Final Fantasy VII vs Ocarina of Time: Which to remake

Two absolute classics

I was posed with an interesting question yesterday. If given the choice which would I rather have remade with the best current technology; Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time or Final Fantasy VII. Both these games are close to my heart so it was quite a difficult decision. Each of these games contributed greatly to the industry as a whole and even had genre defining attributes. So which deserves a remake? Let's break down the individual elements. (Please note: I'm not going to take into account that Ocarina IS being remade right now for the 3DS)

Remakes aren't quite as prevalent in gaming as they are in movies, and they take on a different form. Generally in movies a person wants to apply their own artistic view on a subject so they remake it. In games a remake tends to be a few minor gameplay tweaks and a major overhaul to the graphics. Case in point: the remakes of the early Final Fantasy games for the DS and the Monkey Island 1 and 2 remakes. I'm explaining this to create a clear line between a remake (re-creating and updating content), re-imagining (redefining the source material in a new and usually drastically different light), and reboot (forgoing source material and sustaining core elements). This article is only discussing merits for a remake, as that was the original question.

Story

Both these games have landmark stories, but they couldn't be more different. One involves time traveling to save a princess and a kingdom and the other… well, I've read dissertations on the story of Final Fantasy VII. Simply put, a lot of people love these stories all based on taste, it's simple vs grandiose. In my opinion Final Fantasy VII comes out ahead, the narrative in this game is epic, and deserves to be experienced by a new generation.

World and Setting

Hyrule is awesome, it harkens back to the day of good 'ol swords and sorcery fantasy, but we've seen it… a lot. It's been seen in different forms and while not hyper realistic HD graphics (wow!) it has been thoroughly done. It pains me to say this because I really do love Zelda games, but something needs to change. It's pretty sad when the Final Fantasy series is more innovative and adept at trying new things. Final Fantasy VII has a robust and engrossing world filled with characters to chat up, side quests to undertake, romance, action, adventure! It has it all! Ocarina and VII have beautiful worlds to explore, but just based on sheer variety I'd have to go with Final Fantasy VII.

Gameplay

This is another category based solely on opinion, because honestly is just comes down to which genre you prefer. Ocarina is a fantastic action adventure game while FFVII is a great JRPG. One has you swinging a sword and grappling to walls with the press of a button the other has you strategically planning your next five moves. However, Final Fantasy VII also showed us just how many amazing mini games you could squeeze onto three PS1 discs. Whether snowboarding, riding your motorcycle or piloting a submarine, this game had quite an abundance of extras that were worked into the story incredibly well (even the ability to replay them!).

Ocarina had some great dungeons and puzzles (including the infamous Water Temple). The combat would still be the same essentially, no matter how HD it is. I don't really care if I can count all the hairs on Clouds head as he swings his ridiculously phallic sword, or if I can see the thread count in Links sweet hat. I can't really choose a winner in this department because somedays I'll feel like an action game, somedays a JRPG. As for applying new technology though, I think improved AI would make for some fascinating and intense battles in Final Fantasy VII, can you imagine if the Weapons were smarter?

Other remakes/re-imaginings

Ocarina was a great success and Nintendo does this funny little thing whenever it has a great success: It remakes that game over and over until it stops being successful. Zelda and Mario are the worst offenders here. There is no denying that Ocarina is a great game, it is certainly one of the all time classics, but it has been remade again and again (referring to the similarities in Zelda games since Link to the Past). I don't really have an issue with playing the same game over and over with minor differences but when it comes to a remake, I'd rather a game get remade that hasn't been done so many times. Also, looking at how the Zelda games have evolved what would you get with a remake? HD graphics, maybe some voice acting NPCs, and perhaps some enhanced puzzles. Enemy AI could be improved but you'd still just be swinging a sword or shooting your bow. Link still won't talk… and he's no Gordon Freeman.

On the Final Fantasy side of things you have an interesting trend. Much like Nintendo a few years ago Square Enix realized the last game that people really loved was Final Fantasy VII, so they decided to go back and milk that cow till it was dead and dry. They made new games in the FFVII universe and told new stories. A sequel movie and game and two prequels. It was a great time to be a FFVII fan, for the most part. The games on whole lacked the charm of the first thus never struck a chord with the fans. Though Crisis Core remains one of the most well written and intricately woven prequels I've ever played (and it's fun too!).

Final Verdict

Each respective franchise has seen it's growth and changes, but I think Final Fantasy has grown more and would have more to offer for a remake. Now, do I think FFVII will ever be remade? No, but that comes with a caveat. Square Enix holds the FFVII remake as a trump card, basically if they were ever to screw up so badly as to alienate their entire fan base *cough* Final Fantasy XIV *cough* they could throw down an announcement that they are remaking VII and everything would be right again. Now, here's why that will never happen. First, fanboys: they will always defend and love Squenix. Second, it would be nearly impossible.

Final Fantasy VII is such a huge, rich and deep game that to recreate the world and bring it to todays standards (Voiced NPCs, Cutscenes, fully rendered backgrounds) it would take Square Enix 30-40 YEARS to finish according to Final Fantasy XIII Director Motomu Toriyama. As for Ocarina of Time being remade, yes, I believe that will happen.

Ultimately though I don't think a remake of either of these games is necessary. They both had a huge impact on me and I don't need to experience them any other way than how the were intended. Yes, both would look stunning simply from an artistic standpoint, but honestly it's not that hard to pick up either game in it's original form and still be floored by it, and I think that speaks more highly of a game's merit than any remake ever could.

An early Tech Demo for the PS3 before it was released. Also, a game that will never happen

(...probably)

;D

Only Slightly Delayed: Prince of Persia Forgotten Sands

Prince of Persia has always intrigued me. I remember when Sands of Time came out on PS2 it got rave reviews and I wanted to play it, but I didn't do so until about 5 years later. I must say Sands of Time aged like fine wine. The Free Running platforming is smooth and fun and the combat, while weak, certainly got the job done. Why am I explaining how great the first was? Well because Forgotten Sands is essentially the same game with HD graphics. So is that good or bad? Read on to find out (oh how I love baiting muwahahaha)!

Forgotten Sands is an appropriate title because this game was literally forgotten in the series. The story places itself between the first and second games and it works well enough. Our young Prince Dastan finds himself in quite a pickle after his brother unleashes a cursed army. The story tries to play along the same lines as Sands of Time only with a "family ties" bend. It works, but won't be winning any awards. Also, take note, this has nothing to do with the movie Sands of Time even though they were released in conjunction… I'm sure that was just a coincidence the Ubisoft had a Prince of Persia game in production while Disney was producing a movie...

Story aside, this game functions like all the rest in the series; platforming and combat. The real reason you want to play this game is the platforming. Forgotten Sands offers up some excellent Free Running that is both challenging and rewarding. There were only a handful of times I felt the game "tricked me" into dying. The jumping puzzles require impeccable timing and button switching. Thankfully the Prince's ability to reverse time is back. Along with that you gain the ability to solidify water, replace broken surfaces and do a… warp kick… Believe me, by the end of the game you will be doing all these in rapid succession like a pro.

This is about the minimum number of enemies on screen at one time

The combat, much like Sands of Time, is the weakest part of Forgotten Sands. enemies come in predictable patterns and are dispatched by mashing attack and occasionally casting one of four magic spells. Sword attacks feel a bit sluggish but that is made up by the attack speed of your enemies being that of molasses going up hill in January… with crutches. Simply put, the fighting is easy and slow. There is no block, which can be frustrating at times, but the dodge roll often teleports you threw attacks. Your greatest foe tends to be the camera in the larger scale fights, particularly when your enemy is the kind that charges. However, my opinion on the combat changes drastically in the last quarter of the game.

You see toward the end you get the Master Swo… magic Mcguffin Sword of Solomon. After this the combat feels quick and responsive, because you are suddenly ridiculously strong. Every attack is a one hit kill, it seems odd, but with the sheer amount of enemies the game insists on throwing at you it really makes the combat flow far better. That, in turn, mixes the combat and platforming much more naturally. The combat becomes easy and fast, so you can get back to the juicy platforming faster.

The game is fun throughout but the last quarter of it is amazing. Honestly the set piece before the final boss had no right being that good. Basically (this isn't much of a spoiler but if you want the full impact DO NOT READ, skip to next paragraph) the last part before the boss takes place in a giant sand storm. You hop from piece to piece of broken palace fighting enemies occasionally. Granted it is fairly easy, the spectacle of it was just awesome. I haven't been floored by design like that since the Scarecrow levels from Arkham Asylum. the boss fight that follows is just average, but to be fair it's hard to top crazy sand storm tornado parkour.

So that's Forgotten Sands in a nutshell. The platforming is top notch, but the combat leaves much to be desired. The end of the game is great but the middle drags ever so slightly as fighting becomes more prevalent over platforming. I got this gem for $10 and it was worth every penny. If you're a fan of the series you should definitely get it. Honestly, it's worth it, even if only for the penultimate scene. One last gripe though, Prince Dastan looks weird. It's almost like they started with the idea this was going to be a movie tie in then couldn't afford Jake Gylanhopperwhosit... He just looks... off...

Maybe it's just me... But Leeanne agreed...

Only Slightly Delayed: Killzone 2

KZ2: Pure, Unadulterated Eye Candy

The first Killzone is one of my all time favorite First Person Shooters. Available on the PS2 it went for a very heavy approach to war. You were able to play as 1 of 4 unique soldiers as you fought off the invading hordes of Helghast. It was tonally quite different from other FPS' out at the time and a breath of fresh air in my opinion. Nowadays though gritty, dreary war games are a dime a dozen. So how does Killzone 2 hold up? Read on to find out.

Killzone 2 opens with an all out assault on the plant Helghan. Helghast are the big baddies of the KZ universe and now you're stomping on their turf. The story is generic; you play as the unstoppable one man army Sev. Basically plot points are just mission objectives on your way to capture Vasari (the main bad dude). It works well in the context of the game and fills in the cracks adequately enough. The end was really great though, even if it was just sequel baiting. The story uses rising action to great affect. It builds up to epic proportions then does a sweep kick and knocks you off your feet with this helpless feeling. moments later you're back up again for another rising action and climax.

Lets be honest though, not many people play First Person Shooters for the engaging narrative, they want to shoot things. The first thing you will probably notice is that this game is stunning. Just like the first this game is fistfuls of setting, tone and realism wrapped up in a gritty sci-fi package. Simply put; it is awesome. Now, when it comes to shooting things the major aspect that sets Killzone apart from other First Person franchises is the feel of the gameplay. While basically every FPS goes for a very light and fluid approach Killzone mixes it up by adding something: weight. No, I don't mean you feel like a portly soldier plodding and wheezing across the battle field. You can feel the weight of your gun and equipment as you heft it around corners and through the ruined cities. Guns punch with recoil, enemies drop hard, and movements take effort. It might take some time to get aquatinted with, but in the end it feels very natural and actually helps draw you in.

There is also a cover system that works well enough. If you don't use cover you die, luckily it is abundant and doesn't rely on gimmick. In Quantum of Solace when you pop behind cover the camera shifts from first person to third. It works for Bond but it would have felt awkward here. This game survives on immersion and they never break it.

Helghast: with a name like that how could they not be evil?

I did miss the squad based mechanics of the first game. Here you play as Sev the entire time where in the first you could play as 1 of 4 each with their own unique style. It was a nice distraction and lacking in the sequel despite the fact you're usually with at least one other member of your squad. I doubt they will add this in KZ3 but here's for hoping.

They're currently taking pre-orders for Killzone 3 and I must admit, I'm very tempted to get this day one. However, I remain steadfast the Worlds Worst Critic so I believe I will wait for it to drop down to the delightful $12 I purchased KZ2 (gotta love black friday). So to wrap this up, KZ2 is great game. It is heavy both in the games mechanics and story. The Killzone series is very much a sci-fi retelling of World War II an it works. KZ1 was Pearl Harbor (The Helghast invade the ISA planet Vekta) and in KZ2 you take the fight to them. However, toward the end it strays a bit from the formulaic approach and takes the story in a far more tragic direction. I'm interested to see where this series will go next and glad to say that I made it through this review without any mention of another inferior sci-fi FPS… Turok. ;D

Happy Holidays everyone! I know this article is a bit short but I've just finished several games and I've got to many "games as art" articles on the back burner to focus on really fleshing these Only Slightly Delayed games out. Fear not my loyal readers! I have a surprise coming for my fast approaching 50th entry!

This is actually from KZ1... I just love it because KZ1 has my favorite sniper scope EVER

Top 5 Movies of 2010

Spurred on by a random question of the week (thanks Pedro) I decided to do a little end of the year article on my top 5 movies of 2010. This is easier than top 5 games, because I go out to the movies a lot, but I don't really play games the year they come out, so I'd be more apt to do a "Top 5 Games of 2009 or 2008ish... or 2005". So without further ado here is The Worlds Worst Critic's Top 5 Movies of 2010!

5. Shutter Island

Martin Scorsese is a fantastic director. Lauded by the like of Robert Ebert he changes things up a bit for Shutter Island. The slightly fantastic and mind messing elements of this film are great, it's Scorsese doing the modern "artsy" approach and it works well. This movie provided a fantastic sense of paranoia and had a great payoff. The last line has an eerie resonance and what is akin to a wink and a nod. This is a perfect blend of old hollywood and new, well worth a watch.

4. Jackass 3D

You can read my review for this film here. To sum it all up, this film rises above its immature aspects to become something wholly unique. It is about friendship, it gives words and images to something almost indefinable. While not for everyone this was probably the biggest surprise of the year for me. If you have a strong constitution I highly recommend it.

3. Toy Story 3

Seeing as a PIxar film was my favorite movie last year it's not to hard to imagine why Toy Story 3 is on this years list. Simply put it is beautiful, not only in how it looks, but how it brings to end a story I (and most of you) grew up with. It's exciting and touching, it amazes me that pixar can bring out more emotion in a group of toys than most movies can with real world subjects. The end of this film will have you in tears, assuming you have a heart that is.

2. Inception

I wanted to give Inception my top spot, but it got beat out ever so slightly. This movie is amazing. The plot is NOT convoluted or overwrought (as some would say), it's easy enough to follow and the description alone should have you clamoring to see it. Again, like in all my top 5 it is the subtle aspects of the film I enjoy the most. Yes there are grandiose dreamscape action sequences and a plot about being in a dream in a dream in a dream and so on. There is also subtlety though, in a way that shows what regret can do to a man, and what love is. If you haven't seen this film yet, please do. The ending will definitely have you talking.

1. Scott Pilgrim Vs The World

I am a nerd. If you read my blog you probably know that, I just wanted to make it clear that Scott Pilgrim is Nerdvana. It is single handedly not only a perfect graphic novel adaption, but also a fantastic video game movie. That's right, despite not being based on a video game it seems to defy (or transcend) genre logic and become a game movie, only it's good (and the game for the movie was good too). Directed by a personal favorite of mine Edgar Wright (Hot Fuzz, Shaun of the Dead) the editing is fast and furious and the dialogue takes center stage. This movie may have underperformed at the box office, but rest assured, it is still an epic of epic epicness.

So there you have it, my top 5 movies of 2010. Inception has a game in the works and I positively can't wait for it. If you were wondering my top pick for movies in 2009 was "Up" and my pick for 2008 was "Brothers Bloom". I insist you watch both, they will make you a better person. The holiday season is in full swing so I hope everyone is staying safe. I'll be back to report on all the awesome games my wife gets me!

Only Slightly Delayed: Assassins Creed II

I just finished Assassins Creed II under what I would call unique circumstances. You see, while I was playing AC2 my wife was playing AC1, so I was able to play the sequel with a visual replay of the first almost simultaneously (Insert outdated "yo dawg" joke here). While I remember and enjoyed the first just fine this former/latter duality really helped drive home what an incredibly successful sequel AC2 is.

Assassins Creed II is a special game. It was made on the shoulders of a predecessor that was lauded for its vision but criticized for its execution. To make my stance clear I was not one of those people. Yes, the first Assassins Creed was repetitive but I didn't mind. I was weaned on games like Mega Man, so repetition doesn't bother me much as long as it has some context. In AC1 it was the simple and sometimes mundane tasks before tackling an assassination.

This game stands so far above AC1 it makes it almost hard to see what an achievement the first was, which is exactly what a sequel should do. Every aspect was improved upon and overhauled. The missions take place in a dynamic format instead of a linear one. No more slogging along from task to task, now you get an assassination and you do it. Lets break down the individual elements shall we?

Combat is similar to the first in that it is terribly easy. There are plenty of new weapons thrown in the mix to spice things up, but it ultimately boils down to the same thing. certain enemies have their particular weapon of weakness and those that don't are easily dispatched by counters. Also the dual wrist-blades, while awesome, are incredibly overpowered... but then again maybe that's a good thing. One of the best parts of AC2 is that it nails the aspect of being a master assassin. You can sneak in, take out your target and sneak out (or you can go in guns blazing... literally).

In the story department AC2 really took off. Characters are given life and meaning beyond simple dialogue exchanges. Ezio Auditore de Firenze (yeah, I know) is a terrific lead as compared to his somewhat bland "modern day" counterpart Desmond. He is charming and skilled where Desmond is whiny and bumbling (though 'ol dessy is getting better). I have to admit, when AC1 came out I was skeptical about the DNA memory story, but the more I see of it, the more I love the two weaving story lines between past and present. I'm not going to spoil it, but the end of AC2 was just fantastic, a bit weird, but seriously, fantastic.

As for the gameplay AC2 is great fun. The linearity of AC1 is gone, you are given much more free range here. The old assassination structure was dropped in place of a more modern mission (or "memory" in the game) based structure. This means less monotony and more murdering evil guards (because they're all evil, right?). The new mission structure is just about the most welcome deviation from AC1 they could have made. No more completing the same five tasks before an assassination, now every mission has a context.

Of course, the running, jumping, climbing and general galavanting is all back in full force. The parkour is always fun, and is used to great strengths with stealth. Shimmying behind an enemy to sneak into a haystack then snagging the unsuspecting guard is both fun and rewarding. Ultimately the free running and missions just mesh better than they did previously because of the new take downs (hanging, hidden). You can be very, very sneaky here.

The voice acting is another huge step up. Our main man Ezio actually has an accent (Take that, Altair)! Kidding aside though, the acting is terrific. All character models animate beautifully both in and out of cutscenes. The chattering of NPCs are more diverse from the first, but you will still here a lot of the same conversations.

In AC1 you could collect flags to distract you from the main story, or save civilians in trouble like a blood thirsty batman. In AC2 these distractions return in form and greatly improved. There are now races, assassination contracts and citizens to assist along with the best new addition: economy. Granted, the economy here is on a small scale; you inherit a villa and are tasked with making it a shining jewel. Ultimately this ends up being a tad easy, but a fun distraction none the less. You can buy paintings and display armor and weapons to increase the value of your estate and also upgrade it with cold hard cash you acquire from missions, chests and *ahem* less scrupulous means. There is a bit of a balance issue though, and about halfway through the game you will have more money than you know what to do with.

The final aspect of AC2 that just blew me away were the locales. Florence, Venice, they just pop off the screen! Ubisoft really managed to make these cities come alive and become characters in their own right. The drab colors of AC1 are gone and replaced with the vibrant beauty of Italy. The scenery is gorgeous, to the point where (and this is an oddity for me) i actually wanted there to be a day/night cycle... but that is another topic for another day.

So to sum it all up, I had a great time playing AC2. It is head and shoulders above the first game and shows off what a sequel should be. The new features implemented all work wonderfully (though the income/economy needs some work) and it left me wanting more. I can't wait to try Assassins Creed: Brotherhood and the DLC for this game (I'll see about posting a brief review of the DLC when I get around to playing it). So yes, I know you've heard it already, a year ago when this game came out, but it is awesome. Requiescat in pace.

And Now For A Topic of Controversy

Well, it has happened again. If you keep up with my blog (or know me IRL) you probably know that I keep as up to date as possible with my game industry news. As such, I frequent several game related sites on a regular basis to keep informed. Once again, however, what I've found has left me disheartened. A while back you may recall I wrote a blog on a deplorable article out of IGN. The latest news outlet (if it can even be called that) to catch my scorn is Screw Attack.

I don't usually go to screwattack.com except on occasion for an AVGN appearance and rarely for the poor mans Napoleon Dynamite: Keith Apicary, but I usually get all of that from the hub I do frequent Gametrailers.com. Out of sheer terror I watched a headlining video today about the top ten sexiest outfits in gaming. Congratulations Screw Attack, for making a little piece of me die in horror.

Why not go the whole 9 yards and tell her to get in the kitchen

This Top Ten list single handedly proves just about every negative stereotype surrounding the term gamer. These are your people, they are; sexist, homophobic, slanderous, chauvinistic, foul mouthed, men-children. What are women for in games? Well that head scratcher is answered within the first 15 seconds, they smell good and they're nice to look at! Really? Is that the important role that the narrator is referring to? Their role can't be more important than that, after all, Samus gets points taken off for TALKING (I understand critical acclaim wasn't so great for Other M, but come on, that's way out of context) Your intellect should feel pretty well insulted by now, so lets just move on.

This was not an exercise in trolling, Screw Attack is one of the many organizations that presents itself as a legitimate face to video games. They exclaim to the world that "gamers" can't go 5 seconds with out something being over sexualized or ultra violent. My best friend happens to be a woman (and my wife) and I like to think she plays a larger roll in my life then just being a pretty face (though she is a very pretty face :P).

As my good friend Jeremy says, lets Ba Ba Ba Ba Ba Ba Ba Ba Ba Ba break this issue down, get ready for the heavy stuff. Art imitates life, now compare the women you know in real life to the ones in games. How many women do you know that dress like girls in games? Not to many, certainly not every girl on the street. How many girls from video games can even hold a candle to a real world counter part? It's pretty pathetic how few. Females can do more than just "get kidnapped" or "sex things up", a woman can be more than just a plot device. One again I will refer you back to Extra Credits for a deeper look into this issue.

We need to try harder people. For the love of everything good and sweet in this world we need to put a little more effort in understanding the world around us and applying that to video games as an artistic expression. Games are not just for children, true, but that doesn't mean they have to be made by pandering to hormone raging teens and young adults. I know I sound like a buzz kill, and I'm not trying to push sexual repression because intimacy is important to art and the human experience and that's what I'm all about at this blog; Games as art.

Fleshed out female character or just a flesh female character?

On Sushi and Fanboys

Final Fantasy IX

When someone asks me what the best RPG is I want to immediately shout Final Fantasy IX (that's 9 for you non-Romans) and start listing the plethora of reasons that I hold this particular gem above all others. Instead of doing that though I will generally say that the best RPG that I have played is Final Fantasy IX, and then list the reasons why it resonated with me. Yes, even I have an inner fanboy, we all do. I've written on this subject before so I hope you're ready for another small helping of today's topic: Fanboys (and girls).

An observation I made with my wife recently refreshed my interest in the subject. You see, we go out to Sushi a lot, and here in beautiful southern California there happens to be a Sushi place on every corner. The sheer number of Sushi joints might seem amazing, but that's not what is. What's actually amazing is the amount of these places that are "the best". I just have to chuckle to myself every time I hear the phrase "this is the best sushi place" or "they have the best sushi in California". I'm oft reminded of a certain quotable quote "Napoleon, like anyone could even know that".

Best, as an adjective adverb or noun is almost always subjective. Now, is it a bad thing to let excitement grab hold of us? Well, yes and no. Excitement can be contagious, but in effect of opinions it can also be dangerous. I'm not excluded from this myself. More than once I've come across a person with similar taste in "bests" and it creates an atmosphere that is nearly electric. Giddy is a good way to describe it when I can talk to someone about the clever undertones of FLCL, or the impact Pokemon Red/Blue had on our youth, or that The Bouncer is actually a fun game.

We use best as a way to translate complex emotions into one word that says it all. This (object) is the best, it is #1 to me, and that is largely (or entirely) based on my opinion. If someone agrees, awesome! If they don't, awesome! Because they're entitled to their own opinion as well. I can (and do) say that I have the best wife in the world, and I can admit to having a bias, but I know several good friends that would disagree with me and say they have the best wife. This sort of back and forth is fine, it's well within the definition of a fanboy (yes, I'm a fanboy of my wife, she's freaking awesome) but avoids the dark and gloomy borders of that other type of fanboy.

That other type, as I wrote in my last blog, is the one who is blind. Their game, movie, band or whatever has no faults, and they will defend it to the death. This leads to trolling, flame wars, and incessant name calling among other things. These are the dangerous waters. Things like the "Console Wars" are raged by the fanboys, the ill mannered kind who find the best way to build up the system they purchased is by knocking all the others down. Sony, Apple, Nintendo, and Microsoft do not care what you think, they are big boys and can defend themselves.

As for "best", it's all just semantics, but I prefer to limit its use. After all, if we live in a California where all the Sushi places are the best, are any of them really?

Don't Hate the (Multi)player... Well, maybe a little...

I need to make my stance on something clear, because the clever among you may have noticed some omissions from my game reviews. I don't do online multiplayer. I know this is odd, especially in todays market, but I've always seen it as an addition. Please, allow me to explain my personal opinion.

Now let me get this point across, I am NOT saying that online modes aren't fun. I've put plenty of hours into multiplayer and I think it's entertaining. I just never considered it to be a main feature of a game because that's not where the value is for me. Granted, there are plenty of games where it is the main feature, but that is quite different from what I'm talking about here. Personally I find the intrinsic value of a game is its single player campaign. This is where, generally speaking, all the proper elements are introduced and executed. Thus multiplayer is a sort of game in a game (play Death Match or Capture the Flag) and while that is cool, it's ultimately novel, like a mini-game. All to often though online multiplayer is an after thought.

Whoever won the match has a lot to be proud of... right?

Not to sound harsh but the efforts put forward in online multiplayer are generally fruitless. This, in addition to the fact that the online community is akin to the Mos Espa Cantina, make me agree with the likes of Yahtzee that a game must stand on its single player campaign alone (For being such a mild mannered critic I find that I agree with him quite often). Extra Credits (a show you should certainly be watching if you read my blog) just posted an awesome video about the Skinner Formula of game design. Essentially games are designed for compulsive behavior rather than engagement and online games tend to be the worst offenders. Again, don't get me wrong, it's fun to play a few rounds with friends, and the tools we have now-a-days like voice chat make it even more personal if you can't be in same room as a buddy. However, Skinner-esque game design is lazy and does nothing for any genre.

There have been some games lately that attempted to stretch out the idea of what online multiplayer could be. Good examples are Resistance 2's robust multiplayer story campaign, which took elements from the single player side and added them to the standard multiplayer. This essentially added a whole extra game to Resistance 2. Also, Bioshock 2 made the multiplayer portion take place during the Splicer uprising, instead of just tacking it on. This tie in to the arching story of Bioshock made it just a step above being just another "Death Match" with a Bioshock skin. I'm also curious to try Assassins Creed: Brotherhood's multiplayer. Another great online multiplayer is Left for Dead 2. This series provides a sort of narrative lite while making you work together and face down a zombie apocalypse in "episodes". Again, it's something I prefer to play on LAN with my fiends, but it still is a step in the right direction.

You work together or you die.

While I feel that online modes tend to be like fish out of water compared to the single player proper, I absolutely love co-op games. Resistance: Fall of Man had an absurd co-op campaign in which one person plays as Nathan Hale, the protagonist who is introduced as the only American to survive this "alternate history D-day". Player 2 is assigned the role of a silent soldier who despite being attached to Nathan Hale at the hip is never mentioned once. This is the definition of tacked on multiplayer but there is a very simple joy to be found in playing through that campaign with a friend (splitscreen only). Even without having an impact on the story you experience it together, which is terrific fun.

Ultimately though I'm just stuck in a simpler time when multiplayer was a four person round of Golden Eye. I really have to praise Scott Pilgrim Vs The World: The Game for using local co-op for that true old-school vibe. Yes, I have a bias. I was lucky enough to find a girl who will play video games with me for the rest of our lives, so local co-op isn't hard for me. I get to enjoy games with my beautiful wife instead of some foul mouth 10 year old.

What really grinds my gears is that now-a-days online modes have gone from extra to standard. Just because some games are built around an online component doesn't mean that every FPS or action game needs them. It just seems ludicrous that a game can be scored down for not having this extra… it's an extra for a reason.

I'm certainly a minority in my opinion of online play, and don't worry, multiplayer isn't going anywhere. The fact of the matter is that publishers have a reason for including this mode now. Halo and Call of Duty have pushed this feature into the limelight. Online multiplayer is now the glue to keep you attached to your purchase so you don't trade it in. That's why community is pushed so hard: score, experience, rankings, leader-boards; all these things are in place to keep you coming back for more. So we have two choices, continue to be amused by Skinners Box, or introduce some forward thinking, and come up with a new standard for the "standard" multiplayer.

Now for the good. The key aspect of multiplayer is the Unique Experience. It's those unscripted moments that are so hilarious or so epic that you have to applaud the luck, skill, timing, or whatever elements took place in its coming about. Now, this isn't restricted to multiplayer, but the community aspect means that it certainly does it best. When crafting a single player campaign developers need to realize how important the unique experience is. Scripted events are nice, but to many of them and you end up with an analog controlled Michael Bay film.

What Online multiplayer lacks is the Core Experience. The ability to emotionally draw in and invest the player (Please note; MMORPGS are excused from this, but only slightly). Things like choice and consequence, emotional resonance, these are lost in an online match. Call of Juarez 2: Bound in Blood (a game I will be reviewing soon) had an incredible single player story. The end had me just about speechless. So did any of that carry over to the online mode? No. Such a wonderfully crafted journey boils down to a game of sheriffs and bandits when taken online.

So what needs to happen? Well, better design first and foremost. The current standard works fine, and there are those who might say if it's not broke don't fix it, but I feel like there is so much more that can be done with this side of the industry. If you read my blog regularly you know I push games as art, and that means every aspect of games, even the aspects I don't usually care for, like online modes. Millions of people love online multiplayer, and it is fun, but that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. And whatever you do don't use the argument that "it captivates millions of people, so it must be good right?" Because the same argument can be used for Baseball, Avatar, and Twilight.

Of All the Rotten Luck: A Review of The Zombie Island of Doctor Ned DLC

(An Only Slightly Delayed Review)

Well, I finished the first chapter of Borderlands DLC, the Zombie Island of Doctor Ned. Much like the core game I had very mixed feelings about it. So how mixed were these feelings? Were they mushy and weird like the zombies I so elegantly dispatched? Read on to find out.

The first thing that The Zombie Island of Doctor Ned (hence forth ZIDN) did right was narrative. Despite the lack of a blue-ish hazy lady Gearbox still managed to deliver more then the scraps of a story the core game gave us. ZIDN starts with a great narration from the burly Russian gun dealer who is telling a story to a small child about the exploits of the Vault Hunters after they found the vault. The banter between the two is great and the voice actor for the little boy really steals the show. That said, this still only barely qualifies as a story.

You start off in Jakobs cove, where all heck has broken loose. There is a zombie-apocalypse going down thanks largely in part to the evil Dr. Ned and the ignorant Jakobs corporation. It's up to you to set things right the best way you know how, a liberal application of bullets. The story doesn't evolve beyond this, it's really just a one note hunt for a mad man with a few side quests where you… well… hunt for other mad men.

As DLC goes it gets the job done. This is the same Borderlands just with a neat zombie esthetic, nothing more. The missions are brief and fairly simple and it doesn't go out of its way to shake up the formula, adding only a few new enemy units like the loot goon (who is basically just the incredible Hulk with a weapons cache strapped to his back).

The length of the game is ridiculously padded with combat. In Borderlands you didn't have to fight every enemy, you could speed past them in your car (by the way, no vehicles in Jakobs Cove). In ZIDN however, you're dealing with zombies, and you have to kill every single one. It grew to be quite ridiculous how many zombies I had to put down. You shoot one and they all start coming down on you, and if your objective is in that are you best hunker down and shoot, because if you blow past them you'll have an army on you in no time.

To be honest though, I really enjoyed this DLC. There were fewer bugs and issues, though I did still experience a fair share of unintended deaths from going down a non-designated path. ZIDN actually reminds me a lot of the old Duke Nukem expansions. It also shares the same humor as 'ol Duke. There's a lot of tongue in cheek humor in ZIDN, and they go beyond Mad Max jokes (a-thankyou). It's just a new skin, but in the end that's all it needs to be. Yes it rides the zombie trend (a trend I don't mind… too much), but it also takes another stab at a cohesive narrative and does a lot better then the core game. There's still more DLC to go though, so let's see how Gearbox does with DLC pack #2 Mad Moxxi's Underdome Riot.

Thanks Gaming

I have a lot to be thankful for; a roof over my head, a beautiful wife, a loving family, fantastic friends, and food to eat. Aside from the things we take for granted like shelter and food I thought I'd write a little nostalgic piece, here's an ode to the games I'm thankful for. Keep in mind this is more a trip down memory lane for me, but I will try to relate it to reasons why we [the industry] should all be thankful for these games.

Keep in mind these are not micro reviews, but don't be surprised if I do review them sometime down the road. So here it is in no particular order, my list of a few games I'm thankful for.

Deus Ex: The Conspiracy (PC/PS2)

Deus Ex was ported onto the Playstation 2 in 2002 (2 years after its PC release) and it was a game changer. Granted, even at the time the game may have looked dated, but it never felt dated. The open environments and branching paths made this one more than a little special. I hold this game up as the grandfather of modern "Nerd Person Shooters" Like Borderlands and Fallout 3.

The story alone made this one worth the price of admission. Luckily the gameplay was up to the task of matching the engaging narrative. While the voice acting, animation and graphics are somewhat laughable (especially by todays standards) this still stands as a testament to great game design. There is a prequel being developed now that looks to try and capture the same magic Conspiracy had (after one lackluster sequel).

Jak and Daxter (PS2)

I remember seeing the first promotional material for Jak and Daxter in PSM (The unofficial Playstation magazine). From the distinct art style and beautiful environments to the platform driven gameplay I was hooked. When the game eventually came out I was not disappointed at all. Everything was exactly as a I wanted it, as though Naughty Dog read my mind and made my perfect game.

There's just something amazing about the world of Jak and Daxter. The voice acting and animation is spot on, and the interaction between the two heroes is priceless. This is a world that I can visit again and again. While I love the sequels, I must admit that the original will always be held highest in my heart.

Mega Man Legends 1 and 2 (PS1)

The first Mega Man Legends was probably my favorite game for the PS1 (until Mega Man Legends 2). Once again, it was the world that Infaune and Capcom created that drew me in. I've been a fan of Mega Man since the NES days, but this is exactly what I wanted. Legends is a story driven Mega Man game with a fantastic action/RPG feel. With plenty of weapons and equipment to unlock these games held my attention of a long, long time.

It was recently announced that Mega Man Legends 3 is being developed. Unfortunately, shortly after this announcement Keiji Infaune left Capcom. He is the creator of Mega Man and was extremely excited for Legends 3, even saying that he really had to fight for the game to get made because the Legends series isn't really a best seller. So it seems odd for him to leave at the beginning of the project, but Legends 3 is still in development. this game is at the top of my most wanted chart.

Sam and Max Hit the Road (PC)

I remember playing Sam and Max back in the day with my best friend Jake. We couldn't get enough of the irreverent humor and darn near impossible puzzles. Upon playing the game again I have found that it is now even funnier, not quite as hard, and wonderfully nostalgic.

The old Lucas Arts adventure games have certainly aged well, like a fine wine. The graphics might not be a crisp 1080p but it doesn't matter. Games like Sam and Max, Money Island, and Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis are relics of a time when game design was more then something esthetic.

Final Fantasy VII (PS1)

This is the game. Final Fantasy VII absorbed my life. Looking back I can't believe how robust and full this game is. Everything in it elicits a memory, and I searched every nook and cranny of that world. The story is absurd (in a good way) and sometimes borders on silly, but it's something that is missing in todays market. FFVII is probably one of the most widely recognized RPGs of all time. Granted, it might not deserve all the praise it gets, but it still holds up as a fun and engaging story, full of melodrama and action. There are mini games and side quests to distract from saving the world (even a theme park!). The JRPG is dying, sadly, but luckily we will always have FFVII to hold onto.

Final Fantasy IX (PS1)

That's right, another Final Fantasy. IX was very different from VII, while VIII adopted VII's futuristic feel and added nothing but new, terrible elements. IX went back to the series roots. Final Fantasy IX was unique, it was a step forward for the series while paying homage to the past. It used a classic fantasy setting with a sweeping and absolutely gorgeous art style. IX was the optimism to VII and VIII's pessimism.

The story was, of course, one of global catastrophe that our heroes must end. Instead of being cliche, however, the effort in the story is primarily focused on developing the characters. It has probably the most credible love story of an Final Fantasy and certainly has the most moving and profound moments. One in particular is when you stumble upon the Black Mage village and your young friend Vivi discovers his heritage… It's… well, you'll just have to play it.

Ico (PS2)

Ico holds a special place in my heart because quite simply it is a game that is also a work of art. you could literally hang a TV in an art gallery and just let someone play it and I know people would begin to recognize that our medium has more then just some significance as art.

Ico is a quite game, there are not vey many enemies, most of the challenge comes through platforming puzzles. All you do is rescue a girl, then guide her by the hand out of an enormous castle. The sweeping vistas are breathtaking, and the close ups show a relationship between a boy and girl that doesn't need to be cluttered with dialogue to evolve. There is an HD remake of both Ico and Shadow of the Collosus (another stunning game that is proof of games as art, it didn't make my list only because it really isn't nostalgic to me). I can't wait for the HD versions of these games.

So there you have it, my short list of games I'm thankful for. This is not nearly all of them, and I tried to stick to older games for nostalgia's sake. There are plenty more like The Bouncer, Sly Cooper, and Ratchet and Clank. Don't worry though, faire reader, these games will get their treatment in time. Reviews are coming after I'm out of my Turkey Coma and finished recovering from Black Friday. The last generation of gaming (PS2, GC, XBOX) was incredible, and I aim to make sure no one misses out on these "oldy but goody" games. They're fun, fantastic, and cheap. So until I get around to that, I'll end by asking: what games are you "thankful for"?

Only Slightly Delayed: Borderlands Review

Two bulky stereotypes and two scrawny stereotypes? Check.

I managed to finish borderlands this weekend, and to be honest, I was disappointed. Now that isn't to say it's a bad game because it really is fun. No, much like a parent laying the guilt on heavy I am disappointed in what Borderlands was because of what it could have been. What follows is going to sound like a lot of ranting, and it is, but I want to start it by saying that I really did like Borderlands. There are bugs and issues but overall the game is incredibly addictive. I suppose I had to high of hopes, but Gearbox did a good job.

Borderlands starts out interesting enough, you get a bit of backstory about the planet Pandora (no, not that Pandora) and the elusive Vault. You see, the Vault is what the story hinges on in Borderlands, or at least that's what you would expect from the opening cinematic. The Vault is what you are supposed to be searching for throughout the game, a legendary treasure trove that may be a myth. Unfortunately the first place the game goes wrong is in the story department.

When the credits rolled I counted 8 writers that worked on this game (and 21 QA, but I'll get to that later). I find it completely unbelievable that they had 8 people writing for this. At first glance Borderlands is filled with personality, but that opinion will change the moment you play it. All missions are told through text descriptions given from a character or bounty board. Now I understand why a bounty board would just have a message, but honestly, the game's "crazy" characters don't even talk to you.

The moment that Borderlands fell flat on its face for me was when I reached New Haven, a small town populated by NPCs. Upon seeing these lifeless drones just standing (or sitting) unflinching in the same position only made me realize how dull and void all the previous areas had been. These NPCs were not an improvement over the dull and empty "town" of Fyrestone (where the game begins). The appearance of these lifeless characters was like eating a fistful of grass to make one realize the mud they had earlier wasn't quite so divine. It's kind of embarrassing that Shenmue, a game that came out 11 years ago, has a more vibrant and lively world than Borderlands. As a matter of fact, the only people you will come across besides the lifeless drones are hundreds upon thousands of freaks that want to kill for no reason other than "they're crazy".

Beyond a few generic lines of dialogue, these characters don't evolve at all

The character dialogue, what little there is, is delivered almost entirely through vending machines. Basically there is a machine for medical supplies, ammo, guns, and cars. Each one has a "quirky" character assigned to it that'll talk while you buy supplies, spouting the same five lines of dialogue over and over. The same can be said of Clap-trap, the resident robot guide and mission informant.

The true story elements are introduced by a bluish hazy lady that appears at the top right of your screen maybe five or six times over the course of the game to tell you where to go next and that it will be very difficult (despite the fact the missions tend to be Trivial in difficulty). There are vague references she makes toward the end of the game that she might not be your average run of the mill bluish hazy video girl, but that is completely dropped by the time the credits roll in what I am calling the worst ending of the year. I was amazed at how little care was taken with the end of the game. Here comes a *SPOILER* so duck and cover if you don't want to be spoiled rotten, skip to the next paragraph NOW. In the end you open the vault and a big monster comes out, you kill it, the video lady says good job. The end. That's it. You don't see what's in the vault, you don't get any character resolution, you get nothing. A little video showing a ninja clap-trap assassin that you have to buy DLC for doesn't count.

So yes, they dropped the ball in the story department, but what about the rest of the game, we're not playing a book after all. Well the rest of the game is quite addicting and belongs to a category I lovingly refer to as "Nerd Person Shooters" this is a new genre of shooter that includes games like Fallout 3, or going way back, Deus Ex: Conspiracy. In a Nerd Person Shooter the game focuses more on statistics than actual first person shooting skills. It's basically FPS meets RPG. Unfortunately for Borderlands there were more than a few hinderances to this formula.

When the enemy knows you're there hit detection is spot on

One issue I had was with the games hit detection. I am fairly adept at First Person Shooters, especially where sniper rifles are concerned. In borderlands, however, I was reduced to newb status through no fault of my own. I was a Hunter, which is a class specifically for sniping, but no matter how long I would take to get a perfect bead on an enemy when I fired that first shot if he was not aware of my presence it would miss 9/10 times. Regardless of how high my stats were I'd miss, this is an issue with hit detection, not my skills. Do not question my skills.

This is where I bring up my other major gripe. Quality Assurance. Now you see I do this for a living, I make sure that several websites are up and running with no bugs or glitches. Much like Fallout 3 this game is buggy as an entomologists office. There are a great many places that you can slip into and get stuck, which is especially frustrating around an objective. Aside from spotty hit detection at a distance there is also an issue with going out of bounds. Usually when a game has an invisible wall it will either turn you around or give you a countdown to flee the area. In Borderlands almost no warning is given and you'll find that stumbling into death happens a bit to frequently.

Death brings me to one aspect I greatly enjoyed about Borderlands, the "Second Wind" System. Basically, if you die you are given a small amount of time to "fight for your life" and by taking down a nearby enemy you will pop back up with full shield but low health. Since dying costs money (hand over fist by the end of the game) this system is greatly appreciated. There is just something awesome about being taken down, then getting a rebuttal, and a little revenge. Just be sure not to kill a guy at the same time you die.

One last gripe: yes, this is a loot whore game, I don't mind that. What I mind is having to pick up every bit of ammo and having the hot swap button the same as the pick up button. Several times I would unintentionally equip something without knowing (usually a shield, grenade, or class mod) that would severely stunt my character. If you're going to make us pick everything up then please don't use the same button for auto equip.

This is what co-op looked like for me, Lee is a Siren and I'm a Hunter

Despite all these complaints I must say that over the past few weeks I've really been addicted to this game. The multiplayer component is fun and intuitive and playing co-op is fantastic. I'm not a fan of online multiplayer, I love splitscreen co-op but not anonymous stranger stuff. That said, Borderlands will punish you for playing single player, honestly that's what it feels like. An example: Before a boss fight you will hit a check point, say you get him down to 1/4 health then die. You will re-spawn instantly right in front of said boss, you'll have no ammo, and they'll have full health. However, if playing with another player, you pop back into the battle and the boss will still have the same amount of hurt you laid on them before you bought the farm.

For the sake of beating a dead horse I have to say one more time that I really enjoyed Borderlands. The RPG lite leveling system is fantastic, with just enough room to make you feel like a bad@$$ without getting out of hand. The gameplay was engaging and addicting and despite my gripes I continued to play all the way to the end (and beyond as I'm playing through again with my wife), and on top of that I've already downloaded one of the expansion packs. It fascinates me that a game I have so many complaints against (remember, worlds worst critic here, that's a TON of complaints for me) could hold my attention and keep me so occupied. I plan on getting the rest of the DLC and reviewing each in turn to see what else Gearbox has up their sleeve. So as a final word I'll say this, play Borderlands if you think you fit into the Nerd Person Shooter niche, but don't come here looking for a good story… At least, not yet.

Will I be able to figure what keeps drawing me to this game?

Will the glitches and bugs get the best of my patience?

Find out in the next exciting installment of Only Slightly Delayed: Borderlands!

To be continued in: Borderlands DLC: The Zombie Island of Doctor Ned

Dr. Halo, or, How I Learned to Stop Being a Fanboy and Love Video Games

My latest blog entry has spurred me on to finish a piece I have had in the works for quite some time. You see, with the incredible reception of Black Ops there was a misunderstanding. Many people just denounced this as Fanboys doing what they do. The success of this game, however, reaches far beyond that. Here we will make a clear distinction between a fan, and a fanboy, and how a horde of fans can set a world record, and change our industry.

Lets start with the Fanboy/Fangirl (we have to be PC after all). Now then, it can be very easy to confuse a fan with a Fanboy. They will both say things like "This is the best game ever/of all time/is awesome/is epic!" In short, they will love the game. Where the two groups divide (unintentionally, mind you) is in knowledge. A Fanboys greatest weapon (in his/her mind) is the knowledge they hold of their beloved franchise. It's more than a game just being fun, they will defend characters, story, gameplay elements, even the development studio.

"It's 'Aerith' you troglodyte!"

This is the gap between a fan and a fanboy. You honestly can't believe that "Dark Knight" did so well because of fanboys. Yes, there are a great many Batman fanboys, but there are is an even bigger mass of fans. It was the fans that pushed the box office take of Dark Knight through the roof, and the same can be said of Black Ops.

Lets take a closer look at a fan. A fan is simply a person who enjoys something, they would 'like' the profile for Scott Pilgrim Vs The World on Facebook, but they wouldn't spend their spare time writing reviews for every product released (oh snap, what did I just say about myself). Fans tend to enjoy something for face value, and while they might encourage others to experience it, they won't attempt to convince in any way other than "It's really good, you'll love it"

To go back to fanboys, they take things to the next level. They dissect and evaluate, the good ones will criticize elements that deserve it and compliment those that are above and beyond. The flip side, obviously, are the fanboys that ignore all faults and praise the glory of their franchise to the ends of the earth. In short, they lack either reasoning skills or critical thinking. We need to put an end to the rampant fanboyism people, this is a detriment to the game industry. I don't have a problem with games that are "Middle of the road", but praising mediocrity will only result in mediocre games. It's ok to be a fanboy, but don't let it blind you.

Hear no, See no, Speak no evil against your favorite franchise

So What does it all mean? This represents a change in the tide, this is the rock solid proof of the industry turning mainstream. What was once niche and surviving because of fanboys has grown into something that a great many people enjoy and appreciate. This happens with every medium and its about time it happened to games. If this sounds frightening, well… it is and isn't. This is growth, and good for such an amazing medium. At the same time it could represent growth in the wrong direction. We want video games to grow upward, strive for goals that are artistic and have value. Publishers (the people that actually spend money for a game to get made) want to see it grow large (think: fat instead of tall). This will result in the continuation of "Trend Gaming" where the publisher only green-lights games that are selling now (see any military FPS' set in current day lately? How about set in WW II a few years ago).

Fans have officially power-grind the game industry to a level up, and now you know what, in my opinion, that means for our future. We are at a cross road and must decide whether we will become bloated and stagnant, or push toward diversity and something better. So let's encourage publishers to take chances, and for developers to express themselves.

As an Endnote: If you're wondering about the title being Dr. Halo, that is because in my humble opinion, there are more Halo Fanboys than Fans. If you're insulted by how that sounds don't be. People love the games and they are quite good for the most part. Also, one more thing, it is perfectly acceptable to be a fanboy of my blog. In fact, you probably should. Go get a T-shirt made.

Infinity Who?

As I mentioned in my last review (Scott Pilgrim Vs The World:The Game) I am currently three games behind on the Call of Duty series. This is not due to any dislike of the franchise. I genuinely enjoy the games and appreciate the over-the-top spectacle they've become. The only reason I haven't been able to keep up is financial for the most part, though one reason is because the games don't rank terribly high on my 'Need to Play' list.

So of course I was interested in Black Ops, I really do want to play it (though I want to beat World at War and Modern Warfare 2 first). Black Ops has held my attention recently, however, for another reason entirely. I wanted to see the sales figures. Sales figures often interest me, simply to see what people are buying, but this was different, there is a conclusion to be drawn at the end of this road about a group of folks known commonly as gamers.

You see, the Call of Duty franchise has traditionally been made by two separate developers. The power house 'Infinity Ward' put the series on the mainstream radar with Modern Warfare (Call of Duty 4) then Treyarch came in and used the same engine to develop an interim title World At War (Call of Duty 5). Now, Modern Warfare was such a huge success that Infinity Ward began working on the sequel almost immediately, while Treyarch's game was released in the mean time.

Don't look for this logo on any future COD games

World at War was a solid game but it was certainly not as polished as MW. This is due in no small part to the fact that Treyrch's development team was split in half the other half working on Quantum of Solace, which also uses the MW engine. To not get to much into the nitty gritty (this really isn't supposed to be a COD article) after the release of Modern Warfare 2 the head honchos at Infinity Ward got in a dispute with Activision (Owner of the COD license) and the big A cut them loose. Most of the MW development team followed suit and left, afterward Infinity Ward was essentially dissolved and all the power and glory of the COD franchise was placed squarely in the lap of Treyarch.

Now here's the thing, it really seemed like back in the day most folks knew that World at War was made by a different studio. If you look at the charts sales went down for World at War (Post Modern Warfare), and then skyrocketed for Modern Warfare 2. So that is why I was so interested in seeing the launch sales numbers for Black Ops, a Treyarch game. I figured at this point because of all the press coverage over the two heads of Infinity Ward leaving, more people would be aware that this Call of Duty was made by a developer different than the ones responsible for last years behemoth. So would this be the begging of the end for the franchise? A slow decline with the departure of Infinity Ward?

Well, no.

Sales figures just came back and Black Ops actually out sold Modern Warfare on launch… That's just staggering! This game raked in $360 million from 5.6 million Units Sold, almost an entire million more than Modern Warfare 2, and snagging the title of best first day ever (source). So what does this say about us?

Well, it could say many things to be honest. Perhaps this means the gaming community as a whole is somewhat less informed then previously speculated. The controversy over the departures and dissolving of Infinity Ward was no where in sight on launch day obviously. In hindsight, I highly doubt more than a fraction of the people who bought it are well read in industry news. Maybe people were just sick of World War II shooters and didn't want to play World at War.

No, unfortunately what we are probably seeing here is what Jeremy eluded to briefly in his blog, essentially; the masses. The masses are not here to promote video games as an art form, or push developers to make better games. The masses come for one reason only, a sick game of C-O-D bro. Ultimately there's nothing wrong with that, I mean, it's just people having fun and that's what games are made for right? But we can't forget that is not all they are made for.

Sick Game of COD BOP?... Actually, that sounds disgusting...

Scott Pilgrim Vs The World: The Game: The Review

As of today I am currently 3 entries behind on the Call of Duty franchise with the release of Black Ops. Unfortunately for the good people at Treyarch my money belongs to one man today, Scott Pilgrim. Today, November 9th, is the release of Scott Pilgrim Vs The World on Blu Ray and DVD. What better way to celebrate the release of this incredible movie (which you all need to go out and buy, now!) than to review the game!

Before I start this review let me first explain just how bias I am. First and foremost I love Scott Pilgrim, both the books and movie. Second I am a sucker for retro style 8-bit stuff. That said, Scott Pilgrim Vs The World: The Game is like a perfect storm for me.

A brief synopsis: SPVTW: The Game is based on the 6 graphic novels that the film is based on (Note: not based on the film). Basically the graphic novels themselves are set up like a video game in which our hero, Mr. Pilgrim, must defeat his new loves 7 evil ex boyfriends. The world of Scott Pilgrim is easily one of its most fascinating aspects. Bryan Lee O'Malley crafted a comic book world with heavy video game influence. So how does that translate to an actual game?

The art style of SPVTW is reminiscent of the books, but at the same time is injected with a delightful bit of nostalgia. Levels play out like a side scrolling beat 'em up with quirky 8-bit graphics. But it goes beyond just the look of the game, small nods to classic games can be found at every corner. Bosses blink when low on health, giant blocks with question marks deliver coins upon impact, and there are these "subspace highways" you can find that perfectly emulate NES glitches, and my personal favorite: a world map. Simply put, it's fantastic.

On top of all that the game never feels old. It takes massive strides to invoke nostalgia but all the while feels fresh and new. Contributing to this is the leveling and shop systems. SPVTW features a RPG lite level system from beating baddies and collecting experience. This can be further augmented by stopping in the various shops and spending your hard earned cash on items (most of which are cleverly named after new and oldschool games/characters).

The gameplay itself actually improves as you improve. The game starts out a bit on the sluggish side, your characters hits a bit slow and you'll be taking a lot more punches then you dish out. As you level up you you'll get faster and unlock sweet new moves to ease the pain of getting constantly beat down by nameless thugs, which brings us to the difficulty.

The game starts out a bit difficult, and it's tough to beat the first level without dying at least once. The game is made substantially easier with proper mastery of the block button, seriously people, learn it love it. After you gain a few levels though, you'll be right on your way to Gideon, especially if you have some help. Like all the old arcade quarter eaters SPVTW is made to be played with friends. 4 of your favorite people can play at a time as either Scott, Ramona, Steven Stills, Kim Pine, and the newly downloadable Knives Chao (Mr Chao and Nega Scott are also unlockable).

Co-op works as expected and one of my only gripes, no drop in drop out, has been fixed with a recently released downloadable ad on. Friendly fire can be turned off, which is greatly appreciated as sometimes higher level characters can toss an item the will bounce on the edges of the screen and do some serious damage to a lower level friend. The only other aspect I didn't quite like in co op was whenever you play with a friend the "Guest's" levels and stats don't get saved.

Another aspect of SPVTW I have to gush on is the sound and music. Again, I will admit to nostalgia, but this is the best gosh darn soundtrack I've heard since World of Goo. As you might have guessed the music follow suit with the rest of the game and goes for an all out assault of chip-tunes goodness (a soundtrack I now own in full, thank you Amazon). The music is attributed to Anamanaguchi and is entirely original. This stuff is classic, it was made based on the oldschool philosophy of gaming and something that almost no one could pull off today: How to loop a track for an entire level without it getting repetitive or annoying. I could play these levels over and over with the same track playing in the background and still be humming the tune long after I turned off the game.

Fun old school game play with catchy music and slick retro visuals; In the end all of these elements come together to form one spectacular package. This game has it all! Anyone can easily justify the $10 for this one, so do yourself a favor and pick it up. Scott Pilgrim's game is no less awesome than his books or movies, and you should know how ridiculously awesome those are.