3DDS Missed a trick

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.

Mass Effect 2

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.

Darksiders [Xbox 360]

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

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.

Forza Motorsport 3 First Impressions

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.

Halo 3: ODST

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.

Forza Motor Sport 3 Demo

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).

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 thoughts

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.

Fable 3

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?

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

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

Project Natal = new console?!

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 - Microsoft Press Conference

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.

1. A big addition to Fable 2 - most likely
2. Fable Wars - a RTS based on the Fable franchise - not likely
3. 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

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.

Fable 2's second DLC announced

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.

Resident Evil 5 Demo Impressions

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.

Braid Blew My Mind

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

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.

2008 Analysis

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

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?