:12] - Peter Molyneux!
[20:15] - Get lost! How are they doing this? How?! Even without the face recognition it is impressive...
[20:17] - Well, I wasn't predicting that *hastily deletes predictions*

Conclusion

Well Microsoft's conference is over, and it certainly had some surprises. I am pleased about the Metal Gear Solid, although it was really MGS 4 that I wanted to play. None the less, I am sure this new title will contain the same type of thing as MGS 4, which I suppose will have to do. ODST looked really good,(how many of you spotted I put Recon before correcting it to ODST?). Obviously the new Halo is good, but to be honest, it is going to feel forced and a lot of people (me) will be unwilling to drop Halo 3 after sinking time (maps) and money (maps) in to it. The 2010 release date will slip without a doubt, I reckon early 2011 or very late 2010 at best.

The big thing was obviously this motion thing (by the way, the name is stupid, no one is going to remember that, it's worse than the Wii, at least that was short). Technically, it looks impressive, but these things always do in such controlled environments. What Peter Molyneux has supposedly done is incredible, but I will wait until someone from a respected site says it's as good as he says it is. Like the Wii, this technology is entirely dependant on developers. If we just see another batch of mini-game/party games, then it will fail. Non-gamers have already bought the Wii, they will be unwilling, in these economic times, to buy another games console, even with this easily marketable gimmick.

It is also going to suffer from the same problems as the Wii did in that, I don't want to stand up for a few hours playing games. I am not going to buy hardware for the sake of easy menu navigation and a few mini games I'll only play once. I'll buy it if it enhances the games that I play loads of, but then, if I play them loads, I don't want to stand up...

I think that it is going to be hard to develop for and, as developers have already invested a large amount of money in to traditional 360 development cycles, they will be unwilling to pour more money in to an unproven tech. None the less, even my scepticism can't quite stop me feeling a little excited if it really does work that well.

Some nice game previews there, Splinter Cell looks like 24, CoD 6 looks like CoD 4 but better and obviously a new Left4Dead is good for everyone, and Steam will obviously be releasing for the PC. I was surprised to not see anything about Bioshock 2 or Assassins Creed 2

Overall, a very nice conference, Nintendo must be crying. They just got out-done at their own game, however it turns out in the end.

I've seen the future

2009-05-27T22:00:00.001+01:00

And I was pretty pleased. I am, of course, talking about the Fable 2 DLC currently available on the Xbox Live market place. It comes in at a less-than-average 580 Microsoft points, and, being related to Fable, I snapped it up the day it came out. And finished it the next day. Despite having to do the first quest twice due to a glitch. And than taking my time. And having exams. It is short, I can't hide that from you. However, what there is, is pretty good, albeit missing any moral decisions. Included are three quests and glimpse of the future. Without wanting to give too much away, here are my thoughts.

The first quest takes place in a black and white world in which you must restore colour. While I do think they could have used this backdrop more thoroughly, it was an enjoyable quest. At least, it was the first time, but I'll get to that in a minute. The thing that really made the quest work were the enemies. Each enemy could only be killed through one of the combat disciplines (melee, ranged or Will) While I wouldn't describe it as hard in the traditional sense, being forced to use your different abilities added variety to an otherwise dull combat system. It got particularly interesting when the game started throwing different colours at you, and you were forced to play much more dynamically instead of just spamming level 1 fire spells.

The quest was somewhat undermined when, at the end, I got stuck in a wall. The game would only let me fast travel if I reset the quest, but, when faced with an eternity living in a wall, that seemed like a small price to pay. None the less, it was frustrating and to top it all, I ended up with far less of the collectibles at the end.

The second quest was quite amusing, as you were forced to dress up in various different costumes and perform expressions, which is always fun. Also, towards the end it had these interesting puzzles which were almost lemming-like. You had to summon various different types of Hobbes, each with their own unique uses. You had to use them to solve some environmental puzzles. For example, there was a toxic river which you couldn't cross. First, you had to summon an explosive Hobbe to destroy a wall which reveals a second summoning point. You use this one to summon a Hobbe with stilts to walk across the river and activate a switch. Once again, it wasn't very hard, but they were enjoyable enough to work out. I would have liked to see this mechanic expanded upon.

When you do go to see the future, you will, most likely, be unimpressed. There is hardly some ground breaking secret within it. It varies a little depending on your character. Sadly, little is the operative word. All you can definitely get from it is that Lionhead plan to make another Fable. If you wanted, you could read in to it that they are considering making a real time strategy game, but that is quite a stretch.

The third and final stretch of the game is definitely the highlight. Although not hard, as Lionhead promised, the arena poses an interesting challenge with its high scores. You are tasked with killing as much as you can in a tight time limit. It is not hard to get all the prizes, but I have yet to face the final boss, so it isn't easy. It also emphasises the need for two screens in co-op, as it is virtually impossible to actually co-operate. Instead, you end up fighting for the single view, making shooting specific things and getting the combo things virtually impossible.

As you would expect from Fable DLC, it comes with nice costumes and collectibles. This time, it even has some amusing achievements in addition to the normal collection ones. It has a couple of nice locations to explore, new characters to meet and weapons to use. The only obvious omission is the lack of any moral decisions there were so focal in Fable 2. I would have liked to see many of the mechanics expanded upon. None the less, for 580 Microsoft points I do recommend it. It is an enjoyable reason to return to Fable with some interesting quests.

Posting hiatus is over

2009-05-26T23:09:00.003+01:00

I know it is early than I said it would be. However, I had to end the posting hiatus prematurely for a number of reasons.

Firstly, I have written my Fable 2: See the Future impressions and can see no real reason for keeping them from you! As a sneak preview (I'll be posting it tomorrow) I really enjoyed it, but it didn't have a moral decision, which I felt was odd at best.

Secondly, THQ have just granted me a review copy of Red Faction: Guerrilla (!) which, while I haven't covered before, does look very cool (see video below). Also, it looks like it has a Team Fortress 2 style online, which, given how much I am enjoying that, should be good to see. Anyway, as I am being given a copy of this game, I feel somewhat obliged to review it around the time when it was released. The review embargo is until the 5th of June, so expect the review some time around then.

Also, as you may have gathered, I have the Orange Box. Steam were selling it at the outrageous price of £5, so I couldn't refuse. And what a package! I can't work out which game I like most. I have the Cinematic Mod for Half-Life 2 and I am loving every second of this beautifully well paced first person shooter, more than any other FPS ever (except maybe Metroid Prime, but that isn't a real shooter). Then there is Portal, which I am going to devote a whole post to just expressing my shear love for the game. And then there is Team Fortress Two, which was recently patched to include some really cool maps (it's like Steam love me). The whole game is that amazingly balanced online experience that hasn't got old yet.

Talking of free maps, Relic have added more maps and even a new game mode to Dawn of War 2. The game goes from strength to strength, with the 2v2 mode adding even more strategy to the game, but I'll be talking more about that too.

And I sold out and got both map packs for Halo 3. I haven't really played much of Legendary, but I have made a map that I am pretty pleased with in Sandbox (I'll probably be posting about it on my game development blog). I really got it as I was going to have points left over from Fable, and I wanted Sandbox, so I just got it all so I could play it online.

Oh yes, and the small point that E3 is coming and I best get my predictions in early. And guessing Forza 3 doesn't count as a prediction, it's like "predicting" that the sun will rise tomorrow, it's all but guaranteed.

Anyway, hope all is well with everyone. I am 3/5s of my way through my exams, I am addicted to Twitter and the weather was fantastic, until today.

Wordle

2009-04-26T11:40:00.004+01:00

Posting hiatus continues, but, I had to quickly show you this:

Sorry about the size, click on it to see it full size. Basically it searches my RSS feed and finds the most common words. Based on their popularity it assigns a size. I may try and use it more frequently on a separate page. I am planning on introducing a couple of new pages to Veteran Gamer anyway, so stay tuned for that. Don't ask me how it can do that, I've got no idea... Check it out out @ wordle.net

Posting hiatus

2009-04-23T19:50:00.004+01:00

Well you will have probably noticed posts seems to have dried up. To avoid the situation which happened last year I am posting an official hiatus notice. Due to exams, posting on this blog, (and my game development blog) will halt. Posting will resume on June 15th with a post about the Fable 2 DLC.

In the mean time, I will leave you with some links.

Firstly, a personal shout out. I mentioned my game development blog, which I am pleased to report has successfully taken off (as in, past the first two posts, which so many of my other blogs didn't). Better yet, it has got a couple of posts about Frozen Kangaroo, the real time strategy game I am working on. Most recently, about how the nuclear weapons will function.

Secondly, I am really enjoying the Three Moves Ahead podcast from Flash of Steel. If you want a taster of what the podcast is like, my favourite one was about symettry and asymettry in games. The podcast is well worth a subscribe because it combines genuinely interesting discussion about games design with some funny personalities. Better yet, it doesn't just focus on the latest game release.

Finally, an odd link. I am linking to this site primarily so that it can be found by Google. It is a website I designed (email me @ thekileyenator@gmail.com if you fancy one for yourself) and so I need Google to index it. However, if you are looking for plants in your work place, and you are based the home counties, this is the site to go to -Renaissance Plants

Fable 2's second DLC announced

2009-04-06T13:42:00.001+01:00

And it's called See the future. Some more information was released today, not least, that it will come out in May. You can read the full release here.

It appears to be centered around a strong story element. It also suggests that it will be harder than anything found in Fable (admittedly difficult for it to be any easier...)

The other interesting feature appears to be similar to their April Fool's Joke, where you can change the breed of your dog. Customisation is always fun, and hopefully they won't take it at all seriously an include some weird breeds and custom colors (maybe even using your existing dyes!)

However, the most important part of the press release is the price: 560 Microsoft Points (about £8). This is 240 points cheaper than the usual 800. Hopefully, this is Lionhead being nice, although I fear it means it is not very long. It also doesn't appear to include any new areas and the press release lists only three quests.

Either way, more Fable = Good.

Steam: The future of game distribution...

2009-03-18T23:01:00.005Z

Steam is the future of game distribution...but not yet. Steam Powered Games is rapidly changing the way games are bought and played on the PC, however, there are still a few issues that is going to stop it becoming truly main stream.

Unless you have been living in a hole for the past two years, you will probably have heard of Steam. It provides 3 basic functions: firstly, a gaming community system akin to Xbox live, complete with common friends list, in game tools (including a web browser and chat) and everything else you would expect. Secondly, it offers dedicated servers for large multi-player games such as Counter Strike. However, probably the most unique of its services is the ability to download (legally) entire games straight to your PC - the gaming equivalent to iTunes, if you will.

Judging by PC sales last year, the PC market is now completely dependant upon Steam for its survival. And believe me, I think it will survive. But Steam isn't quite ready to conquer the world. Here are the things that I think they need to resolve to go truly main stream.

1)Bandwidth - Steam side
For years, one of the biggest obstacles for online game distribution was that high speed broadband was not common, and even where it was, it wasn't anywhere near fast enough. This isn't true any more. As far as I am concerned, in the UK within the next 5 years, 5-10Mb broadband will be standard with 20-100 being fairly common. Which is fast enough.

The problem, would currently appear to be at Steams end. I have above average, 20Mb broadband, normally getting about 15mb/s. However, downloading a game from Steam, I will normally get no more than 1mb/s, usually a lot, lot less. Like 10-20Kb/s. I don't think Steam is capping the download. Instead I think their server can't deal with the downloads.

Obviously, this will improve over time. However, if they want to become mainstream, it has got to be as quick as walking in to town. A download cannot take 24 hours.

They are offering a solution which lightens the problem, called pre-loading. Basically, the user downloads the game before it comes out, but can't play it until it does. This is a good idea. Make sure every game is doing it. Make it so it is available as early as possible and make it possible for people to download it a little bit at a time whilst leading up to the release. If the download is available a month before the game comes out (as is usually possible) then every time people log in to Steam, it downloads what it can in the background, then the load will be shared out effectively across the 30 day period.

2)Piracy

Part of the reason that Steam is as successful as it is, is because virtually every game released, is released on to it. If you had to see if a title was available, you just would stop bothering. Steam has received loads of publisher support. Partly, this is due to their excellent anti-piracy techniques. As far as I am aware, Steam games are not easily hacked. When playing a Steam game, the game checks its legitimacy against the Steam servers. This is good, as piracy is a very real threat to PC games.

This is fine, until the connection with Steam is lost. It doesn't happen very often, but it does happen. If you are charging people to pay games, you have to let them play them, whenever they want to. Either guarantee 100% up-time on your servers or find a work around. Maybe less frequent checking, or allow it to fail a few times. I wouldn't mind, but it has happened twice in two days - Xbox Live doesn't fall over, ever. Well OK, maybe at Christmas, but it didn't stop you playing games, and it certainly doesn't happen on a daily basis.

Survival of the fittest

When playing Dawn of War 2, I have to manage my Steam overlay window, my Games for Windows Live (GFWL) dashboard, and, if I have any attention left, Dawn of War 2. I think that Steam needs to sign a deal with Microsoft or else they are going to start competing against each other. That is bad for Steam, as Steam will lose, simply because there will never be Steam on the Xbox, and the Xbox isn't going anywhere.

Steam need to agree with Microsoft to work together, as Microsoft could easily do what Steam does. Were Microsoft to sell games they would have far greater bandwidth with which to do it. Factor in that they could sell 360 games too, and they would be very attractive to sell with. I don't care how it is done, but make Steam needs to join Microsoft, because they can't beat them.

Pricing

Like iTunes, Steam needs to be cheaper than retail stores. For a good few years yet, people will have an attachment to physical objects. No one is going to pay more (or even the same) for a download. Particularly when it isn't even much more convenient with the 24 hour+ downloads. Game regularly under sells Steam. Steam needs to be doing much more dynamic pricing to keep the prices low. Admittedly, they do more than iTunes, but iTunes offers something that shops don't; £0.79 songs. Seeming as Steam can't do an equivalent (one level of a game just wouldn't work as people would view it as a demo), it needs to be cheaper in general.

I genuinely believe that the future of games is in downloading. Better deals can be granted to everyone and the community system is an excellent reward. However, I don't believe it will necessarily be Steam that wins. They are winning at the moment, but like I said, Microsoft could sweep in at any point.

What do you think? Do you buy all your games from Steam, or do you cling to the polythene wrapping? Do you think that broadband is ready for this? Post your remarks below, I would love to see some other opinions on this.

Bonfire Studios Interview

2009-03-03T22:22:00.007Z

When Microsoft announced they were closing down Ensemble Studios (most famous for the Age of Empires series and, more recently, Halo Wars) I was deeply shocked. More shocked even than when Bungie left Microsoft. Ensemble had been with Mircosoft for as long as I have been playing video games.

Since this announcement, Halo Wars has been released and, by and large, has been positively reviewed (with a few notable exceptions), I'll be posting my thoughts in a couple of weeks. Following it's release, Ensemble Studios was duly dismantled; a true figurehead of the industry removed.

However, all is not lost. From Ensemble rises two new development companies. The first, Robot Entertainment, is currently working on the Halo Wars DLC in addition to their own new intellectual property. The second, Bonfire Studios, kindly agreed to answer some of my questions about the break from Microsoft, Halo Wars, their new studio and their new project.

Closure of Ensemble Studios

1) Would you view your break with Microsoft as a blessing in disguise, as you surely must have more freedom in design, or a curse, as, in reality you have less freedom due to financial constraints?
It’s a bit of both. We enjoyed a great relationship with Microsoft for almost 15 years, and it was very disappointing when they decided to close Ensemble. Microsoft was supportive of Ensemble in most ways, but we found it difficult to branch out into genres other than RTS, largely due to the success of our RTS games. The break from Microsoft allows us to explore some creative ideas that would have been difficult to pursue in the past.

2) What will you miss least about being a first party developer?
We liked the fact that Ensemble was closely linked to PC gaming and now the Xbox, and I believe we helped Microsoft push both of those platforms forward. However, there were times when we wish we could have pursued development on platforms such as the iPhone or Wii, and obviously that wasn’t going to happen when we were owned by Microsoft.

3) And what will you miss most?
I’ll miss a lot of the friendships that were built over the years at Microsoft. I think we’ll also miss working with one of the biggest players in the tech and gaming industry

Halo Wars

4) Have you played Dawn of War 2, and if so, what did you think of it (bare with me)?

Yes, it’s really popular around the office right now. The reviews have been very positive, and the game looks great. Relic has done a very nice job with the Warhammer 40,000 franchise.

5) What would you say to Dawn of War 2 being better suited to the console than Halo Wars? After all, there were fewer units to control, which surely would have been easier on the console.

Without commenting on Dawn of War 2 specifically, I will say that the number of units you control is just one aspect of what makes an RTS work well on the console. Every feature in Halo Wars was designed with the Xbox 360 in mind, and because of that, I think it works very well on the console. After our experience developing Halo Wars, It's hard to imagine any PC title working well on the console without significant design change.

6) Were you pleased with the reception of Halo Wars?

Yes, we've been pleased with the response so far. Our ratings are in-line with those of previous Ensemble titles, and most of the reviewers feel that Halo Wars is a great addition to the Halo Universe. They feel that we nailed the control scheme, which was extremely important to us, and something that we had to get right for RTS games to finally migrate to the console.

7) Given more time, is there anything you wished you could have changed in Halo Wars?

Of course. As a developer, there’s always one more feature or one more polish pass you’d like to finish before sending the game out into the wild. Halo Wars was no different. Given more time, I would have liked to have seen us implement split screen co-op for the campaign.

8) Are there any plans to port Halo Wars for the PC?

Microsoft hasn’t announced any plans to port Halo Wars to the PC. To-date, they’ve been firm about Halo Wars being exclusive to the Xbox 360.

Bonfire Studios

9) There are two splinter development companies that came from Ensemble Studios, so obviously the team was split. Which areas do your team specialize in? Do you wish there was anyone / any skill area that you wish you had more of as it has gone to the other team. I.E., is one team the artists and the other the programmers?

The company was divided largely along product lines. Virtually everyone at Bonfire worked on Halo Wars from the earliest concept phase all the way through ship. We have a complete team – artists, programmers, designers, audio, and production. Robot, the other Ensemble spinoff, has very specific plans in mind that don’t overlap with what we’re doing at Bonfire, so it really worked out well that two top-notch studios are coming out of Ensemble’s closure.

10) Will you be working with the other studio on any future projects?

We don’t have any plans to work with Robot at this time, but they are great friends of ours, so you never know what might happen!

11) I heard that Robot would be working on the DLC for Halo Wars; does this mean you are not?

That is true – Robot is releasing DLC for Halo Wars. Bonfire doesn’t have any responsibilities for supporting Halo Wars at the moment.

12)Why is Robot working on the DLC if your team is composed of the Halo Wars development team?

At Ensemble, everyone in the company eventually piled onto Halo Wars to help get it out the door. So, while most everyone at Bonfire was on Halo Wars from the very beginning, the team also eventually included the folks that now work at Robot. Robot was the first spinoff to come out of Ensemble’s closure, and Microsoft felt they’d be a good fit for the initial round of DLC.

13) Will you remain a 3rd party developer to Microsoft or entirely freelance?

We haven’t announced a publishing partner yet for our new game, but we’d certainly be open to working with Microsoft in the future. Despite the fact that they closed Ensemble, we enjoyed working with Microsoft over the years and we made some great games together.

Future Projects

14) What is your current project, or is it just a collection of different ideas at the moment?

We’re working on an entirely new game based on original IP that we are very excited about. There’s not a lot we can discuss just yet, but I think fans of Ensemble titles will be very excited when they hear what we have in store and also a bit surprised!

15) What are your thoughts on the Wii, specifically for "hard-core" games and even real time strategy games?

I think there is a huge opportunity for a publisher willing to take a bet on a more “hard-core” title for the Wii. How can you ignore a console with such a massive install base? The game needs to be designed with the Wii in mind from the start, and not just be a simple port of an existing title. Madworld from Sega comes to mind – talk about breaking the mold of what is expected in a Wii title! I think strategy games could find a home on the Wii as well. Our hope is that Halo Wars is the title that finally demonstrates that RTS games can work well on the console. If it does, maybe other publishers will feel more confident in investing in RTS games on all consoles including the Wii.

16) Will you be producing games from outside the RTS genre?

Definitely - our first game is something very different than what we've done in the past. I think our games will always have a strong strategy element to them, though, since that is one of our core strengths. Of course, we do love the RTS genre, and I imagine we’ll always keep that door open in the future.

17) Can you give us a time frame on hearing about a new project from Bonfire Studios more officially?

The team would love to share more with you today, but I’d say “later this year” is a safer answer!

Conclusion

While they sadly did not reveal their current project (trust me, I begged) they do drop a couple of interesting hints. While this is purely speculation, I think their new game could be squad based first person shooter. Why? Well, they hinted at a game that was "very different to what we have done in the past" but yet has a "strong strategy element". It is also possible that it could be a Wii game, however, that is also guess work based on their apparent interest in the Wii.

Their conclusion of Halo Wars is to be predicted, I truly hope it was the legacy they wanted to leave behind. While I am disappointed that there are no plans for a port to the PC for Halo Wars, I am hardly surprised.

Blog Update

2009-03-01T17:21:00.004Z

Well I hope everyone enjoyed the (long) review for Dawn of War 2. I really can't stress enough how fun I found it. I stand by my positive opinion of the campaign, despite everyone else seeming to disagree with me (Tom Chick, Gamespot).

Also, sometime mid next week I will be posting an interview with the newly created Bonfire Studios which was one of the two companies to have emerged from the ashes (no pun intended) of Ensemble Studios. The other studio was Robot Entertainment. I've sent my questions off and I should get the replies on Monday, I expect to have the whole thing posted by Wednesday, so check back then.

Also, I have been putting a lot of time in to Sins of a Solar Empire, late I know! Anyway, I just got to the bit where it lives up to everything it promises. I must have had about 40 ships (and was no where near the cap) my two allies must have had 60 each and the enemy had 50 or so. With a bit of ping spamming on my part, I engineered a huge pitched battle between these two forces. It was the most awesome space battle I have ever seen, beating even the intro to Star Wars III. Part of the problem I have been having up till now is not really understanding anything. In fact, the reason I was so far short of the cap was because I only today found out how to increase it! There are a number of game design topics in this game, which I will be posting about on my other blog, Bot Work Studios. However, I hope to be putting some gamer impressions up here as well.

I downloaded the demo for Empire: Total War and as of yet, have not had too much time to play on it. This is largely down to the atrocious loading screens. It must have been loading for a good 10 minutes. While my computer is not quite state of the art, it can easily run Dawn of War 2 on Ultra with a rock steady frame rate, so it is hardly under powered. When it did eventually load, it was too late for me to work out how you play it without a user interface(!). I hope to put some more time in to over the coming week. I'm too much of a fan of the series to let a little loading put me off; Rome: Total War was bad on my old computer, and that is still one of my favourite games of all time.

Remember to check back on Wednesday for the interview with Bonfire Studios!

Dawn of War 2: Review

2009-02-21T20:57:00.012Z

If you were expecting a traditional sequel to Dawn of War 1, think again. Dawn of War 2 changes so much it is some what surprising that Dawn of War 1, an immensely popular real time strategy (RTS) that didn't introduce a lot to the genre in terms of innovation, is it's prequel. In an industry that seems scared of changing anything out of fear that it might not work perfectly; this fact alone makes Dawn of War 2 stand out. However, on top of this, the changes work really, really, well. If you are looking for an RTS like no other, this game is worth every penny.

Like many RTS games, Dawn of War 2 features a campaign and a skirmish element. Normally, I prefer the skirmish element. I think this is probably down to the fact that the campaign normally shoe-horns you in to a fixed strategy and the story is not enough make me put up with that. However, in Dawn of War 2, I love the campaign. I have spent more time on it that in the skirmishes.

From a story perspective, it is weak. The story is predictable. The characters are shallow at best and it offers no depth. So no surprises there. To top it off, the main characters struggle to get across any emotions beyond the simple, I-like-to-kill-stuff. The story is presented well through a variety of mediums, however. The game uses painting-style cut-scenes interspersed seemingly randomly through the campaign. The odd style gives works very well, giving them a very gritty feel. The voice acting, apart from being devoid of emotion, presents the story clearly.

Fortunately, the rest of the campaign makes up for the story. The campaign takes the form of linear missions. You usually have a choice of missions. Variation is added through optional missions and missions that have to be completed within a certain number of "Campaign Days".

Campaign days are sort of a compromise towards the more modern approach of province capture. In normal circumstances you are only allowed to deploy once per day. For every day that passes, the Tyranid infestation spreads, weakening your hold on the planets. Missions lower the infestation. If you perform especially well in a mission, you are granted extra deployments. This really feels like you are pushing back the wave of Tyranids, giving your campaign momentum. Choosing which mission to undertake also adds to the immersion as you have to fight back the infestation on different planets.

That is just one of the many decisions the campaign will force you to make, however. The various different decisions you must take are really what set this campaign apart from the competition. From choosing how to level up your troops, what equipment to give them and even what troops to deploy, you will find yourself battling over the options.

All of these decisions have the same strengths and weaknesses. They all offer an interesting decision and add to the replayability of the campaign. The decisions have visible effects. The levelling system is an excellent example. As you might expect, levelling in each of the different areas provides a small benefit in that area, eg, upgrading in combat will allow the units to deal more damage when in close combat. However, in addition to this, there are perks that are unlocked every so often. These provide a very noticeable difference, often in the form of a special ability, eg you may unlock a power attack. This blend of micro and macro makes the levelling system very rewarding.

Sadly, the system is, in some respects, over balanced. Their need to not make one dominant strategy sometimes makes your decisions feel irrelevant. Every strategy is so equally viable, that you can choose your options at random.

Overall though, the decisions are largely interesting even if somewhat irrelevant.

The actual missions split in to two main types. The main style involves pushing from one end of the map to the other. While this is hardly anything new, it is quite satisfying and the maps are interesting and well designed. Most of these levels end in a boss battle, of all things. While they don't require any thinking or tactics, do offer a nice crescendo to the mission as you use everything you have got on them.

Also, on each map there are points that you can capture. On the first occasion, they provide you with a special bit of war gear, and each one of that type you capture increases the number of times you can use said war gear. However, they are heavily defended. This adds a nice decision in to the otherwise linear missions. Also, as you can only capture one of these per mission, and there are usually two per map, it means returning to the map the second time is not so tiresome.

The other type is defence. In these you are pitted against waves of enemies and you must protect a building. They are not nearly as fun or as satisfying as the other missions (not least as there is no reward, only a lack of loss) None the less, they add variety to the campaign and make it feel more like a real campaign.

I think the one weakness of the missions is scale. As you have so few units, the maps often feel empty. Obviously, you can't control any more, as this would upset the balance of the campaign. However, I think what they should have done (and, admittedly, did at stages) would be to put in computer controlled AI and have pitched battles going on around you. There would be too many people for you to get involved and they wouldn't be doing your objectives, but it would have made you feel like you were involved in something bigger.

Sadly, my positive thoughts of the campaign are somewhat overshadowed by the fact that I have been unable to pass one mission because of a technical flaw. I can't believe that it is my computer as it meets the specification and some. Nor can I believe that it will happen with every copy, as it happens at the same point in the same mission. Hopefully, they will fix this, as the campaign has been a lot of fun so far and I do want to see how it ends.

Unfortunately, this is not the only technical hitch I have come across. The game repeatedly crashes at seemingly random points. Aside from the bug I mentioned above, these occur outside the intense fire fights and simply after cut scenes or before loading screens! These are minor inconveniences as the game picks up precisely where you left off with no loss of data. None the less, it is quite frustrating.

It may then come as a surprise that technically this game is very impressive. The graphics are fantastic. Even when you zoom right in, the models looks good. Even the organic shapes of the Tyranids look pretty good. The frame rate is rock steady even in intense fire fights. The frame rate only dips when there are hundreds of Tyranids on screen and you are rapidly delivering orders to all your troops. Even then it is only by a couple of frames a second.

The audio, as you might expect from a Dawn of War game, is top notch. The Orks still make me laugh. The noises the Tyranids are genuinely disturbing. Overall, the excellent technical achievements outweigh the inconvenience of random crashes. Sadly, the broken mission is slightly more serious, I will check whether it is just more, or if everyone is having this problem.

Obviously, the other key element to this game is the skirmishes. Most of my online experience comes from the beta as the press online is deserted whenever I search for a game! The online is really good. The movement away from conquering towards the new, more mobile, style is really good. Having played the campaign I wish they had taken it a step further; select five units before the game starts and use them instead of building units during the game. As it is, you still have to have some focus on your base. Furthermore, because your units aren't levelled up (as they could have been with the selection method) they don't have any of the special abilities that they do in the campaign.

I have now had the chance to play some team battles, admittedly with AI, and they work much better than the 1v1s. As there are more units the scale feels much better. Also, the battles go on for longer, allowing more advanced units to be produced.

The integration with Games for Windows Live is a good thing. Stat tracking being tied to your Live profile, easy to use matchmaking, achievements and your friends list are all great. To top it off, they have kept the custom hosting option, so it is win win!

In conclusion, I have thoroughly enjoyed Dawn of War 2. It is refreshing that this game has done something different. Like most people, I was shocked at first. However, this change is good beyond the fact the genre needs change; it is good because it works. Yes, it is disappointing that the game has some technical issues. However, I have faith that Relic will get these issues resolved as soon as they become aware of them. The game is a really nice package, with good graphics, good frame rate and an excellent array of decisions that you must make.

It is also worth noting that this game features co-op campaign. I have not had a chance to try this out. I have my doubts about this, as four units is certainly not too many to handle for one player. None the less, it should be a joy to experience the campaign with another!

This review was based on a review copy of Dawn of War 2 supplied by the publisher.

Dawn of War 2 First Impressions

2009-02-20T14:41:00.004Z

Well I have now spent 3 days playing Dawn of War 2 and, while I don't feel like I have fully experienced it, I certainly think I can do quite a detailed first impressions.

Firstly, I just want to say a huge thank you to Relic (the developers). For the first time in a long time, I won't have to say, it's just another sequel. This game is not "another RTS", it is not just some nice graphics stuck on to an age old model. This game is different and, err, fun.

Another thing I didn't think I would ever say; I think I prefer the campaign to the skirmishes. Me, as in the person who played all of one mission from the first two parts of Dawn of War 1 and never even finished the campaign in Dark Crusade. Me, who loved the Rome: Total War campaign and, despite spending hours in the game, never finished the campaign because I preferred skirmishes. Me, who never even touched the campaigns in Age of Empires 1, me who didn't notice there wasn't a campaign in Sins of a Solar empire and me, who doesn't even bother with scenarios in Civilization 4.

However, the campaign in this is loads of fun. You control a maximum of four units (choosing these four units quickly becomes one of the many interesting decisions that make up this game) The reduced numbers quickly makes the game incredibly focused. In any other game, the amount of handling you have to do for each unit would be unhandleable micromanagement. Admittedly, at times it does feel a little intricate. For example, you have to point you Heavy Bolter units in the right direction for them to shoot, you have to constantly be activating special abilities and moving all your units around to face the onslaught on enemies.

However, it is doable. The game manages to keep you under pressure whilst not overwhelming you. On the lower difficulties, it isn't actually very difficult, but it feels like it is and that you are only just making it through because of your command.

Part of this is down to the decisions. Sid Miers once famously said that "a game is a series of interesting decisions". In this game, every decision is non-trivial. What equipment do you give your units, which units do you take, do you push for the heavily defended fortification to provide you with bonus equipment or focus on the main objective.

Also, because of the intricate combat, your stratagies feel much more relevant. In traditional RTS's, the actual tactical element is largely just amassing troops. This is out of the question in this, not least because the enemy will always out number you. As a result, you must constantly be using the terrain around you to make best use of your units. The weaker units that in most RTS's are just throw away units are as vital as any other, no unit is dispensable.

The press release said that you would care for your units on a personal level. Sadly, this isn't true. The characters are clichéd at best and are simply to shallow to ever feel like you know them. They are not loveable enough and it is very difficult to empathize with them. Also, the game made it so that units do not die, they are simply knocked unconscious. This is an interesting decision, and was no doubt taken in part because each unit's leader plays a part in the story. None the less, this once again stops you caring about your units.

Levelling up your units also features in this game, and it works really well. At first glance, it seems fairly simple, upgrade your heavy bolters with ranged and your jump pack troops with close combat. However, as you earn enough points in a certain area you get a perk. These perks are tailored to the unit, so every path is viable. For example, upgrading your heavy bolters in close combat makes them able to carry on "focus firing" when they are in combat.

As far as I can work out, when your unit is knocked unconcious, they don't loose all their experience, they just earn less. This could have been a way of appeasing the story whilst making you care about the units. Or it might just have been annoying.

I could talk about the campaign till the cows come home, so I will move on. Rest assured, this is the first RTS campaign that I have enjoyed that isn't done in the Total War style, and in some ways, I might even prefer it to the Total War ones. Story wise, it is a bit "whatever" and the voice acting is pretty much mediocre, but aside from that, the campaign has a few neat mechanics, interesting missions and fairly varied objectives.

With all that good, what is there left for the skirmish side of things. I have talked before about it quite a bit with the beta. However, I didn't actually try a team battle. The team battles work better than the 1 v 1s. One thing they do wonderfully is recreate the wonderful feeling when playing the board game with many people. The 1v1s, the battles, whilst fun and frantic, always felt a little empty. A quite effective strategy was to run around securing the victory points after the enemy has left them (you don't have enough units to defend every point on the map).

In the team games however, you really feel like you are taking part in a big battle. Normally with team RTSs, you invest a lot of focus back at base, meaning you can't really co-ordinate with your team. However, now it is capture victory points, you are forced out of your turtle shell and stand next to your brothers.

And I was only playing with AI!

The game isn't perfect, the army painter is fairly basic with only a minimal selection of badges and only four customisable colour parts. Another slightly annoying thing is you can't even use your painted armies in the campaign. Another thing I encountered was during the campaign, the game crashes immediately after the cut-scenes. It didn't matter, once I loaded up the game again, it resumed right where it left off, and the cut scenes aren't very command but a bit annoying any way.

Overall, get this game, this is the change we need (in the RTS genre at least). Apologies about the length, the final review will be more orgaised.

Full, more formal, better structured, review on Sunday.

Dawn of War 2 Interview

2009-02-19T19:44:00.005Z

I read an interesting interview with the developer of Dawn of War 2 with Tom Chick. In it, they talk about how the genre has gone stale when compared with other, more successfully genres (such as first person shooters).

While I completely agree with what is being said, I think part of the shrinking sales is to do with the PC as a whole. Halo Wars has not saved the RTS genre (more information about this some time next week) but only showed that RTSs are almost always better on the PC, hence RTS survival is completely dependant upon the PC.

Sadly, however, the PC market is dying. It is, in part, to do with piracy. It was reported (I have sadly lost the link) that one game had a piracy rate of 85%! Compare this to the current generation of consoles, where it is virtually impossible to pirate games and even harder to distribute them, you can see where the money is going to go.

None the less, they raise a couple of interesting points about how console games are changing and why PC games need to do the same; and they are right. Console games are being simplified and shortened. Even Civilization on the console can be played through in a single play. Personally, I liked the depth that PC games offer. However, what might speak more is I love being able to dip in to console games for maybe 10 minutes - and I do probably spend more money on the console than I do on PC.

For those who are interested in Dawn of War 2 itself, I have a review copy of it which I am currently playing. I am not allowed to post anything before Friday though. My plan is to post my (detailed) first impressions on Friday and the full review on Sunday, allowing me to get a good feel for the game and what not. However, if I am allowed one sentence it would be this: Thankyou Relic for not making me repeat my sentiments that I have used so frequently in the past 12 months; "it's just another sequel". Stay tuned for more!

Free Radical bought by Crytec

2009-02-09T23:23:00.004Z

Last year, Free Radical (Time Splitters) went in to administration. I, along with many others, was both shocked and upset, I was looking forward to Time Splitters 4, scheduled for this year. It was rumoured there were a number of third parties looking to buy in. However, it was not until earlier this month that it was revealed who was going to take them on.

And I must admit, I was surprised to find it was Crytec, most well known for Crysis. If I had to think of two first person shooters that were as different in style and execution as possible, it would probably be these two! Crysis is ultra-serious with incredibly realistic graphics and physics, a clichéd, with no tongue in cheek humour, action story. Time splitters has a weird, goofy, genuinely funny script, cartoony graphics, some of the worst physics you will ever come across and a monkey gun.

Can it work? I am not convinced. With the economic climate, and that FR was rescued from administration, Crytec may not be willing to fund a FPS that is less serious (as it may be considered more risky, just compare the sales of Time Spiltters with Halo or even Cyrsis itself). On the other hand, it could be absolutely awesome. It depends on whether the Cryengine can handle cartoony graphics as well as it can handle real graphics, and whether Crytec let FR run with their crazy monkey schemes!

I played the Halo Wars demo, so expect some first impressions coming soon. On top of which, some very exciting VG news:

While I am not getting my hopes up just yet, I think I may have secured a review copy of Dawn of War 2. As a result, I will be getting my act together and actually witting the review on time! The review cannot be posted before the 20th, but I aim to have it released exactly as the embargo is listed. Don't worry, I won't let it get to my journalistic integrity! But, however I score it, I want to say a big thank you to THQ, and if the beta is anything to go by, I am sure it will be awesome.

Resident Evil 5 Demo Impressions

2009-02-07T19:00:00.000Z

Well, along with 1.8 million other people, I downloaded the Resi Evil demo for the Xbox 360. It comes with two playable levels. I played them both on my own and in co-op.

On your own is good but not great. The controls feel a little clunky. I know this is what they have always been, but that doesn't mean it isn't time for change. My main Resi Evil experience comes from RE4 on the Wii, which I thought had perfect controls, so maybe I will wait for a Wii port. My main gripe is that you have to press a button to draw your knife and then a second b to swing with it. What other possible reason could there be for drawing it, if not to swing with it. You can't move with it drawn, so when you draw it, you obviously want to swing with it.

The other main problem is your co-op partner is frustrating at times. You can't tell her to push furniture, or rather you can, but she only pushes it a little bit, you must go and push it all the way. There is no way of directing where she is shooting and she only ever uses her primary gun. There are bits which are obviously set up for co-operative fighting, like a room with two doors. She, however, refuses to settle on one.

Chuck in a second player and it gets a whole load better. There are some neat co-op features like ammo sharing, requesting different things and obviously being able to protect each other. The inventory is a bit clumsy - when you select an item, you have a drop down list to chose from (use, give etc.). I think it could have been more streamlined if A was use, B was give etc.

Yes, it has the painfully obvious scripted "co-op" bits that stick out like a sore thumb, but aside from that, it was fun to play through. Graphically, the game looks very impressive. This is certainly a title to watch.

Dawn of War 2 Online Beta Impressions

2009-02-06T19:00:00.002Z

Well, despite THQ claiming this game has gone gold, Dawn of War 2 has gone into a last minute beta check and they need YOUR help, quick, download it off Steam. [If you didn't pick up on the sarcasm in that last sentence, I recommend you read the rant at the end of my last blog update]

Dawn of War 2 is very different to Dawn of War. If you are not aware, there is no base building. At all. Before you all leave to pre-order Starcraft, hear me out. This change is not a bad thing.

So, you strip out the base building, what do you have left? A surprisingly fluid RTS that could work on the console as well as the PC. How does it work, all your units are built at your headquaters. You can level your headquarters, but that is about it. Levelling up grants additional, more powerful, units.

The game flows a lot more than in Dawn of War. In the original, the best strategy tended to be: build some turrets, quickly level up, build as many units as your cap allows then attack. This was fun, but made games quite similar and also quite lengthy.

If you do that in Dawn of War 2, you will lose. Annihilation is not the aim of the game. On each map, there are 3 "Victory Points". Both players have a score, the opponents score decreases at a rate relative to the amount of victory points you hold. When one reaches zero, they lose. These work in a similar way to the requestion points in Dawn of War(which are still present).

Building units still requires energy and requestion. However, you cannot build power stations, they now must be captured like requestion points. All of this adds up to force you to mobilise your troops right from the start. If you sit in your base, the opponent will quickly be able to rack up more requestion and energy points than you (on top of the victory points, allowing him to win). When he does finally attack you, you won't stand a chance.

This means that you will constantly be sending out troops to capture points. Which in turn means you will always have less units alive at any given point(hence why it could, in theory, be adapted for the console). Less units means more control over them. Units can now get behind cover, for example. It plays more like Platoon (a demo came with a newspaper once!).

Also, because right from the start you will be battling, your commander unit (which you now start off with) plays a much more important role, helping to turn the tide of battle. Commanders now level up and, when they die, an option to revive them becomes available.

Another bonus is the game is actually balanced. Each side has a very different feel to it and yet, remarkably, the sides feel fair. Such a quick and competitive online will surely result in this game being played a lot - the true test of balance - but from where I am sat it looks balanced.

The game looks good, not quite as good as the screen shots, but the animations are really cool. The game sounds good, as you would expect from Dawn of War. Finally, the Games for Windows Live intergration is a mixed addition. On the one hand, it will mean achievements, plus neat stat tracking and a working friends list. However, no option to browse games (the custom game feature doesn't seem to work, either that or no one in the whole world was hosting a game) and having to matchmake (which is as slow as Gears at the moment) is a bit annoying.

Overall, I am pleasantly surprised. I have talked before about how I am looking forward to see what they are doing with the single player campaign. I am pleased to report the online, which was so key in the original, is shaping up to keep in sync with the fresh single player whilst offering fast, addictive online.

Blog Update - Walking in a winter wonder land

2009-02-04T17:32:00.004Z

Sorry I haven't been posting much lately, despite having much to post about (Resident Evil 5 and Dawn of War 2 beta/demo's to come). The main reason is this weekend I took part in an event called the "Global Game Jam". You can read all about it on my other blog.

Another thing that may have got in the way of my posting is the incredible snow! Normally, when their is snow, us British tend to make quite a fuss over what would, in other countries, be described as "light". This time, it is different. We had about 9" of lush, thick, soft snow, and it is still hear some 3 days on! Yes, maybe we did overreact by having schools closed for the duration of those three days - but hey, this only happens every 20 years. To all the people who are complaining about people "skyving off" because of the snow (*cough* Borris Johnson *cough*) lighten up a little bit. This does not happen often enough to be a serious disruption to anything, so just go out and enjoy yourself!
Check out the bench! I spent Monday and Tuesday morning sledging and the afternoons warming up by the fire (my Xbox 360) I hope that if you did get snow, you were able to enjoy it also.

Also, for those who read my review of Braid early today, I have now completed two worlds (first world and the third world) and have discovered that more content becomes available once you do every world. I forgot to include scores and such that you normally find in my reviews as I only decided to make it a review when I finished it and came to tagging it up. On the other hand, how helpful are scores? The question you want answered is, should I buy it? Post a comment if you have oppinions on scoring games using arbiatary systems (oh yeah, make a simple concept sound a lot more in inteligent!)

I am going to write impressions on both the Dawn of War 2 beta and Resident Evil 5 demo tonight. As I don't want content released earlier today (Braid review) to get lost and then there to be a drought of content, I will have scheduled publications of them over the next 3 days at 7PM (Dawn of War 2 on Friday, Resi Evil on Saturday) so make sure to check back then.

But first, a quick rant. The "Multiplayer beta" of Dawn of War 2, as much as I am loving it, IS NOT A BETA. For one, the game went gold (ie. into production) before the beta was released. Unless they are trying to sell a half finished game that will require instant patching, the game is not in a beta stage. Beta stage means it is still being tested! I don't want to buy a half finished game and then have to patch it.

The truth, my cynical mind tells me, is a little different. Yes, the game probably will need to be patched (even the internet and widespread broadband comes with it's curses) the reason they call it a beta is to follow a new trend. CoD 5 also did this. Ever since Halo 3 did an actual online beta, games have been using it as the new buzz word for "early demo". It makes players feel like they are getting involved in the game developement and it means that people can say "oh, it's only the beta, the actual thing will be much better", providing a fallback for the developer. This is simply not the case, if you don't like the "beta", you won't like the game, the disks are already being burnt with that on. It isn't like in the beta they are supplying you with an old copy of the game to see if you can spot the improvements they have already made.

Ok rant over, check back on Friday for my opinon of the so called beta. If you liked Dawn of War, you will probably want to check this out first before commiting to the game. It is very different (read: barely 4X). Check back Friday to see why I think it is a good different.

Braid Blew My Mind

2009-01-30T09:00:00.005Z

I don't really know what else to say. I downloaded Braid and I am loving every minute. This may well be my favourite platformer since the original Mario on the Wii Virtual Console! Every single puzzle requires you to think. The levels are so well thought out and clever. The game's difficultly even increases at a good pace.

The game is a 2D side scrolling platformer. The difference: a time travelling mechanic. In the early levels, this is a way of quickly fixing mistakes and bringing yourself back from the dead. However, it doesn't take very long for the game to use it to solve puzzles. The first puzzle that you really have to start using time is quite a good one at demonstrating what kind of mind bending activities are to come (although they obviously get quite a bit harder)

[Note: items that glow green are resistant to time travel]

You appear in the level. There is a green key at the top of the map. The puzzle piece (what you are trying to collect) is located behind a locked door. Above this door there is a rock that is slowly falling.

First attempt: Run and get the key, by the time you reach the door the rock has fallen in front of it

*Spoiler - if you plan to do this game without any help, this next paragraph explains this puzzle. Having said this, it is not very complicated when compared to the others, so you could be forgiven for reading on if you are deciding whether to get the game.*

What you have to do is grab the key, rewind the time to the start (causing the rock in front of the door to have lifted) Because the key is green, it rewinds with you.

Fairly simple to work out, yes. However, the puzzles become very complicated requiring you to consider a number of different things at once.

Also, to keep the levels fresh, each world introduces a different mechanic, twist or theme. The 4th world, for example, time only advances when you move forward, and goes back when you move backwards. Or in another, when you rewind time, a shadow of you does whatever you just did and you have to use him to do simultaneous things.

I have now played through all the worlds - so the game is not very long. However, I have not got a single world on perfect, not even the first one, so many more hours of fun are to be had. This game is challenging, fun and refreshing. I would recommend it to anyone who enjoys puzzles. Beautiful - arguably my favourite game of 2008.

Knothole Island Thoughts

2009-01-28T18:16:00.006Z

I officially sold out all my beliefs because I am a Fable sucker and got the Fable DLC (800MS points, Xbox Live Arcade) It doesn't really warrant a review or a first impressions and quick review, so here is my final thoughts/conclusion/mini review, whatever you want it to be.

Basically good. It is not too short (as I thought it was going to be) Playing at a normal pace (not rushing, not searching every nook and cranny) took me about 3-4 hours. The area is really big and has a couple of very cool features. A personal favourite addition is the "Mystery Shop". Instead of buying things, like a normal shop, you must trade specific items (2 lutes, a rotten carrot etc.) to get a suprise related item. This is cool as you get some unique elements and you can't just go in with your millions of gold and buy everything.

The main quest line is more challenging than the rest of the game, if fairly rudimentary in whatn you are doing. It even has a, weak, decision at the end. I recommend this if you enjoy Fable, it has all the things you would expect (new items, stuff to find and more shops) and a few quite cool features. and a couple of unexpected items. Plus, they have brought back the graves with witty lines on, so all is good. Worth the 800 points? If you enjoyed Fable, then yes. If you haven't purchased it yet and don't want any spoilers, stop here.

My one criticism of the game is the final decision. Unlike at the end of Fable, which you had to stop and think it over in your mind until you finally come to your excruciating decision, this decision feels trivial. In it you must choose between money and good points. The money (10 000 gold) is irrelevant as, by this point in most peoples game, people will have more money than things to buy, and more coming in constantly. If I was designing the decision, I would have had it so you either handed control to the locals, which meant the weather changed regularly out of your control, or to you and the chieftain, which would obviously be evil, but you could control the weather. A third option could have been to kill the chieftain and take sole control of the town for yourself.

But, you can't have everything. An enjoyable distraction from finding gargoyles and keys. 4 star.

Ten things killing and saving the video game industry

2009-01-21T21:31:00.003Z

Just a very quick post for the moment. Two excellent articles on IGN on Ten trends that are destroying video games and Ten trends that are saving video games are well worth reading.

A lot of what they say I highly agree with. I think 2009 is going to be an interesting year. During Q4 of last year, despite the global depression, the video game industry as a whole grew. However, I think this year could be the crunch year. The economic crisis is going to force causal gamers to either pick more carefully to make their purchases more £/hour effective or quit video games and sell the Wii on Ebay. As a result, I can see shovelware to start to decrease. With any luck, because of the Wii Motion Plus, developers will be reinspired to create decent innovative Wii games all over again.

Anyway, I'll be posting more about my thoughts for the future of the industry soon, but I strongly reccommend reading the above articles.

Update, fixed link to things that are saving video games. Sorry!

Dawn of War 2 has gone gold

2009-01-19T16:17:00.006Z

It has been announced today that Dawn of War 2 has been completed and is now moving in to production phase. The current release date is February 19th. I haven't quite decided whether I am going to get this. On the one hand, I know they are going to bring out loads of expansion packs which I will end up buying because I want to use the Imperial Guard and I should just wait for the box set. Plus, Starcraft is coming out soon also. However, I really enjoyed Dawn of War and what they are doing with the campaign sounds really interesting.
One of things that did interest me in the press release was this:

"Disposable units will become a thing of the past as gamers feel the intimate brutality of war and develop a personal connection with fully customizable squads."

It is one thing to have customisable squads, but to actually make players care... Also, if you have spent ages levelling up a unit players will fear losing it. However, this could just mean that disposable units play an even bigger part, as you cannot risk your good units and so just chuck rubbish units at the enemy and only use your best units in the worst case scenario.

The campaign sounds really interesting as you have control over a very small number of units and there is no base building. This reminds me of a game I really enjoyed a while back based on the film Platoon. The problem I can see though is Platoon was built for this. However, in Dawn of War, the game has to be able to take standard base building skirmishes too. It will be interesting to see how it all fits together. It is easy to see how customisable units can work in the single player campaign, but in the skirmishes, will you have access to them?

What I would quite like is if you had a persistent army (tied to your GFWL[Game for Windows Live] Profile) As you won games, you could purchase upgrades.

For example, when you build a standard infantry squad, if you have upgraded one standard infantry squad to start off with grenade launchers, then the first one would have grenade launchers. All units would be standard after that, unless you had purchased identical upgrades, so you could have more than one unit starting off like this.

The possible problem with this would be balancing, if you win more games, you just become unstoppable. Perhaps to get around this, choosing your army would constantly require trade off's. Yes, you can upgrade all your units to have grenade launchers, but one of your tanks won't be available at all. This could actually work quite well as new players would have a well rounded army to suit any strategy, but then as you hone your strategy, you could hone your army to fit it.

And to think this was meant to be a quick post! Coming up, more on Fallout 3, got in to it and I am loving it. I have only done like the first part of the story, I just keep wandering off in to the wilderness!

Fallout 3 First Impressions

2009-01-13T10:44:00.005Z

I got Fallout 3 (off Steam, took 6 hours to download!) The first couple of hours are kind of lame. Fortunately, I was forewarned, and so pushed on through them. When you are in the vault, the game is slow and fairly boring. Fortunately, it doesn't last too long. When you get out, the game doesn't improve straight away. You have nothing, no ammo, not very much money (caps) and no idea what is going on. The game seems to assume so much. Within a few minutes, in true Bethesda style, people are offering up quests. However, the game assumes that you know that caps are money and how much they are worth (is 300 a lot, or nothing?). There are enemies which can easily kill you EVERYWHERE. You literally cannot go anywhere without being attacked by something which is stronger and faster than you. Sure, this does create a sense of desperation, but it has been taken too far. I think I died about 15 times, this isn't fun, and shouldn't be necessary just to scout out a safe path.

Until you find Megaton, you will repeatedly die in a desperation to find something, anything. Fortunately, once you find Megaton (named after the bomb it is built around) the game gets a lot better. It plays something like a cross between Oblivion and Stalker. It has the punishing difficulty of Stalker, combined with the huge expanses, thousands of quests and millions of in game items that Oblivion is famed. The world is bleak, I have yet to find a happy spot. Everywhere you go there is a dead body or a ruined house. The skyline is mainly dominated by what looks like a nuclear missile launch facility. I can't work out if this is really cool, or just really depressing.

So far, I haven't spent a lot of time with the game. Some of the quests seem to require certain skills which you might not have, which is kind of annoying, and there is a fair amount of Fedex quests. Fortunately, exploring the world is a treat (in a weird sadistic way) and searching every box, every corpse and every blown out structure for something worth keeping. Drinking water out of a puddle because you are so desperate for health, beating down a bandit with a baseball bat in a derelict school. It all feels so desperate, it's fantastic!

More to come. Also, you will be pleased to here that 24 started yesterday (Monday 12th Jan, 9PM Sky One and Sky One HD) You will also be pleased to here that it is fantastic and on form. Secretly, I was scared that this would be the downfall of 24, but, judging by the first two episodes, it isn't. It has everything that a good 24 needs, emotional involvement for Jack, an over-arching political conspiracy, a relevant political comment, no one to trust and some awesome action. Loving every minute, the next 22 weeks will fly by.

2008 Analysis

2009-01-05T22:15:00.005Z

Well sorry for not posting in ages, been busy with Christmas and other stuff.

2008 has ended, and despite a fantastic 2007, it was good game wise. Normally, (normal in that I think I did it last year) I would comment on Gamespot's Game of the Year award. However, this year, they were shockingly poor. Neither Fable 2 or Gears of War 2 made the Best of Xbox 360, let alone Game of the Year. This wouldn't be bad, if there were 10 clearly amazing games, but NHL? It wasn't just these shortlists that were off. For example, Fable 2 was not even listed in the funniest game. Sure, I maybe a bit of a Fable fanboy, but everyone found it funny. But it was in best sequel. What, that makes no sense either. Best Sequel should go to a game which had either a really poor preuel, or took everything good from the first one and crafted it in to something new. Fable 2, while good, did some things less well than Fable 1.

Gears wasn't on best Technical graphics, nor Fable on artistic, Super Smash Bros didn't win best Wii game. All in all, I was highly disappointed in the whole thing. This was worsened by the fact that the comments section wasn't working, I couldn't vote and the whole thing was taking forever to load.

Instead, as I don't play enough game to do my own set of awards, I am going to briefly discuss some of the big, controversial and important releases of the year.

Spore

The brain child of Will Wright was highly hyped, but the press received it with a collective shrug. For me it had two key floors. Firstly, the Space age was hugely frustrating and none of the modes slotted together. I have already published a huge rant about the space stage in my review, but the other comment I have only mentioned in passing. Excluding the space stage, each mode was weak, simple and could be found on the internet. The bit that was meant to be different was that you played them all. But there was no continuity, no consequences. Other than choosing whether to play the Simon Says peace game or a simple power of numbers RTS game, your decisions had little impact.

The game was not without redeeming features (not least the hugely impressive editors), and perhaps minus the hype it would have been good. However, I guess I was expecting something a little more thought out from Will Wright.

Read all my coverage of Spore...

Super Smash Bros Brawl

I will get round to reviewing this game at some point. On the one hand, it is that same addictive, easy to pick up, impossible to master game play that is impossible to resist. But, on the other hand, the game feels constantly lazy. There is no IR support for the menus (instead you use a cursor controlled by the joy-stick!!), the online is not only lacking in functionality, but is also constantly laggy (and consequently, no one plays it). In true Nintendo style, there has been no apology, no explanation and no resolution. I could go on for hours about the features missing from the online, but it really doesn't matter, if it had just worked, it would be good.

Ok, so they failed to take advantage of the Wii, they failed to make a decent online, but at least the standard modes are good. Well, yes. But the characters aren't balanced. So, what exactly did they do in the years they had to develop it. A great game, an even greater disappointment.

Read all my Brawl coverage

EndWar

You may be surprised to see this title, I haven't bought it, don't worry. However, this is the only strategy game to come up with a WORKING control scheme for an RTS on console. While everyone's breath is held for Halo Wars, EndWar did what I have been trying to said needs to be done. And no, I am not talking about voice commands (no pun intended)

This game did three things which made it work on the console. Firstly, it simplified everything. There is only one resource and you don't have to manage its collection (it builds up), there are only 7 or 8 different units fitting a simple Rock, Paper, Scissors thing.

Second, it has come up with a logical way of controlling the units (even without voice, issuing commands is as easy as on a PC) and thirdly, it made the whole experience much bigger. Now before you go accusing me of saying that console games need to be dumbed down, it isn't because of the market. It is simply you sit much further from the screen. On a PC, I can read size 10 fonts, size 20 on a console can be tricky. By making the experience big and visceral, it was easy to play and above all fun.

Yes the voice commands do help, but it was not the only noteworthy feature in the game.

Read my first impressions...

Fable 2

I will be writing about this game for years to come. What can I say? I game with so many flaws, I'm sorry, but it did. Flaws that Peter Molyenux himself admits in an interview (which I have lost the link to, some of it was on Xbox Live at one point as well) But through all this, the game delivered a stunning experience. It is the first game to make me feel something other than, "Woo, I did it". Sure, the co-op was terrible, the game was easy and the world no where near as big as Oblivion. But it is bigger than you think, I bet half of you never went to the cave in Rookridge where you had to swim round the river. I am constantly finding new areas. I will be writing more about this game and what I want from the DLC (which I will sell all my beliefs and probably end up getting!)

Gear of War 2

Horde is an incredible stroke of genius with near endless re-playability (I would like to see anyone do wave 50 on insane, and then anyone do that ON THEIR OWN) The campaigns story is not very satisfactory. At the start, the Locust were nearly defeated and then they weren't, and judging that there is a Gears 3 planned, the end is the same. At the start, Dom had lost his wife, everyone thought she was dead, now she's dead. At the start, humanity was on its last legs, at the end, well you get the idea. The campaign was fun none the less, and co-op is a blast.

The online started off terrible. It could take an hour to find one game. It does appear to be fixed now, and is almost as fast as Halo. It still has annoying timers before you can't quit, you can't party up and the ranking system isn't very rewarding (there are only 5 ranks, so you hardly ever go up, except after you win your first game) However, it is as intense as ever and the new game types work really well. All the weapons are balanced and the game manages to stride the fine line of non-frustrating-but-tense very well.

Read my first impressions...

Fallout 3

I haven't got this game (but I will be getting it soon) but I have heard quite a bit about it. Apparently the start is really bad, but fast forward three hours and suddenly everyone is raving about it. It sounds like Bethesda as done something fantastic with this. They took what was good with Oblivon (large expansive map with near-infinite things to do) but put some character in to it. I am really looking forward to find the parts for the rail gun which pins people to walls, all of the toys and explore the wasteland. I will be writting about this more on Tuesday next week (that's when I am getting it, after my exams)

Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriot

Once again, not played on this, but DAMN I wan't too. Sure it sounds stuck up, excessive and redicuolous. But I think that if you have made what some people call one of the greatest series of all time, you are entitled to do that. The mix of genres sounds impressive, but a game where enough love to create 1 and a half hour cut scenes has gone in, I want a part of. Unfortunatley, this is not quite enough to justify selling my house for a PS3. Not that that is true anymore, they are actually reasonably priced - if it had the range of games that the 360 does.

Little Big Planet

But it is getting close (to me getting a PS3). Although this game got kind of average reviews (considering hype) from the press, I really want to play this. Maybe it is my love of making things, particuarly games, or maybe because it is a platformer with a physics engine, I don't know, but there is something about this game which I find irrestible. The MGS (Metal Gear Solid) LBP (Little Big Planet) pack nicely consolidates all that is good about the PS3

Home

Home ceartainly shouldn't be included in this package from what I have heard. Immature pre-pubecent teens seem to make up the numbers, crowding ANY female arvatar and performing acts which I shan't go in to here (youtube Home if you are interested, I am sure there are quite a few videos) Other than that, just sounds a bit boring and depressing. Probably shouldn't have invested quite so much time in this one Sony...

Call of Duty: World at War

Well, I played the beta, enjoyed it and then remembered why I never got Call of Duty 4; I find it too frustrating. Where Gears gets the balance right (almost), this game goes way in to the frustrating side. It doesn't matter how good you are, sometimes, someone will just randomly creep up behind you and head shot you. The fact that a CoD is now coming out every year probably isn't a good thing for the series - I doubt even Infinity Ward can create a compelling campaign every two years that is any longer than 5 hours. On the plus side, it is the first time (that I can recall) where a video game achives that level continued demand, equalling sports games which are conveniently based on an ever changing list of players. I'll hold of judement to, err, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare 2? Well, there never was a CoD 5...

Stay tuned for what I am looking forward to in 2009.

Guitar Hero: World Tour First Impressions

2008-11-28T17:40:00.002Z

I was fortunate enough to have had a lengthy two sessions with a complete (Drums, Bass, Guitar and Microphone) copy of Rock Band, err, Guitar Hero.

It is really good. Why? A number of reasons. Firstly, the drums are great fun, much funner (and harder) than the guitar. It has what makes the guitar fun (and hard) and then increased it. When you are getting a good streak with the drums and you are hitting pads all over the place, it feels really cool - just like when you have a long continuous streak of notes on the guitar.

The problem with the drums is two fold. Firstly, the learning curve is very steep. Even at easy, you must use ALL the pads and the pedal. I understand for it to be fun, pads have to be on opposite sides, so how about leave out the green pad (in the middle) and the pedal - which requires an extra layer of co-ordination.

The other problem is sensitivity. The pads on the your left, a slight tap is enough, any more is excessive, but the pads that are hit less often do not register. This is slightly off putting. The pedal is also really hard to use, and not just because it is not with your hands. Personally, I think it would be better, if a little strange, if it activated star power, as that is also absurdly hard as it is and you use it less frequently than the pedal as it stands.

Despite all this, the drums are great fun. The microphone, on the other hand, feels quite gimmicky. It does have a nice weight to it, and it doesn't look tacky, but actually playing it is more a matter of luck than skill. You can say anything you like, as the game is only measuring the pitch. While I am sure there will be some people who can control their pitch perfectly, the role feels somewhat superfluous and silly. If the game came with a stand, so you could play a instrument at the same time, it would be good, but seeming as the real singer still sings over the top, it just doesn't have the same satisfaction factor as the other real instruments.

So how about the guitars, well they still hold their own. It is easy to forget that amongst all this plastic it was they who started all this 3 short years ago. It is incredible to see how far this genre as come, from ELC style guitars with covers of unheard of records to this - a complete band kit with unembarassing style and a large and impressive set list featuring huge bands.

Which brings me on to my final point: the track list is fantastic. Normally, I am forced to stick with a few indie (in the modern sense, not the non-recorded sense, such as the Killers or Razorlight) tracks and maybe a David Bowie song. GH:WT covers all tastes, with plenty of songs that I like. It is a shame that they removed so many songs to sell back to people (there are giant gaps in the playlist that are being released for DLC, it sucks).

Overall, here is a game that has shown how to refine it's game play to the extreme. They haven't added a lot to this game - open strumming for the bass, a solo thing for the guitar - but it all fits in well to the game mechanics. Now, just don't realease any more, just sell song packs... cheaply?

NXE First Impressions

2008-11-20T10:17:00.003Z

Meh.

What, you want me to say more? Well NXE (New Xbox Experience) came out yesterday and was quick download. The avatar creation system is OK, very similar to the Wii, same good parts (quite fun) same problems (quite limited). It seems to me like they have obviously left gaps for DLC.

The new menu system is OK. The old blade system, in my opinion, was an effective way of displaying information. This system is a little confusing as you can't always see every option so you must memorise the order. It is a stab at being Apple with the reflections, but over all, it is more confusing. Maybe I will get used to it, but personally I thought the blade system was excellent.

And then there are parties. Group chat, the actually useful part to them, should have been introduced MONTHS ago. Launching in to a game doesn't actually jump you both in to the game, it just invites all the members to play.

I guess it is fine, but it hardly warranted the over the top video at the start.

Gears of War 2 First Impressions

2008-11-10T13:33:00.004Z

I got Gears of War 2 yesterday at a tidy price of £34.99. My impressions are limited as an annoying string of events that stopped me barely getting past the tutorial (which was a stupid decision - I knew it all already) So, I will save my thoughts on the campaign till later.

What I did get a chance to play on (one of the things that stopped me playing on campaign) was horde. And it is rather good. Scrap that, it is fantastic. We weren't playing it on a particularly hard level and you were already forced to work together as a team. We got to level 13 then the host had to go.

The other thing I did get a chance to play was the online. I had hoped to play a quick game, but it was uber close, 5-4 being the final score (having said that, we were 4-0 up) it took 45 minutes. Maybe it was just because it was such a close game, but the tense gameplay that was so great in Gears 1 is still here.

Overall, although my time with this game is limited the message is clear: everything that was good with Gears 1 is still here, and while the improvements are minor, they all fit well within the scope of the game, keeping it balanced, tense and fun. A solid sequel. More to come.

Childs Play Charity

2008-11-08T23:32:00.002Z

Penny Arcade is hosting it's annual charity event: Child's Play. It gives money to help children in hospital enjoy the wonders of video games. You can either donate through paypal/bank etc, or you can choose to buy them something off their Amazon wish-list.

Although PA is expecting less this year, due to the economic crisis, as even the video game industry is, surprise surprise, not "recession proof", please give where you can for an honourable cause.

Follow this link to Child's Play Charity

Tom Clancy's EndWar First Impressions

2008-11-04T23:35:00.003Z

I downloaded the demo of EndWar today. For those who are unaware, EndWar is a RTS for the Xbox 360. Normally, I avoid these with a a vengeance, so what is the difference? It is controlled by your voice. So what it it actually like?

Well, actually, it was rather good. Technically, the voice recognition is fantastic. My only gripe with the actual tech is that is always tries to assign what you said to something. Whilst this is good to a certain extent, when you use the wrong word for rifle men, say infantry, you might accidentally deploy a tank. However, that is a small gripe - providing you say the right word, it is 100% perfect in my experience. The thing takes a couple of seconds to respond, making giving orders to multiple units quickly difficult. However, this is resolved with a easy to use grouping system.

Commanding with your voice may be a good laugh, but it is also a very effective way of controlling your forces in the absence of your mouse. You will be pleased to know that haven't been excesive, as is the case with some Wii games, and it really does feel like it has got the balance between your voice and your controller allowing efficient control of your troops. The whole game is suited to the voice command, the battle's happen before your eyes in a very up-close manner. The whole experience is very hands-on.

Even when you take away the voice control - how this game is controlled is suited to the console. It is possible to play without the mic, and I think this is a perfect demonstration of how an RTS can be adapted to the console. Simplify, zoom in and limit. The mouse and keyboard gives the user so much control, obviously a PC player can handle more. This is why I have faith in this and Halo Wars, console-only is the only way that you will get a game that controls well. A player can't manage a huge army, buildings, an economy and still form a logical plan of attack with two joysticks.

As for the actual gameplay, it is suited well to the controls. You must take objectives. Your units, of which there are a thankfully limited 8, all have simple strengths and weaknesses. The aim is to capture key points - which can only be done with infantry. However, you must protect the infantry, as they do not stand a chance against tanks or helicopters. While tactics aren't hugely diverse- defend your troops while they take the points, use special powers towards the end - as the points are scattered across the maps, your forces must maintain cohesion if you hope to hold on to the ones you have captured and captured more.

That is, if there is a higher difficulty. As per with all demos, this game was very easy. It did, however, offer a nice rating system that ranks how well you performed in the match (on both combat and mobility) One of the most exciting features about this game - a persistent battle world online - was not available in the demo. Online was, but I have not got round to trying it yet.

On a side note, I have completed Fable, posts, reviews etc. coming soon.

Peter Explains why there is no minimaps in Fable 2

2008-10-29T23:41:00.004Z

Peter Molyenux was in a video interview with the BBC about Fable 2. The video is very interesting and I reccomend watching it. One thing he did touch on was why there was no mini map. For those who cannot be bothered to watch the video, here is what he says:

"Gamers...find it very easy to go from 2D to 3D [that is what you do with mini maps, even if you don't think about it like that] they [non gamers] don't get it, don't understand it"

Apart from the obvious points that Fable is neither a casual gamer game, nor is the game void of other conventions that baffle non gamers such as XP, the point he makes, I think, is wrong. A mini map is entirely logical. It isn't like it was something made up for RPGs, or for games in general. Maps were developed long before video games. The fact that they even have a useful "you are here" symbol makes them even more intuitive. Yes, they could be made to be obtrusive, like using symbols and acronyms, but in their raw state they are just useful maps. Surely removing it entirley just makes it worse.

I will be conducting a thought experiment over the coming week to discover whether Peter is correct, and a mini map is just mad for a non gamer, or I am correct; a mini map is a logical way of presenting information. Yes, the trail used in the game is simple, but it's functionality is limted, ristricting what core gamers can do. This nicely brings me back to my orginal point - Fable is not a causal game, it rewards dedication, you must level your character (if ever a more bizzare and non gamer unfriendly concept ever existed, I have not found it) among other RPG conventions.

Still, it is always enjoyable to listen to Peter talking about games, he is a very interesting character. Oh and for those who are interested, I had my second child, she's called Delliah.

Fable 2 First Impressions

2008-10-27T11:54:00.004Z

I know this is two days late, my excuse: my wife is very demanding! In Fable. And what a game it is. It is not without it's problems, I will come to those in a moment, but this is one of the most staggering games I have played in a long time.

OK let me just get this out of the way, like Fable before it, this is one of the best looking games to date. Technically it is stunning, with light diffracting through trees. beautiful particle effects and virtually no jagged edges or rubbish textures. However, it is the art direction that will continually take your breath away. Only through the cartoony style can this game achieve the beautiful sun sets that you will stare at, the pain in your concious when you kill an innocent person and the true love you feel for your dog. Every location has a unique feel that carries through regardless of the weather.

While I would love to go in to far more detail than this post will allow, it is not the graphics will which pluck the strings of your heart. You really feel emotion in this game. Not just anger, but love, pain and humour. While it is difficult to describe, this is a game which will truly suck you up in to it's universe.

One of the most memorable things I have done so far involves a choice – like all good games. I was playing a good character. I was told not to feed the starving prisoners, there was a lever to do so. Obviously, looking a the prisoners, they need feeding. Should you choose to ignore their plea's, apart from the fact it counts a s an act of evil, you will have to fight the feeling in your stomach, But if you pull the levers, the mind control device activates. This will cause you, not your character, you, to feel pain. Every time it is activated, you see your character grab is head, your controller vibrates then experience orbs come flying out. The orbs you have spent so much time collecting, poring effortlessly out of your head. 12000 XP Lost. How good are you really? It is one of the most difficult and excruciating experiences ever – it was amazing.

Better than that, the moments of hilarity. This is one of the funniest games I have played on. The lines some of the characters come out with, such as when a bandit shouts at you “he was retiring next week!” just after you have killed one of their number. Or when you miss some wood that you were chopping and your dog covers his eye's with his paw and shakes his head. Or the amusing quotes on the loading screens (“I am seeking revenge because bandits killed my mother and sister. Clichéd I know, but that's life”) The voice acting is superb and the tongue in check humour, self deprecating irony and good ol' British sarcasm are all out in force.

There is so much I can talk about with this game, but I will have to save that for a later post, lest this goes on for days. Instead, I will skip to the problems with the game.

Firstly, the world still is not open enough! In some ways it is even more frustrating than in Fable 1, sure there are more places to go, but the places where you can't go make even less sense. For example, you can vault over quite a lot of the scenery, so you find yourself running at fences to jump over them. Only to find that that is one of the fences you can't vault.

Loading screens and odd frame rates also plague this game. Loading screens are alleviated by amusing comments (did I mention that, this game is hilarious) but why is the menu, of all things, still so clunky. Given how much the game handles in combat, the framerate is great, so why, when I jump in water, is the splash so slow?

Another problem is spell casting. Changing spells is difficult during the heat of battle. To do so, you must hit RT (Right Trigger) which stops your character moving, then you must use the ultra-sensitive D- Pad to select your spell. Alternatively, you can pause the game to do this. This really messes up the combat for spell slingers such as myself. In Oblivion, changing spells was easy, hotkeys were easy to define. Even in Fable 1 it was better than this. Although, having said that, both of those games had better magic systems than Fable. You have 8 different spells, there is no customisation, no different tactics to use them. Surely they could have done like a half way ground between Fable with the cool spells, and Oblivion with make-your-own.

The penultimate issue is the co-op that they so waved about. There is one simple problem. When you go in to someone elses world, you cannot use your hero. You get your stats, your spells, but not your weapons or, crucially, your appearance. This basically defeats the point of Co-op, because it is basically a way to show off.

The final issue is the map. Why isn't their a mini-map, that is a long held tradition with RPGs. Yes, you can use this trail thing, but what if I don't want to go where it is pointing. I even had to draw my own map of Albion to work out how the provinces join up.

Overall though, this game, despite it's numerous flaws, is incredible. Expect more coverage soon.

Botworks

2008-10-23T17:53:00.004+01:00

Just thought I would give a quick shout out to my new blog: Botwork Studios. For those who are unaware, this is game development company (I love making myself sound important!) Here you will be able to find out the latest developments from the RTS I am working on: Frozen Kangaroo. I will also be posting game design topics, programming techniques and other stuff in that vein. I will try to keep it updated, there should be a mixture of posts for all interests relating to video game development.

The link again: http://botworkstudio.blogspot.com/

The full website is currently in development.

On Piracy and Copy Protection

2008-10-23T17:17:00.003+01:00

Recently there has been a lot of controversy after EA's big game: Spore, included copy protection that limited the number of installs per key code. While I do not believe this the ultimate sin (hence it being glossed over in my review) that some people do, I do think it is a stupid way to stop piracy. And when there is such a simple solution...

Basically, Spore includes a piece of software - SecuROM - which installs itself on your computer when you install Spore. It then immediatley contacts EA to tell them that your product key has been installed. EA then checks that it hasn't been installed more than 3 times.

Personally, it has not effected me one bit. Sure, it isn't acceptable to send data off without my permission, and if I was to sell it, this could prove an issue, but other than that, it doesn't matter one bit.

My point is this - it doesn't stop piracy of the game! If you can sell it twice, then you are making a profit. The only way it could work is if you only were allowed one attempt, but then, if your computer failed, the game would fail with it. And the best part - you can email EA and they will give you - legitamitley - extra installs.

And it isn't like there isn't a simple, effective nearly fail-safe method. Just check the disk is in the drive at boot. It isn't hard, games have been doing it for years. Someone has obviously developed a method of it not being burnt when the disk is copied - as I discovered when trying to do a LAN version of Railroad Tycoon 3.

I recently borrowed Sins off a friend, only to discover I don't need the disk to run it. There is now no incentive for me to buy it. (For those who are interested, will be giving impressions). However, I am not going to go to the effort of borrowing a disk every time I want to play on a game. Sure, some people will work their way around it, but they are going to beat you WHATEVER you try. But with a simple disk check, most people will give up and buy the damn thing.

Oh and by the way, for those who need a counter to tell you when games are coming out, I am sorry but Fable 2, which got somewhat disappointing scores from GameSpot, is coming out tommorow! Won't be able to play until like 6/7PM so first impressions will have to wait till Saturday.

Call of Duty 5: World at War beta

2008-10-14T21:11:00.002+01:00

The Call of Duty beta has started and fortunately I got a code. This for the 360. Full analysis coming soon. Will be posting more videos as and when I upload them. Looks very simmilar to CoD 4 graphically is all I am saying at the moment.

Spores first exapansion packs

2008-10-13T22:59:00.002+01:00

We all knew that Spore was would have expansion packs, but November 18th really was fast! it is not a full expansion pack but will contain:

more than 100 new creature-building components themed in two distinct styles—charming, cartoon-esque creatures and scary, monster-like creatures

Also announced was a much more promising expansion pack coming out in spring 2009. It is an expansion pack aimed at the space stage. It will allow players to teleport themselves down on to the planet surface; just what someone who I was talking to about this game requested!

Also, pushing the content sharing stuff, it will be possible to design adventures and share them. What these "Adventures" will entail is anyone's guess. Hopefully, they will be more thought-provoking than the fedex missions in the game itself.

Personally, the first expansion pack does not interest me one bit. If it was freely downloadable - to keep consumers interested in the product - then obviously I would download it. But the idea that I will purchase, which I presumably will have to, 100 graphics is absurd. The second expansion back, providing these adventures are as dynamic as the creature creator, sounds highly interesting. Particularly if they fix all the issues I ranted about in my review!

Stay tuned for more updates. Also, some new information has come to light about Halo 3: Recon. The expansion pack to Halo 3 being developed by Bungie. That is - despite the fact it is the only DLC I will pay for - is not in fact downloadable at all. Why? I can only assume it was bigger than 2GB. If Bugie charge £20, I will consider it as a snap, but this is why I hoped it would be DLC. They can now, in theory, get away with £40 - a price too steep for someone who, while did enjoy the H3 campaign, not enough to purchase it again. It has the same online as Halo 3, so little temptation there.

Ah well, Fable is coming. I have agreed with my friend that, once we have both clocked in 30hrs(about a day after getting the game!) of single player, we are, until online is enabled, sleeping round at alternating houses playing local co-op! Stay tuned for the full review upon release on the 24th.

This is DLC I will pay for

2008-10-09T18:02:00.002+01:00

This looks awesome, and the final few seconds prove it will be running on Halo's engine. This presumably means that it will be DLC as opposed to a new game. Maps, I do not hold with paying for, I pay for them yearly as far as I am concerned when I cough up £40 for Xbox Live. But a new campaign, that sounds sweet as!

Also, November 19th is the date for the new dashboard with Mii support. Sorry, Microsoft avatars. And, at long last, group private chat. Looking forward to all this, and Fable. That's your Microsoft update for today folks!

Spore

2008-09-28T22:32:00.000+01:00

If ever there was a bigger game, I haven't known it. Maybe in the hardcore world Halo 3 got a little bit more hype, but never before has a game attracted so much media attention, with any and every media outlet running something. This game feels like it has been in development since the start of life itself and reviews have been insanely mixed. I don't mean like they gave it average scores but some give it a 10, others a zero. For a while I was tempted not to give it a score, but that would go against VG protocol. Enjoy the review!

System: PC

Type: Sandox / RTS / Space Explorer / Action

Graphics: 9.5/10

Sound: 8.5/10

Gameplay: 7/10

Story: 9/10

Multiplayer: 9/10

Overall: 8/10

As games go, Spore is very ambitious in it's scope, taking you from the dawn of life right past modern day and into a galactic civilization whilst still including a new approach to game design. It includes a piece of sophisticated model creator software, a real time simulation of player activity on four million planets and basically 5 games to play through. Even Civ doesn't do half of that. So, definitely full marks for effort, the four million planet statistic alone is quite impressive.

The game is, as you probably know, split in to 5 distinct stages. The cell stage, the creature stage, the tribal stage, the civilization stage and the galactic stage. I could give individual reviews for each of these stages, but this would miss the point of the game completely and this review would become very negative very quickly. That is because, with the exception of the galactic stage, which I will come to, all of the stages are very repetitive and simple. You would not be very surprised to find any of them, perhaps with less graphical flair, on an online game site. I did, in an earlier post, give some details about the first 3 stages, so I won't explain them. However, for the uninitiated the Civilization stage is a real time strategy game. However, it is very simple with a very limited number of strategies (3). Even these three strategies are just different names for the same task. Instead of shooting a town, you buy it out, but this is still done with tanks going over to it. It is quite fun sending tanks around with air and naval support, but it is not very challenging or at all thought provoking.

Then you design your spaceship and the galaxy is your oyster, well sort of. When you first take off, you will see your set of tools with loads of empty boxes for other stuff. And there is some really cool stuff there, there is teraforming equipment, teleportation stuff, weapons, and with four million planets and an internet of generated content, where can they go wrong? Then you are told to do some fedex mission, they're not great fun, but they do allow you to advance, collect more money, buy more stuff to do cool stuff with and add some direction to it. That's fine.

You meet other Civilization's, and in the same way as it is good in the earlier stages, it is awesome to be engaging in diplomatic relations with yours and others creations. It is a thing I will end up touching on again and again, but seeing other peoples stuff in your game is, for the most part, a treat. However, then they start demanding tributes. If the game is Civ 4, well that is the point; defending your nation, however, it can be tiresome. In Spore it is worse than tiresome, prepare for a rant.

Another race demanded tribute from me. Anyone who has ever taken a history lesson will know, appeasement is not the answer. So naturally, I declined. Next thing, about 4 races have declared war on me. Fine, if I had a number of units to control, but no, you have ONE SHIP. If you want to defend your planet, you will have to fly that single ship all the way back there. They will attack with maybe four ships, WHICH CAN REGENERATE HEALTH. Finally, I destroyed them using a tactic of my-gun-has-a-marginally-longer-reach-than-yours. On the plus side they dropped some things worth money. However in one instance, and I make no exaggeration, the absolute second I had finished picking stuff up, my planet came under attack again. Once again I defeated them, this time, I thought I might attack them. So I went to one of their (many) planets. About 4 ships again attack and slowly I beat them. Except this time, more keep coming. So you ignore them and attack their cities, their turrets shoot you, their ships shoot you and at the same time, they have launched ANOTHER attack on your home planet. Who thought that was fun?!

Rant over, but it is unacceptable game design. Or lack of. Even if the ships that are attacking me are works of art from someone with too much time, it is unacceptable. The space stage has an imperial ton of potential, but it is all wasted on some lame diplomatic model which expects you to control a galaxy with one ship.

The gameplay isn't without its moments. Everyone will remember the first time an asteroid field collides with your planet in the creature stage, and later when you meet an epic creature, watching it destroy everything that gets in its path including the animals that were killing you. Watching your enemies run in fright is awesome. Then, finally, being able to take down the epic creatures in the Civilization stage. When you first play through, and you don't have a clue what is happening, it feels like I imagine what a creature would feel. “What is going on?” This is a great feeling.

Visually, the game looks great. The worlds are really interesting, if a little stereotypical of retro sci-fi with their vibrant colours. Obviously, the most visually impressive element is how it can simulate how all these creatures walk, attack and even do the Stomp! There are the occasional graphic errors, but for a game generating so much animation on the fly based on what the user does, these are easily overlooked.

The game includes sun rises and it is really interesting to see how you emerge from being a creature, where days and nights span out in immeasurable lengths, to the Galactic age, where you can whiz between the two and see where the day and night end. This gives you a sense of evolution and linkage between the different mini-games. Another example of this linkage is looking at the history of your creature. It is a pleasure seeing how your tiny little creature evolved into some three legged behemoth that you ended up with. Despite this, the mini games can feel a little detached. This is largely due to the fact that what you do has little effect on the next stage. If you are a herbivore in the first stage, peace might be the best option in the stages following. Whereas carnivores will be forced to attack. However, that is basically it. What would be really interesting is to see if you could have scavenger creatures, stealthy creatures etc. It isn't that the game doesn't build these features in, but you can't progress through these strategies.

For example, in the tribal stage, it is true that you can run up and steal the other camps food. But, to advance to the next stage, you must either wipe them out or ally with them, thus making it a tribal only feature for gathering food rather than an actual strategy. What if, to win, you merely had to outlast the others, as is the case in real life. It is really easy to see how this could be expanded in to both the stages below it and above it. For example, if you were fast in the cell stage, maybe in the creature stage it was easier to steal food from dead animals and run off before the rightful owner came and attacked you. Another thing that would benefit this is a bit of emergent evolution. Instead of, “You have chosen X route, that gives you this special power”.

The game is very polished, as I mentioned, the creature animations from a technical perspective at least, are hugely impressive. The audio in this game is also equally well done. The sounds are very believable, even if the munching on the dead animals sound is a little disturbing at first. The music is both dramatic and clichéd when you evolve.

Spore, in addition to the main game, includes a host of editors. These are, as expected, great fun to mess around with. Finally, being able to paint individual parts of something that the creature creator was just crying out for. This is, if I am honest, where most of the fun is coming from. If you enjoyed the creature creator, I would recommend this game, the other editors are fun and it is great to be able to try out all your different creatures, vehicles and buildings in an actual environment. The game also includes a few other editors, including the national anthem editor, which felt a little tacked on and cramped within a clustered window for one stage. I would have liked a flag designer.

However this is far from a serious problem, the biggest problems with this game are the individual stages. No single stage is, in a word, fun. That is a pretty serious accusation to be making, and it isn't entirely true. But they are only as fun as simple addictive mini-games can be. They are easy to play, but they offer little in mental stimulation, except the space stage. However, for reasons stated above, someone messed that up.

Obviously this game will be milked by EA, so hopefully they will fix all of the stages. What do they each need, well the first 4, depth. Just add some more strategies, or at least the potential for more. The space stage, just fix it. Don't make the AI annoying, if you have to, get rid of it. At least let me build space ships to defend my home planet. Let me explore the galaxy in peace.

In conclusion, you must think carefully about this game. On the one hand, the editors are great fun, you will almost certainly not be left dead in the water with this title and it is definitely not without its moments. In this review, I have somewhat stuck to the negative aspects of it, but this isn't because they are the dominating aspects when you are playing, but this game was hyped so much, it is just a huge disappointment. There are some moments that you wish you had captured by camera, like when you lead your pack in to battle against a stronger species and bring it down. And the sense of ever zooming out to get to a grander scale is fantastic, but the unification of the stages is often missing and there is a huge amount of lost potential with this incredible game.

Fable 2 is Offline

2008-09-27T10:43:00.002+01:00

It has been confirmed that Fable 2 will ship without online co-op. It will be available as a patch, "hopefully within a week" after the American launch. Now, I am pretty sure this will be free, as it would be the biggest joke EVER if it wasn't. However, if they can actually get it patched within the week, why not just delay it for a week. Then I realised, the only people who would gain from this are people without online, in which case it doesn't matter, as it is only the online co-op that is being patched.

So all in all, this is fine, providing it is free and providing it is out within a week. I was looking forward to questing with my friends. Ah well, at least it gives me more time to find a secure castle to hide my wife in while my friends decide to destroy my game!

It's Gone Gold

2008-09-23T22:21:00.003+01:00

Fable 2 has gone gold. The game I am most looking forward to this year has gone gold. Come October 24th, I will be do something big for the blog, maybe a minute by minute impressions like I did with Metroid Prime 3. Or maybe something EVEN bigger.

Fable 1 was one of my all time classics on the original Xbox, it was one of the 3 games that I keep coming back to (Mercanries and Chaos Theory is the answer to your question)

I will be playing Co-op with my friend probably day 2, after I have made an awesome unbeatable character! Fable 2 will be coming out on the 24th October (32 days) or the 21st if you are in America. However, I am planning on wandering over to Lionhead on the 21st to see if I can't barter a copy off them!

Hopefully, Gamespot will have a review up soonish, so looking forward to that.

In other news, I will be reviewing Spore this weekend, so stay tuned for that. It is a really difficult game to review, so it may be another collosal review like Civ (sorry everyone) I am really going to work on cutting it down. It will be out Sunday at 2PM (BST)

How Embarassing

2008-09-18T23:40:00.003+01:00

Gamespot have stuck up the Star Wars: Forces Unleashed. As I personally, predicted, the 360 version got an average score (7.5) However, the Wii version got a disappointing 6.

Yes, I know it was naive of me to hope, but I really thought this was going to be the game that showed everyone how to make an awesome Wii game. However, they messed it up, like everyone else.

I might try and rent the 360 version at some point, as the story looks quite interesting and chucking stuff was quite fun in the demo. But this is me disappointed.

R.I.P. Ensemble Studios

2008-09-10T20:04:00.002+01:00

Microsoft has confirmed that ancient and legendary game development studio, Ensemble Studios, will be dissolved. Ensemble Studios are most famous for revolutionising and popularising the real time strategy genre in the form of Age of Empires. Fear not 360 owners, this will happen after the unannounced release date for Halo Wars.

I think Ensemble will leave behind an amazing legacy if they not only made PC RTS games work at the start of their career, then at the end, fixed the console end.

Microsoft will be founding a new, 3rd party developer with the management team of Ensemble, so it probably will remain, but, here is my condolences for the Ensemble Studio. Thanks for everything. I am going to go and play on Age of Empires now, in honour!

The End of the World is Nigh

2008-09-09T22:16:00.002+01:00

The world will end 8AM tommorow morning. Well, maybe. Well, actually definitely not, but it is still fun to say it is. Yes, that is right tomorrow at 8AM BST (7AM GMT) the worlds largest Atom Accelerator will be turned on. The particles will be going round the giant doughnut at something approaching the speed of light. Then, they will smash in to each other, revealing the secrets of the universe... or creating a black hole.

Technically, the black hole, if it is ever created will collapse on itself so quickly it will have no effect, still, nice to pretend to the uninformed. The actual result will be we can find out about the particles that make up quarks, which make up protons and neutrons, which make up atoms, which make us and everything. The main one is called the Higgs Boson, or the "God" particle, that is meant to breath life in to everything to make it work. It may take until 2010 to find all this out though. But, after that, we should understand a lot more. This will probably be the first really big break through in science since we created the atomic bomb. Hopefully, nothing like that will come out of this.

Well that is your physics interlude. Assuming we don't all die tommorow, I will have continued first impressions of Spore and maybe a review of Brawl coming up.

Spore: Tribal Era

2008-09-08T22:50:00.004+01:00

Well I got past the slightly monotonous Creature stage. It does get better, for example, a UFO turned up at one point and dropped off a giant "War Reptile" A creature I had made before in Creature Creator. Except, this time it was huge. It was uber powerful as well, so it would just attack all the creatures near it, killing them instantly. All the creatures were fighting before it turned up, but then they fled.

Also, as you progress in brain size, you can recruit a pack. These creatures follow you around. It is cool to have gang wars with your pack and an enemy pack. Overall, it was enjoyable, and does allow you to properly personalize your creature, but it just goes on too long. I sense they did this as people don't want to be rushed in upgrading. But there really is no need, just make it so you can continue playing and upgrading after your have reached sentinece.

However, that is not what this post is about. The game changes when you get in to the Tribal stage. Suddenly, the camera zooms out and you are in the 5th person (made up by me, but basically you can see more than one camera, like in Real Time Strategy games). The game gets a lot funner (Also not a word...).

Not that it wasn't fun before, but the experience is much less repetitive, more involving and requires more though (because, by this point, your brain has grown!) Your tribe, made up of 3 of your creatures plus one leader must collect food and, like in the Creature stage, either ally with, or destroy, the other tribes on the map. What is cool about this is you can see each of the species evolving at different times. You are the first to evolve, I assume, but when you do, all around you are just nests from creatures. However, these evolve, fairly rapidly, in to tribes for your picking.

Like before, your creatures still have a hunger bar, which you must look after by killing creatures and, a la Age of Empires, gather their food.As you conquer, or ally with, the other tribes, you gain new buildings to add to your village. These allow you to ally with others, destroy others, or gather food, more easily. Once again, attacking was simpler than allying, so I destroyed all of them, as you have to, as far as I can work out, destroy at least 2 to even stand a chance (to unlock the other instruments to ally with the others) of an alliance.

It doesn't involve a huge deal of thinking, but it is quite fun. Couple of annoying control quirks get in the way of the otherwise simple fun (For example, why isn't double click on the units icon zoom to it). Like all the other stages, it is fun, but hardly a ground breaking game on its own. it is very impressive to see many of your creatures scutuling around. There are other options of survival, such as stealing food from neighbouring tribes, but combat always seems to be the easiest. Normally, it comes down to Ctrl-A to select all your troops, right click on the enemey tribe, one at a time.

The civilization stage is reached when you wipe out or ally with all the tribes. It is late now, but I want to publish this, so I will continue with my preview tommorow (I have reached the galatic era, which is fun, but also quite frustrating) If you can't wait for the remainder of the preview and the review: my advice is: get this game if you enjoyed (or think you would enjoy) the creature creator. The extra creators are great fun to mess around with, especially the vehicle and building creators. The games are fun, but not ground breaking, it is very much a play with than a play on game.

Spore Cell to Creature

2008-09-06T11:02:00.004+01:00

I got Spore yesterday. And what a lot of hassle it was to install. First, it took ages to install, which is never good. Then, having installed it, you have to use the ever complicated log in process. I figured, as I already had a Spore Creature Creator log in, I could log straight in. However, when I did this, it said the password was incorrect. Then I went to the place to reset the password, which I did many times. However, despite saying it had done is successfully, it would still not log me on. Then, I, in an attempt to clear the cache, closed the game and tried to reopen it. Error! Could not find file 1004. I mean, COME ON! This is a brand new game. So, I reinstalled it, again taking a while. Finally, I used the create-an-account-but-when-you-already-have-one log in, and that finally worked.

At last I can start the game. I was going to film it as I was playing, however, many technical issues prevented this. So, instead you will have to read. On the plus side, I have now surmounted these issues so I will be recording from creature to space.

You start off as a single cell organism in what seems like an online Flash game. It is fun, but not riveting. What is quite cool, is you don't get many DNA points, which you can use to evolve your creature. As a result, evolutions can be few and far between, meaning you choose them carefully. I imagine on higher difficulty settings, this has a greater impact on the game. Unfortunately, when you reach the point to evolve to a land based animal, you cannot continue collecting DNA points and evolving your creature, even though you can carry on playing.

After a short cut scene, you put some legs on your creature and march in to the big wide world. Based on your decision to be a carnivore or a herbivores, you can either attack the other animals or ally them. Once you have done this enough, I assume you can move on up. As before, you have a bar at the bottom which gradually fills up as well as extra DNA points for evolution. It is quite amusing, but it is starting to stretch on a little too long and I can't work out how to become friends with other species.

Now, back to the game, which I will be recording and talking on. I can't do live broadcast, but I will post it as soon as I can.

Star Wars: The Forces Unleashed Demo

2008-08-27T12:04:00.003+01:00

I downloaded the Xbox 360 Demo (available for free on the Xbox Live Marketplace) yesterday and I have now played through it a couple of times. Firstly, download the demo. The graphics are awsome, the physics are awesome, the star wars troopers clinging on looks great. Some times they can be a little sensitive, but the demo is a great fun to play through. My recomendation is play on lowest diffiucltly level so you can have the most fun by treating it as a sand box game.

However, the demo has further made me decide that if I get this game at all, I get it for the Wii. Why? Well because, it doesn't matter how cool the physics are, that and the story are all that is selling it for me for the 360. The controls are sometimes difficult to use, particully with Force Move (although that is inherient of moving anything in 3D with joysticks). The lightsaber fighting is highly unsatisfying and there is a force meter. How randomly bad is that? The one cool thing about the game is walking around being awesome, and your putting a cap on it?! The game isn't hard on the easy difficultly settings, but it isn't fun on the harder ones' because you can't be awesome.

Spontenuity is the cooler part about it, deciding to randomly rip out an iron bar and place in the Tie Fighters path is cool. I am not going to deny it. But I don't think it is quite enough.

But all the Wii has got is the controls right. And maybe they will ware off too. But it does have an exclusive versus mode. It's still going to have the incredible story, and maybe they will do away with things like the Force Meter and power ups (I know!)

The problem with the 360 version is the physics is a gimick. Just like the Wiimote thing might be. But if there is any company that I trust to make a decent game for the Wii that doesn't just use waggles, it is Lucas Arts. However, I will be waiting for reviews of this game, and I do wish they had made it for Wii Motion Plus. (What, did you think I had forgotten about MotionPlus in my E3 post, no...., just saving it because it is so big *shifts eyes nervously*)

Finally, I would like to publicly appologise for my mistake in the Spore post. There are, as Mr. Anon pointed out, more colours if you simply hold down the colour and more pop up. Also, Project Entropia is good, and I will be telling more about it soon. Very soon.

Spore Creature Creator and Project Entropia

2008-08-21T19:23:00.006+01:00

I got the Spore Creature Creator today after finding out that you get the cost subtracted from the game (making it free) and I am loving it. it is so simple to use it is amazing.
You can create some really interesting and diverse creatures. What really makes it though is the simplicity, as I said. Being able to drab and drop legs, arms, eyes and feet on and them just work is out standing.
But above and beyond that the absolute best feature is the ease of sharing. For example, it comes with a built in Youtube uploader.

Perhaps the only bad thing I can say about it is the colouring system. As random as this sounds, it is really bad. Instead of, as you might expect, being able to colour every single limb independently, you must choose a colour scheme of which you can only choose 3 colours. What is worse, is the colour palette is limited to just 10 or perhaps 12 colours. Personally, I was expecting the complete computer spectrum of 256 million.

**Update: As an anonymous reader pointed out, you can infact press and hold on each colour for a further selection. Woops!

I also downloaded Project Entropia. It is very confusing start and I am still not quite sure what I am doing. What initially drew me in to the game is that it doesn't have a pay per subscription, but instead you put (real) money in, but, here is the clever bit, take real money out. So, theoretically, you could make money on it. That, and it's got loads of cool concepts. However, at the moment, I am struggling to learn the controls. Hopefully, in about a months time, I will have sussed out what is going on and tell you more about it. As usual, stay tuned.

Dawn of War 2 Will Have Tyranids

2008-08-20T08:22:00.005+01:00

Everyone knew it, but it has finally been confirmed. THQ released this video this morning. Apologies if the video hasn't appeared yet, Youtube can take some time "Processing"

Nintendo @ E3

2008-08-19T20:27:00.002+01:00

How embarrassing. How disappointing. How painfully bad. These are just some of the ways I could describe Nintendo's press conference. It started with a detailed account of someone's skiing injuries. Then an interesting but lie ridden demo of a snow boarding game using the Wii Balance Board. Then some statistics that don't correlate with Microsoft's, and 3 average looking game trailers. They did, some what inevitably, announce a microphone along with Animal Crossing. It might not look great, and no backwards support was announced, but a room mike is better than no mike I guess...

Animal Crossing looks decidedly average. Average graphics, average set of features etc. However, judging by the rest of the of the show, they might have been underplaying it.

Yes, that's right, Nintendo has a cunning plan. It involves under talking and deliberatly missing out key information to upset core gamers to a point of suicide. The problem is, I haven't worked out how this plan benifits them in any way at all. For example, it turns out a new Mario and Zelda are being created. All they had to do was say along with a quick render of Link. THATS ALL THEY HAD TO DO. No effort, shut everyone up for months. But no.

Then the stage goes dark, at first you think it is Wii music because they haven't mentioned it. But then dry ice starts pooring on to the stage and crazy lights start going. Oh my word! Nintendo have some big old hard core announcment. There is litterally nothing else this can be. Nothing. Wait a minute, thats a drummer. Wii Music... *Collective sigh* Wii music is a game I kind of had hopes for becuase if there is one company that can make an affordable Rock Band it is Nintendo (I actually have an idea of a Nintendo Rock Band which I will detail later, but rest assureed doens't envolve hundereds of pounds) because they have a huge music collection that they can use for free. I will happily drum away to Zelda main theme, you can use Brawl as a juke box, so just take it to the next level.

Sadly not, there is no skill. You press buttons at random. When you want. In any order. GH (Guitaur Hero) managed to breach the gap between non gamers and gamers. It isn't so much Nintendo are breaching this gap, they are just catering to non gamers. Why? Probably because they are making a fortune at the moment.

On the plus side, The Conduit looks intense, and actual real people thought it was a 360 game. Plus, it will, apparently, support Wii Speak. On top of the fact, there is a halrious reinactment of Ninty E3, so every cloud does have a silver lining.

Blog Update

2008-08-11T20:30:00.003+01:00

OK, I am going to have to post a short post now and then post E3 stuff after I get back from France (for the third time!)

Tomorrow, I set off for France by Eurostar with my friend. So I will be away again, then I get my GCSEs on the 21st then back to school in September. I have holiday snaps, but have not got round to putting them on Picasa, so tough if you were the slightest bit interested.

Personal update out the way, what gaming stuff do I have. That's what you were thinking. I got STALKER. I wanted to get it when it first came out, but it wouldn't run or fit on my old computer. So, having got a new computer, I thought great. Got it for my birthday. It doesn't work on my brand new straight out of the box £500 computer. The most bizzare problem. The disk works in other computers (A vista and my old computer) and my disk drive can read other DVDs. However, when I put the Stalker disk in, it groans for a few minutes then says "Please Insert Disk". A long (and possibly very expensive) phone call to Dell has not resolved it yet. In the mean time, I persuaded (read bullied) my Mum in to letting me install it on her laptop (a Vista XPS). It is a cracking game, difficult with survival a key element. You can't just go running and gunning, a) because you do not have the ammo and b) you have not the got the health or the arms to ever do it and live to tell your Stalking buddies about it. Besides, you also must fight the enviroment, which just refuses to lay down and die. I have not got very far, but I am so far loving every minute. Although, I am very relectutant to drop anything so I am constantly carrying too much causing my character to tire quicker.

While on my French exchange I got the chance to play on Gears of War (which I have played on before, but not to this extent) and it reminded me why it was such a fantastic game. It wasn't the bloody chainsaw gore (although that probably helped) but the fact the campaign is so damn amazing. It never ceases to be like a film. There is so much untold depth once you start turning the difficulty up and you can no longer run and chainsaw. The last act was my favourite, as when you are battling your way up the train, that is Gears of War at is's best. Cover, shoot, psuh forward and so on. As I result, I am now super looking forward to Gears of War 2.

Also got the chance to play on 2 less good games. Firstly, Vegas. Maybe because it is older than I think, but this game looked terrible. The models for the characters looked great, but then the buildings and surrondings looked terrible. Sometimes there would be a physics engine, other times everything would be brittle as a brick. The cover system, on the plus side, did allow you to feel very proffesinal. But, for the most part it was decidedly average.

Lost Planet was weirdly bad. Like, who would have a dead zone anyway. Ceartainly not when you are controling with joy sticks. For the un-initaited, the dead zone is an area in the middle of the screen where the character does not turn when the cross hair is moving about there. This feels slugging (which when on a 360 controller is really bad) and this was after Halo, so there really is no excuse. The game also looked terrible, and had possibly the worst intro level. You were fighting this boss, it wasn't hard, but if anything touched you, you died. No health. Randomly frustrating as there was little you could do except keep moving to the bit where you could beat it. On top of which, it had some of the worst acting/story line I have ever seen. Your body is found in one of these armoured suit things called VS. Then the character who finds you goes, with his tongue no where near his cheek, "If only there was someone who could pilot the VS" I laughed out loud. I don't think this was the intention.

Short update for now, but I am going to be writting one massive rant about Nintendo (they are slipping, fastly, out of my good books) a quick analysis of the console war as it stands at the moment, and my offical review of Brawl. This is going to be like my Halo 2 review, so Nintendo fanboys, watch out. Still not settled on the score, but as a sneak preview, I am torn between 7 and 9. Nothing in between.

----------------
Now playing: Blondie - Picture This
via FoxyTunes
Enjoy the rest of your summer/winter (if you are getting as bad weather as me at the momement.

Pre-3, Brawl Tourney and Other News

2008-07-11T13:21:00.004+01:00

Well, I am going to France this weekend until next week, so it is looking like I am going to miss E3 this year, which is a shame as I was looking forward to finding out what Nintendo had to say. And Microsoft and Sony of course. Obviously, I will catch up on it when I get back, but here are my predictions for the big 3.

Nintendo:
I wish I knew. Seriously, they said they had 3 big announcements a while back, and we haven't heard anything since. It could be anything. I think we will hear about additional storage and voice chat, but on the game front, people are saying it could be Star Fox, Legend of Zelda, Animal Crossing (that is where my money is) or perhaps a new FPS IP(Intellectual Property). (Talking of which, read below if you are interested in FPS's on the Wii... ) Hopefully there will be some news about the Forces Unleashed as well...

Micrsoft:
Big long speech about how amazing the 360 is. Then a big old price drop about the aforementioned amazing 360. Then they will talk about all the great games coming out. Namely Fable 2, Gears of War 2 (that's a big one) Fallout 3, EndWar, I could keep listing to be honest. Then they could shock everyone and announce a hand-held console. Or they might not.

Sony:
Brag about Blu-Ray, talk about MGS sales, have a big old demonstration of LittleBig planet, mention Home, drop the price significantly, again, talk about PSP 2. Which will have motion sensing, mutli-point touch screen and hey, maybe even 2 screens.

What am I looking forward to? Mainly Fable 2, Fallout 3 and Forces Unleashed, and a FPS that I will talk about below. Obviously, should be good to see Gears 2, but I think I know what to expect from that. I am also looking forward to what Nintendo's big announcements are going to be.

What is this FPS I have been talking about then? It goes by the name Conduit and it is not being released on the PS2, making it a Wii game built for the Wii. So obviously, this means better graphics, but when the developers start to say things like

"feels a lot more like they're making a 360/PS3 title than a Wii title"

It is difficult not to get excited. And then they release gameplay footage:

It's damn near impossible. And there will be a playable demo at E3.This, in their words, will revolutionize development for the Wii. 16 player online is the target, they also said they have taken inspiration from the best parts of uber successful shooters, like Halo, hopefully that means match making, party options, playlists, everything. The best part is, they are working with Nintendo to bring the best online experience possible. Stay tuned for more details.

A couple of posts ago I mentioned doing a massive Brawl tourney. Now the aim is to get 64 or 128 people signed up. Let me explain what this tourney is about:

I had this idea ages back when Brawl was coming out in the US, it has now finally arrived in the UK, so now is the time to do it.

It is basically a giant online tournament. We would get as many people as possible (64 or maybe even 128) and set out fixtures for each of the games. All of the games would abide by some set rules. We make sure that everyone can make the dates they need to at the start for the first round, then organise the next round based on who gets through.

Here is where it gets cool however. The matches would be Stock, but with a time limit of 3 minutes. Then, at the start, the most well equipped person to do this, films the match (saving the replay and then recording it with whatever means they have) Now while I know this is a Nintendo forum, I am assuming that some of you have played Halo 3. It would be similar to the service that Bungie offer. Each game would be recorded with the replay available, screen shots taken by the participants and all the data that is presented at the end of the match.

So like Halo, each match would have a page with all this information. Then each registered player would have a page which includes all of their stats (ie. total damage done over the whole tourney) as well as their screen shots, maybe some information about them and there current status in the tourney.

So obviously, this is going to need loads of people (64/128) so if you are interested, there is almost definitely space. You can sign up with a comment on this page (include your Brawl Code and Wii code), or on this forum or you can email me @thekileyenator@gmail.com

By pooling all my brawl contacts and some eariler registers, I have got a total 7 people, so we still have a long way to go, but I do believe this can happen.

Super Smash Rant

2008-07-08T09:07:00.003+01:00

For everyone's information, my Brawl code is: 5069 - 5371 - 3115, if you add me, be sure to tell me your code. I play Samus.

Ok, so Brawl has come out in the Uk, I got it on launch day and I was considerably less hyped about it then than I was some months ago. Well done Nintendo. This post is a list of all the things that bug me, annoy me or are just plain right stupid.

Online is the biggest one. Why can't I do everything online with Friends? Surely I should be able to do tourney, Co-Op, rotation Special Brawl and custom stages. It is absurd. Why can I not send messages outside a game to my friends? Why am I only online when playing online, can't I be online when playing the campaign. Why isn't there stat tracking or leader boards. Why is the online better in Mario Kart, a 3+, than in Brawl, a 12+ and definitely hard core title. Why are there lag issues when this is the biggest game on the Wii? Why aren't there playlists (ie. for KO fest/ Stock etc)

Why on earth can I not use the point in the menus?! When you are choosing a character, you literally are moving a cursor ideal for a pointer. Did they just not work it out? Why can't it remember which name you use by default. Every time I have to select THK, JUST REMEMBER IT!

The subspace Embissary clearly cost a lot of development time to produce, just look at the fancy cut scenes. So why is it, for the large part, dull or frustrating. Some of the levels are fun, but why isn't it all? Because their level design, in some places, is non existent. Some times it is just really boring, like a flat path with one jump. Other times the controls, which are built for a button bashing fighter, just aren't up to the job of platformer. It isn't without it's positives, but I would have preferred if the development time had been spent on the online.

Why is the game still unbalanced? You have had years to craft these characters, you haven't added that much since Melee, surely balancing Snake wouldn't be too hard.

Unlockable content is fine, to a degree. But unlocking options?! That would be like if you had to play 5 hours on Halo to get the inverted control scheme.

Small gripe, but why are GC controllers players 1 before Wiimotes. Why can't I set the default to not be KO fest in Brawls.

Well, when all is said and done, it isn't as long as I thought it was going to be. Also, happy Bungie day for yesterday. I hope you all downloaded the map and played the playlist, I know I did. I got a Killtacular on Swords, was very happy. The map is one of my favourites from H2 (I think...) and any map with teleporters is always cool. Anyway, more posts to come. FK watchers, you will be pleased to know I have finally got my head round how it is going to fit together (well mostly)

And We Are Back

2008-07-03T17:56:00.003+01:00

After a very long hiatus, Veteran Gamer is back. I have finished my GCSEs, I have Brawl (will post online code soon) I have a new computer, I have Xbox Live Gold, I have played the Civ Rev demo, development for FK has started and I love XNA.

Well during my break, I have lost all my readers, but hopefully I can claw them back. Until I have set up the Frozen Kangaroo website, some of the posts on this blog will be about that. I will be discussing XNA (which I love, have I mentioned that?), game design issues and hopefully revealing some art work.

Brawl is great! It might just be Meelee online, the subspace emissary may be poorly designed, the online may be lacking in featuers, but the tried and true gameplay will keep you coming back for more. However, SSBB is not out of the woods yet, like Halo 2, I am going to heavily critise a game despite knownig I will be playing on it for many years to come!

I am going to be trying to organise a BIG online tourney for Brawl, more details of that and how to sign up to come later when I have discussed it with a couple of other people to see if it can happen.

Is anyone else also hugely dissapointed with the weather at the moment? It just isn't acceptable.

Gaming news I should have posted about:
MGS has multiple cut scense that are 1h30+. I.e. the length of a feature length film
Creature Creator was released to get people excited for Spore; you have to buy it, curses to EA.
And probably lots else which I can't remember.

On the plus side, I may be getting a promo copy of Wall E curtosey of THQ, so it will be interesting to check that out. Yes, it is a game of a film, but just look how cute it is! I will be reviewing, if at all, the Xbox 360 version.

Upcoming posts:

Super Smash Bro's Rant
Super Smash Bro's Review
Racing Games - What They Need to Do
Exclusive details about FK

I hope you are all well and everything and having a lovely summer. Oh wait, you haven't finished!

April Fools!

2008-04-01T17:46:00.002+01:00

Happy April Fools everybody! Unfortunately, I have not prepared something really cool to trick you all with, however, there are a couple of good ones I have seen. IGN's trailer for a Legend of Zelda movie is probably the best, Gamespots is amusing, I actually feel for Vic Davies one and was about to post a congratulations when I noticed Googles! If you have seen or heard of any good ones, please leave them as a comment.

I can't think of any major news item for this month, it being March. However, I have started the GDD for Frozen Kangaroo so, so far, it is going to plan. This month is my last full month at school (if you can call it full, I have a sort of easter holiday in a weeks time for 2 weeks) and then I go on study leave. During that time I will be revising, however, after June 12th, I will be free until September so expect news, reviews previews and Brawl.

As I mentioned, Fable 2 has an approximate release date of this autumn. The main thing to watch out for this month is GTA. In May there is WiiWare (complete with Gravitronix and Platachen Twist and Paint) and, with any luck, Super Smash Bro's Brawl.

Possibly the biggest news is I have a long term "loan" of one of my most favourite games I have never owned. The Elder Scrolls Oblivion. I was a bit worried that I would be under-amazed by the game as it came out some time ago, but it is as impressive as it was then. I am currently a high ranking member of the Mage's Guild, a warrior in the arena and not too far in to the main quest and I am loving it. I have a friend who got it at a similar time to me, he is being evil, having killed something like 100 people! There is so much to do that you could ignore trice the lack of polish the game has. And, if I am honest, there are unpolished elements, Co-Op would have been nice and some times the draw distance and frame rate is down right shoddy, but that doesn't change the fact that 2 years down the road it is still a very ambitious and highly impressive game.

For my Op-Ed tonight, I will be discussing what makes a "special" game and why they make me, at least, tingle just thinking about them. I will be using Oblivion, Metroid Prime and Civilization as case studies.

Release Dates

2008-03-18T17:48:00.003Z

Play.com recently announced some UK release dates, most significantly, for Fable 2. Play.com slated the release date as May 30th. This sounds great to me, perhaps a little too near Brawl, but none the less, sounds good. Unfortunately, Lionhead Studios have denied this release date, saying it "is pure speculation". This is obviously disappointing, as the website implied the game would come out when leaves turn brown, ie. autumn. Still, at least it puts a bit of space between Fable and Brawl.

Or does it, a highly reputable source, has released he first realistic release date for Brawl. Tesco have said the release date will be the 1st of January 2020. So, I will be programming the countdown tonight!

On a side note, you may start noticing references to something called Frozen Kangaroo. This is a game that I am designing/developing (still very much in the designing stage). As a result, you will start to see more posts about game design, and references to Frozen Kangaroo will appear, you can use these to piece together the game, as I will not be releasing any official information till further down the line. You can see the first piece of concept art here. If you've got time, check the rest of his DeviantArt, it's good stuff and he will be the lead artist in FROZEN KANGAROO.

Mario Kart Wii

2008-03-14T10:19:00.004Z

Mario Kart Wii is coming out this Aprile exclusive to, as the name suggests, is exclusive to the Wii. I very much enjoyed Mario Kart Double Dash for the Gamecube as it was great fun in multiplayer and was very accessible to all markets. Surly this would make a perfect game for the Wii, as the whole point about Wii is the accessibility to different markets. I didn't think Mario Kart was perfect however, so here is a wish list of what I want to see improved upon in Mario Kart Wii

Non-Scripted Physics Engine
What made MK so much fun, was the fact that the game would get crazy. Karts would be flying every which way, slipping on bananas, going up jumps, speeding on boost-pads and chucking objects at each other. However, what detracted from the craziness was the linearity of the spinning and crashing. For those who have played the game, picture, when you get hit by a shell, instead of using the pre-animated spin, how you span depended on the incline of the track, the angle at which you were hit etc. Furthermore, with the inclusion of a true physics engine, when you crash in to other cars, there could be huge pile ups. One of the best things about Forza is, when you are racing at 200MPH, you slip and there is a huge pile up. However, in Forza, this is cool, but then, it is basically the end of the race and you have to restart because it is "realistic". In MK, however, there could be massive pile ups and then everyone just drives on.

Increase in Speed
Once again, this comes down to the crazy factor. It is a racing game, so make it possible to go really fast. Obviously, this makes it harder, so make it possible to tone up/down the speed depending on requirements. Sucessfully dodging shells in Double Dash was one of the personal highlights for me. It was a really nice feeling when you see a red shell coming towards you and then you drift just before it hits you and it crashes in to the opponent in front of you. That situation would be so much cooler if it were all taking place at 200MPH and when it hit the opponent in front of you, you would see him shoot behind you (as well as you being forced to doge him thanks to the aforementioned physics engine)

Online Multiplayer
This feature has been pretty much confirmed anyway, but, lets face it, as good as Double Dash Single player was, the multiplayer was where it's at. So, in line with the craziness, lets have lots of people online. For once, I am not at all fussed about lack of communication options or having to have friend codes. It really doesn't matter, maybe let us save fastest times, so people can try and beat them and ranks so non-gamers aren't playing gamers. However, aside from that, you don't need to talk to people while racing, you don't need to add them as a friend because races don't really allow you to pick out favourite opponents. Once again, this is an element that would be enhanced by increased speed and physics.

These features I believe are realistic. Obviously, this title is one Nintendo is going to make non-gamer friendly, but I don't think these features make it and less or more accessible, they just make it better. Obviously, I could ask for the ability to customise cars, or paint them, or have tournaments and leader boards and damage models. But all that isn't going to happen in a non-gamer friendly game. If you want that, play Forza. I will, assuming the reviews aren't terrible, be getting Mario Kart to quench my thirst till Brawl. For anyone who is confused about Brawl's release date, you are not alone. IGN says May 1st, as does Game. Gamespot on the other hand, says June 6th and Nintendo, the publisher and distributor, has not confirmed any release date. So, ignore anyone who says "They KNOW when it is coming out," just ignore them, because unless they occupy a high position at Nintendo, they don't

Super Smash Brothers Brawl Released in the US

2008-03-08T14:04:00.002Z

Brawl has been released in America. Now just Europe and the rest of the world to go. While sales reports are yet to come in, both Gamespots and IGNs review of Nintendo's hotly anticipated fighter are up. They both give the game a 9.5, the highest score (bar perfect) While the reviews are not identical, they both have similar criticisms, mainly of the Subspace Emissary.

"...there are some[levels]--in particular the automatically scrolling ones--that the game could have done without"
"...as it is simply not as balanced or entertaining as the stages designed for multiple human opponents"

Despite this, the Subspace Emissary is just a bonus feature, and when it comes to the actual multiplayer, they do not have a bad word to say. They even declare all four controller options to be completely viable. Also, they say the online plays lag free, and, while you cannot play your own maps online, it doesn't really matter. You can also share photos, videos and stages online. I won't bore you will all the features, as thy are all listed on the Smash Bro's Dojo. It is suffice to say, this is my no. 1 anticipated game for 2008 and I physically don't know if I can wait. Maybe I should just buy an American Wii and play Brawl today. If you want to be excited about Brawl, read the two reviews, check the Dojo for photos from the American users and play Melee.

On a side note, I have set up my real Xbox Live account, what a load of fuss that was, and they expect you to pay for it! My ID: theTHK123, if you send a message saying you read my blog, I will accept you instantly! Current games: Halo and Forza but should be getting Fable and Merc 2 when they come out this year.

The Terrible Graphics Crysis

2008-03-04T18:18:00.005Z

In this months Op-Ed, I will be looking at the effects of "Next Generation Graphics" and if we actually need them.

Many thanks to "my friend" whose, up till now, only use was owning a 360. Fortunately, after coming up with the frankly genius title, he will not be the first redundancy here at Veteran Gamer

Last month, I looked at online gaming. I suggested that online may detract from a game because the developers were focusing online. While I still feel this is true, in comparison to the damage the HD graphics can do, it is negligible and online comes with tangibly good benefits. With the exception of the Wii, all current generation consoles, PC included, are pushing the so called High Definition era. Titles built with the sole intention of wowing the user, such as Crysis and games that have physics engines that put real life to shame, such as the one in Burnout: Paradise. But can a thick layer of beauty really cover up for poor gameplay. Or is it even the cause, suffocating originality?

With an introduction like that, you might think I was just going to rant about graphics. I am, after all, a Wii owner. However, graphics, and I mean this term very generally as I include stunning physics engines (as it has similar pros and cons), are, when used to complement rather than dominate, a very powerful tool. For example, one of my criticisms of Mario Kart was, while the action is often crazy, the fact that all the spinning is pre-animated ruins the chaos and makes it feel scripted. On the flip side, when racing in Forza Motor Sport at 200MPH and you slightly slip, you swerve, knocking the other contestants and causing a huge, entirely spontaneous crash. The fact that you know this can happen adds to the tension of the game. Likewise, part of the reason Halo: Combat Evolved became so popular was the Warthog. The Warthog was fun because, when a grenade exploded next to you, you flew backwards. Which leads me on to my next point.

Good graphics can make a truly immersive game. It is difficult to feel like you are inside a game if you are constantly reminded of it's fictiousness by, say, huge artefacts where your allies head should be. Would the world of Talon IV been as interesting to explore if it had just used dull colours and repetitive corridors? Would Gears of War have won game of the year if the chainsaw animation wasn't quite so belivable? The reason is, most people play games to escape their own world, if they can trick themselves this new, improved world is real, they will enjoy it more and stay in it more. Furthermore, another key feature of modern games is exploration. There is no fun in exploration if there is nothing to find but bland, blurred textures. For example, in Assassins Creed, the first time you arrive at a city, it takes your breath away and makes your long journey worthwhile. This wouldn't be quite the same experience if all you could see was the city walls and a blurry tower behind it and then nothing but the horizon.

Let's take Forza Motor Sport as an example. While Forza Motor Sport 2 is not quite Burnout Paradise when it comes to dynamic damage models, when Forza first came out for the Xbox, it was leading the way in realistic damage models. If it just showed you in a little diagram that the front of your car had been ripped off, it wouldn't have been very satisfying. However, because you see your bumper fly off it makes you appreciate the crash. Once again, it immerses you in the gameplay. By making your car more real, you realise that your shocking driving has real consequences. Also, the detailed enviroments serve to place you inside the car. Finally, by, and you may start noticing recurring themes here, making the maps look real, the player wants to explore new tracks to see what there like and makes the world more real.

However, as the gaming industry has recently out-sized the movie industry, there is now a lot 0f money in this once frowned upon market. At first this sounds good, but as many Hollywood films conform to the same clichés and do not try to be inventive, the same is happening to the video game market. So, the big investors who can't really tell a Wii Remote from a PS3 controller and think the Xbox 360 is Microsofts first games console, come in and see that consoles are pushing good graphics. They demand graphics to be this good, and the developer tells them that it will cost X million amount of money. This means that, as investors do not want to risk such large quantities of money, they go with safe bets. Ie. tried and tested game types, like first person shooters. The effect of this is, when an original idea is dreampt up, it sounds too risky for the investors and they turn the game down. To summarize, because graphics are now a must for current gen gaming, games are expensive to produce, meaning high risk, innovative, games are turned down. All is not lost however, thanks to services like the Xbox Live Arcade, that is what next months article will be on.

Also, similar to the last point, decent graphics take a long time to produce. Because of the aforementioned money constraints, developers will be pushed to release the game as quickly as they can. This means, that other elements, such as gameplay, get rushed towards the end, almost as an afterthought. Once again, this is down to pressures of the developers to make HD graphics in a short period of time. Once again, XBLA can take away the need for fancy graphics and let the focus remain on core gameplay.

A point about PC's as well. By increasing the technical prowess for the game, you shrink your market. Take Crysis, you can buy a top of the range computer now, and you still will not be able to play Cryis the way it is meant to played. While people might say that they are prepared to make compromises, the whole point to Crysis, the reason it wasn't released on consoles, the reasons why the system specs are so high, is because the main selling point is to show the world "This is what our games can do". The side effect of this is, gamers such as myself, get turned off modern computer gaming sticking to the classics and turn to consoles for their HD fill.

When I was thinking of a game for this point, I actually found it very tricky. Not because there is a shortage of games that are entirly focused on graphics, but because I do not buy games that are like this. Instead of blabbing on about a game which my entire opinion is based on a single Gamespot review, I will instead comment on the market in general. Many people will be aware that games are much shorter than they used to be. Gears of War, as great as it is, comes in at under ten hours. Likewise, Call of Duty can be done in less than ten hours. Fortunately, these game's gameplay aren't suffering. However, you could argue that the reason why Assassin's Creed has such repetitive mission objectives is because they spent so long making the draw distance breath taking. The problem with all these examples in showing my point is, overall, I believe that they have benefited from the fancy graphics. If anyone has any examples of games that have genuinely suffered because the focus is entirely on the graphics, please leave a comment.

In conclusion, I think we are reaching a split in gaming. I think the games that appear to be being damaged by graphics, the truth is that the developers couldn't improve the gameplay and decided to spend the time making technically amazing graphics so they can still justify charging money f0r it. I also want to point out that I do still believe the reason why the market is flooded with traditional games rather than different games is down to, almost entirely, the huge cost associated with making a game for the HD Era. I do not think it is because humanity has finally ran out of innovative ideas. Furthermore, because graphics need to be so intricate, game length is suffering and I think that developers now need to find a happy balance. Finally, I think that realistic graphics are going to become less prominent because, lets face it, as realistic as Forza looks, it can't compete with the likes of Paradise which just look cool. It all comes down to why you play games, and because it is for entertainment, realism just doesn't have the same wow factor as it used to.

I hope you enjoyed this post and I really appreciate all comments (which I will read out if I do the Podcast) Also if you have any tips on refining my style of writing or have a suggestion for a topic I can do, please post a remark.

Blog Update For February

2008-02-29T09:32:00.003Z

Brawl has a release date! The 6th of June is supposedly the release date for Super Smash Bro's Brawl in Europe. On Gamespot, this is the listed release date, although, having said that, there has been no such mention on the Dojo. Furthermore, this is some what undermined by Game's website listing the release date as the 1st of May and Nintendo, the publisher of Brawl, refusing to confirm any of these release dates. Personally, I think it will come out 6th June, but that date is not set in stone just yet. It will probably be confirmed after the American release date (March24th)

Also, you will have noticed I have slightly spruced up the design. I hope you like the improvements. The next couple of months I will be working to put the Podcast together and hopeful securing some interviews for the blog. Then the focus will switch to the Flash Media Player - to play said podcasts and videos. Finally, when that is all done, I will hopefully have a proper server and I will build a forum. If you would like to secure your desired user name, because there will be so much demand, I will be setting up a form on the forum page in the coming months. Please do, as it will give me an idea of the no. of users. All you will need to do is write down your desired user name and your email address so I can contact you when the forum is being built.

GDC was this month. There was a very interesting video about Fable Two presented by Peter Molyneux. It really made me want to dig up my copy of Fable. It was a shame, as being English, no one got any of his ironic jokes, however, I still enjoyed it. One highlight was when he went to visit his husband and child (yes, he was female and had to be pregnant - [he apologised for there being no labour mini game) When he arrived, his child ran up to him and was like "Hey Mummy, your home!" Whereas, when he went up to his husband, he was cross that he had left him for so long. Then, his co-op partner just shot his husband. Peter then explained how that was it, game over for his husband. He could not and would not come back. When he went away adventuring, his child would be taken in to an orphanage. I may possibly be doing a 3 part feature, one a preview on F2, one discussing the Good/Bad decisions that make the heart of Fable and a third on something else.

Also, there was a video for the new Unreal Engine. Personal highlight was the "Block of meat we built" This was to demonstrate the soft body physics engine the new build will feature. Also, there were some cool water effects. The engine was demoed with the Gears of War protagonist. Talking of Gears of War, I purchased a copy for a friend on Ebay, so, if it turns up on Wednesday, I will be able to play on it for that evening.

Oh yes, there was a , albeit brief, trailer of Gears of War. Very cool and well worth checking out (All links are at the bottom of the post)

GDC, as good as it is now, will, like E3, change. This is because it is meant to be an academic event and, following the collapse of E3, it has become much more commercialised. I feel this is good, as I don't want another E3, however, the way they are securing this future is by banning all non-full time journalists. Meaning - I can't go.

Also, Civilization Revolutions has been put on indefinite hold for the Wii (not for the 360 or the PS3) This usually means cancelled, which will be a shame as the Wii is the console most suited to this title.

EA Bought 2K this month. 2K being the publisher of Civilization. While Sid doesn't seem to be too fussed, I am worried as EA has a habit of milking cows till they bleed, and even then. I can't count on all my fingers and toes the number of Sims titles there have been, for example. We will have to see where this partnership goes, because, between the two of them, they have quite a lot of every market cornered. The last big publisher is THQ and Sega maybe. Oh, and Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo, but they don't count.

Op-Ed Article: Graphics Galore (title pending) I will be looking at the supposed "HD Era" and how good good graphics actually are. Can they be the icing on a cake or make up on a elephant? You will have to read tomorrow to find out.

Links

Viva Pinata on Ebay

2008-02-13T22:48:00.002Z

Just a quick post. Thought I would let you know, in a kind of VG reader exclusive, that I am selling Viva Pinata on ebay. You can bid on this item here. If you are interested please bid, or if you know anyone else who may be interested, please send the link to them. Any questions, you can always leave a comment!

Also, if anyone is interested, I am also selling a Rock Tumbler- Turns stones in to little gems. You can view that here.

Cloverfield and 28 Weeks Later

2008-02-11T20:37:00.000Z

I went to go see Cloverfield at the weekend and wow, what a film it is. This film is amazing. As a testimony to this, when I went in, before the film started, it was quite a boisterous audience, however, when I left, when there is normally chat about the film, it was deadly silent. Cloverfield leads you into a false sense of security by showing a gentle humour 10 minute introduction about a party before throwing you in to the deep end. The deep end, as I will refer to it as, is amazing. The film takes elements out of so many great films and combines them perfectly. Obviously, the Hand-Cam comes from The Blair Witch Project, but "the Deep End" takes inspiration from films like Alien, 28 Days Later, King Kong and Godzilla among others. My only criticism is that the ending well, lacks ending. There was a place where I thought it was going to end, however, it didn't and the remaining 5 minutes of the film actually detracted from the entire film. However, considering there presence, I thought there was going to be something such as a mock CNN report on it "Ten Years On" to offer an explanation; which there wasn't. Despite that, I still highly recommend going to see it, although do suspend disbelief, because the camera they are using is amazing, the sound quality, picture quality and battery lift are absolutly outstanding!

Also last month, I managed to see 28 Weeks Later, a film I have wanted to see for quite some time. Is it any good, well, my comment for this film is much the same as it was to 28 Days Later. It starts fantastically, but then gradually degrades to senseless violence. Once again, the shots of an empty London are both creepy and effective, as are the panning shots showing people running away from "the Infected". The story is a little predictable. A highlight in the film for me was when you see an overgrown football pitch as it really adds to the sense of desertion. If you enjoyed 28 Days Later you should enjoy this, if you didn't you won't and if you haven't seen 28 Days Later, do so first as it is better.

Bonus Review!!!
No purchase necessary

I finished watching Green Wing for free on Virgin Media on demand; a fantastic service without a doubt. If you have VM, you can watch all of S1+2 of Green Wing on demand for free (under TV Choice>Comedy>G) If you can, do. It is probably my favourite comedy, out ranking even the Peep Show, and the ending so simply poetic and beautiful you could almost forget it is a bizarre comedy. If after watching the first episode you just thought it was weird, watch another one, because yes, it is weird, but you will get in to it. I would recommend this to anyone who isn't offended by a little nudity.

Medal of Honor 2: Heroes First Impressions

2008-02-10T22:02:00.000Z

Some of you may have been aware that I got Medal of Honor for the Wii today. Yes. Medal of Honor. As in that clichéd WWII that's been around for too long.And no, I haven't taken leave of my senses. The reason I got Hereos is two fold. Firstly, it is meant to have a sweet control scheme - arguably the future of FPSs. But, more importantly, it has 32 player online. So, is the game any good. Well, as it turns out, I could have told you that before I got it.

Good parts:

Sweet controls
Neat, lagless online
Some funky gimicks
The arcade mode is fun

Bad parts:

It is so MoH, it feels like it is taking the mic out of itself
A couple of the gestures are fidly and annoying
The single player is Medal of Honour

I will use the remainder of this post moaning about the fiddly gestures. After briefly stating: no matter what impression you get from this, my initial impressions are good, the online is worth the wait.

The first point of frustration is the melee, executed by chucking the Wiiremote an N/Chuck forwards. This is very difficult to do and will usually end up with you reloading, loosing your aim, loosing your sense of direction and completely missing the enemy. I imagine, however, it is quite realistic, because you do not see the British army melee-ing people left right and centre, however, coming from Halo, it feels an intrinsic part of killing someone! Fortunately, online you do not have to bother with this, as you can just press Z.

The next example, is the sniper rifle. To alter the zoom, you rotate the Wiiremote. Apart from the fact this is very fiddly when you are being shot and you are also trying to line up a head shot, it adds nothing to the game as to zoom in in real life does not involve putting the gun upside down. It is good to see EA using the Wiiremote, but like Super Monkey Ball, some of it feels hit a miss.

Finally, the shotgun requires you to "pump" the N/Chuck. For the first two shots you will forget completely and wonder why you aren't shooting. Then, there are, perhaps, four shots after you have worked it out where it is quite cool and is a really nice finishing touch when you kill someone. The problem is, the shotgun isn't very good, and having to pump after every shot, like the melee, just messes up your aim.

There are some good ones, like the grenade throw, where how you throw actually effects the course of the grenade and of course aiming with the pointer is great! Please buy this game, as it may encourage a real shooter and the multiplayer is genuine fun. Full review coming out in March hopefully.

Band Mashups

2008-02-07T17:44:00.000Z

I just got a press release from THQ and this quote was too good to miss:

"Fighting with a sniper violin or flamethrower guitar is something gamers should definitely look forward to."

Apart from the fact this game will be rubbish and, another cheap Wii game, this game also perfectly sums up the decay in the video game world. However, I now WANT to see how a game with "Sniper Violins" can ever work. You can read the full press release here.

In other news, my Live trial has run out, so I should now be able to increase productivity, getting reviews of Galaxy, Enter the Matrix, Rock Start Presents Table Tennis, Halo 3 and Forza. I also have plans for the website how I can make it look a little more, well, snazzy.

The Importance of Being Online

2008-02-01T17:04:00.000Z

My first Op-Ed article: How important is online?. I hope you enjoy it, I am working on my style and really appreciate any suggestions. Also, make sure you post your opinions, as they will be read out on the podcast next month! In this article, I will be discussing online and what it adds to and subtracts from games.

Online has, up until now, mainly something that PCs, and PCs only, do. Yes, the original Xbox connected to the internet, and technically so did the PS2, but even the Xbox was quite a lot of trouble to get it online and most games weren't even Live enabled. This has changed greatly in this generation. All current-generation consoles have online capabilities, in fact, I would go so far as to say, that online is what this generation is about. Great graphics barley make up half the market share, motion sensing is also about half the market share, but all 3 consoles, for better or for worse, have online. Not only this, but online is making stories for all 3 as well. Xbox Live has a massive reputation, obviously, but that isn't it, the PSN is trying to be a free, better version of Xbox Live and is one of Sonys main points to push. The Wii, also in the news about its online capabilities, namely how they are under-used, over-restricted and generally disappointing considering the Wii has built in Wi-fi. Finally, the PC's online is changing too, with Windows Live coming in to play, where some users are now paying for a service that used to be free. So to say online is at the forefront of gaming news would be a bit of an understatement, but how important is it really? Is it even a bad thing?

It is possible that online detracts from the games quality. As many of you will be aware, I recently purchased and completed Halo 3. I did so on the second to hardest difficultly, did not play it obsessively and managed to complete it in a matter of days (less than 5) For a game which has been in production for over 2 years, is that not a little short? If I had paid £40 for this game (as it happens, I managed to get it pre-owned) and did not have any intention of getting Live, I would be very disappointed with the game. While online may be very wide-spread, it isn't 100%. Some people could argue that, if you don't have online, you don't get Halo. I agree, but why should they miss out on a fantastic, albeit brief, game. Besides, it isn't just Halo. Call of Duty is another example (And I am sure Metal Gear Solid will be too) Some of this shortness can be attributed to the fact developers need to make amazing graphics or otherwise their title will just be shunned (that is what next months article will be on) However, I don't think it can be entirely responsible, as many of these games use pre-built engines anyway.

Also, as game developers are presuming the game is going to go online, they are delivering un-finished games. This used to be limited to PCs, where developers would just release a patch a month after launch. This was infuriating for the consumer, and when games are costing upwards of £40, it really isn't acceptable. That is not the worst of it, however. Some games take content out that had already been produced at the games launch to sell for more profits. Games aren't cheap, games are short, half the market is PAYING for online anyway, there really shouldn't be additional fees, particularly for horse armour.

That brings me on to my next point, cost. If assuming that you need online to enjoy a game to the full, you are going to need to spend some money. The 360 is the most guilty of this. If, firstly, doesn't have built in Wi-Fi. This is in itself shockingly bad, given that even the underpowered Wii does. But it gets worse, Microsoft charge £60 for the Wi-Fi card. It isn't a special card, it is a USB wireless adaptor, something that you can buy for PC for under £20 without going budget. It isn't even reliable, my friend has got through 4 since getting his 360 this Christmas. Surely Microsoft has taken enough of your money now? No, you have to pay for online. I mean, come on, that is ridiculous. Yes, Live is better than both the PSN and, obviously, the Wii, but £40 a year better? The truth is no, but it won't change because everyone, myself included, will keep buying it because they want to play their games online. It isn't just Microsoft who will rob you though, the PS3 has got a game coming out later this year BUILT around the idea of micro-transactions (Home)

Despite all that, online does have many good points too. The most obvious one is how it extends the game. Single player, no matter how long, will eventually get old, in theory, a decent evolving online game won't. Case in point: Halo. In 5 years time, Halo will still be a blast to play online. Offline multiplayer requires organisation, online doesn't Online means you can pick the game up for 5-10 minutes, play and go. Online means you can meet your friends online and be able to play them with out breaking commitments to other ties.

Also, many game developers will release more content after launch. Sometimes you will have to pay, sometimes you won't. It means that if they find something that isn't balanced, it can be fixed, increasing the longevity of the game. Halo periodically releases new maps that eventually become free. This, once again, keeps players coming back and helps to keep the game fresh. Yes, micro-transactions aren't cool, but if the content is right, then why not? You pay for games. I am not talking about horse armour, something I will never forgive Bethesda Studios for, but extra missions, new maps, different variants etc.

Finally, one of the key things about technology at the moment is user generated content. Take a look at any modern "Web 2.0" site. Post comments and write blog links are everywhere. Games are starting to embrace this, most obviously with things like Mii creation, but also more crucially things like screen shots and movies. Last generation, there were loads of movies created by fans using their favourite games, just search YouTube for Halo 2 Red Vs. Blue if you don't believe me. Or Halo Music Videos But this generation, things can get a little more advanced. With the ease of online, users can work together to make really good content. The online community is ready to embrace you.

So, do we need online? It definitely makes developers lazy, both with length of single player and bug fixing, but mulitplayer is usually the most fun element in a game and online multiplies that tenfold. I recently marked Metroid Prime 3: Corruption down for not having it. It would be, quite frankly, hypocritical to say no to online, as I just finished a Halo game online. However, one thing that might be possible if a developer was feeling really kind, and in some ways Metal Gear Solid is going to do this, is ship the offline portion on the disk having spent all the development time creating it. Then, because it will take a few months for everyone to complete, they develop the online portion and deliver it digitally. People who don't have online won't receive it, but it doesn't matter, because they won't be using it either. However, this won't happen as people are buying short games at full price. What I think we are going to see, however, is single player stuff being added later for a fee. Please leave your thoughts, comments and suggestions how I can make these articles better in the remarks button below.
----------------
Now playing: Oasis - The Importance Of Being Idle
^^D'ya get it?!
via FoxyTunes