Bonfire Studios Interview

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

Ten things killing and saving the video game industry

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

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

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

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?

NXE First Impressions

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

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

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

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.