I came home today and, as per the norm, one of the first things I did was look at my instant messaging client that I never close. I had a few messages from various times throughout the day, and the last one was simply a link. Naturally, I clicked on it.That link can be followed right here.
It took me to the fairly simple flash game that you likely see before you because, knowing gamers, you're likely an impatient little bastard. As you move around in the odd-gravity platformer that it is, more of the level shows itself to you. As you do so, soothing, gentle music plays. There's no enemies, no butt-bouncing, no score, no real objective even, but it's nearly impossible to not play it.
While I'm certainly not going to cough up 60 bucks for a game like this, big-name developers should give it a definite play-through. It has a sense of exploration, wonder, and discovery that very, very few retail games actually manage to capture with all of their fancy graphics and animations.
Portal is perhaps the most recent game I can think of that managed to capture some of it, though even then, the environments felt so pre-made and designed that it took away from a large part of that.
The best example of a sense of wonder and exploration that I can remember in a retail game has to go to Morrowind. That massive world, littered with ruins, small villages, and seemingly random characters was one that you wanted to walk in for hours, and many people have.
There's other good examples of this too, of course. You could easily place worthy arguments for Oblivion, Fallout 3, BioShock, Mass Effect, Borderlands, and even Halo 1 if you mean the more open levels. I pulled big-name titles, but compared to how many I have on my shelves, it's a very small number, and most are built with exploration or wonder as one of the main goals.
More and more open-world games are coming out all the time, but GTA and its clones aren't making their worlds any more interesting. They still feel very flat, lifeless, and built entirely for the player. If worlds were built with more levels of character interaction and backstory, it's already a step in the right direction. If you then follow that up with interesting level design, you really have something other developers just aren't doing.
Referring back to my previous list, Morrowind and Oblivion both have fairly good character/race interaction, making the world seem more politically grounded and plausible. Morrowind's interesting physical world adds to this by giving the story an interesting and diverse setting. Oblivion dropped the ball on the physical world, giving players only a few unique areas and then repeating the rest until you knew exactly was over the next hill.
Fallout 3 has an interesting world with it's 50's themes and bulky technology. Considerable variety makes the player interested in exploring this world, and a fair amount of loot to be found rewards such explorers.
BioShock is perhaps the most odd inclusion of the games in that list, since the game is fairly linear. But its interesting characters, story, and unique visual style make it one game that sticks with you.
Perhaps what the industry really needs is better writers that work with the level designers. What's important to remember about most games is that it should really be one team of people working on it, not all of the different departments working on the same thing but separate from each other.
8.09.2010
Staring at the Menus 001
I am finally sitting down to do something that I have been meaning to for some time, and that is introducing this new kind of post that I am thinking of making relatively frequently. They aren't reviews in any sense of the word, rather, they are simply going to be me talking about video games. No specific topic. I'm just going to sit down and write about whatever I feel like sharing. Needless to say, a great many of these will sound very opinionated and ranting.
The name originates from those times that every gamer gets where you find yourself sitting in front of the TV, paging through the menus of your favorite game, and having absolutely no idea what you want to play. However, if anyone has a better idea for a name, please let me know at any of the three ways to contact me that I've helpfully arranged to the right of the column you're reading right now.
For my first opinionated rant, I want to tackle common themes in racing games. Specifically, the complete denial that anything but complete realism exists. Not all games are a victim of this trend, but I see fewer and fewer non-sim racers every year.
I grew up on racing games, and became a fan of Gran Turismo shortly after playing the first game, so it's not that I just plain don't like sim racers, but I do prefer the now much more rare arcade racers that used to fill most of my time. Blur is one of those rare arcade racers that still fills a good portion of my time.
Forza is the perfect antonym to Blur; there's nothing that shouldn't be in a pure simulation. In this, there is a certain beauty to it. However, this is also a shining example of most racing games that have released in recent years. Think back and try to remember the last big non-sim racing game that isn't Blur or Split/Second. Hard, isn't it? PGR is the only one I can think of, and even that series was closer to realism.
One big area of difference regarding racing games is in download-only titles, where they are smaller, quick-fire style games that are generally simpler and more arcade-y anyway. These games tend to have arcade physics, favoring quick acceleration, forgiving crashes, and grippy cars over their more realistic counterparts.
It's not that sim racers don't have a place in the market, but I want to know where all of the arcade racers have gone. Even Need For Speed is becoming cold and realistic. Is the problem really that games like Gran Turismo and Forza are as popular as they are, so they're muscling arcade racers out of the market? Or is the industry just so caught up in making everything look next-gen that they've lost sight of what makes a game fun? Only time will tell if arcade racers dies out, but I'm going to enjoy the ones we have for now.
The name originates from those times that every gamer gets where you find yourself sitting in front of the TV, paging through the menus of your favorite game, and having absolutely no idea what you want to play. However, if anyone has a better idea for a name, please let me know at any of the three ways to contact me that I've helpfully arranged to the right of the column you're reading right now.
For my first opinionated rant, I want to tackle common themes in racing games. Specifically, the complete denial that anything but complete realism exists. Not all games are a victim of this trend, but I see fewer and fewer non-sim racers every year.
I grew up on racing games, and became a fan of Gran Turismo shortly after playing the first game, so it's not that I just plain don't like sim racers, but I do prefer the now much more rare arcade racers that used to fill most of my time. Blur is one of those rare arcade racers that still fills a good portion of my time.
Forza is the perfect antonym to Blur; there's nothing that shouldn't be in a pure simulation. In this, there is a certain beauty to it. However, this is also a shining example of most racing games that have released in recent years. Think back and try to remember the last big non-sim racing game that isn't Blur or Split/Second. Hard, isn't it? PGR is the only one I can think of, and even that series was closer to realism.
One big area of difference regarding racing games is in download-only titles, where they are smaller, quick-fire style games that are generally simpler and more arcade-y anyway. These games tend to have arcade physics, favoring quick acceleration, forgiving crashes, and grippy cars over their more realistic counterparts.
It's not that sim racers don't have a place in the market, but I want to know where all of the arcade racers have gone. Even Need For Speed is becoming cold and realistic. Is the problem really that games like Gran Turismo and Forza are as popular as they are, so they're muscling arcade racers out of the market? Or is the industry just so caught up in making everything look next-gen that they've lost sight of what makes a game fun? Only time will tell if arcade racers dies out, but I'm going to enjoy the ones we have for now.
6.01.2010
Blur
Game: Blur
Developer: Bizzare Creations
Release Date: 5/25/10
Multiplayer: Online, 2-20; Splitscreen up to 4; System Link, 2-20
Distribution Method: Disc (Retail)
Price: $60.00
Anyone paying at least a little attention to my Twitter feed (shameless plug: @Takarias) has surely noticed a deluge of updates bearing the hashtag #blurthegame. Most of these were from the Beta, but now that the full game is out, you should expect to see a lot more. I also feel it would now be prudent to write up a review and finally end my spree of not updating this blog for no good reason. So, let us now begin:
Blur may be trying to market itself as something unique by saying that it's 'powered-up racing,' but really, it's a kart racer in every sense of the term. The world is colorful and easy to read, and the tracks are generously dotted with the various powerups you'll be using to rip your opponents a new one. But that's not to say that the game is little more than a generic rip-off of a tried-and-true genre, Blur is very much a good game in its own right.
Steering clear of the usual big head/little car asthetic, Blur takes a much more mature and realistic approach, with all of the cars liscensed and looking good. Blur manages to step away from the pack by also having very colorful imagery, despite the realistic spin on things. Scenery is detailed, but also vibrantly colored, clearly identifying walls and other objects as they whiz by. Powerups cast colorful light on the track, and attacks are glowing supernovas that wouldn't look out of place in a Devil May Cry game.
The UI is similarly alive with animations, colors, particles, and plenty of nice touches, though some text might be a little too small for a smaller SDTV. Since almost all menu text is one of a few shades of blue, some of the information can blend together a bit, but this doesn't pose too much of a problem.
While racing, the HUD is awash with points and various counters, yet still manages to make the most important information very easy to read. Large neon color-coded icons float behind your car, letting you easily see what powerups you have, the map is on the large side and clearly shows approaching turns, and your current position is emblazoned in the opposite corner. Your speed, however, seems at first to have been left out - which would be fine - but it's actually tucked away into a corner of the map and is rather small.
Vehicles handle quite well, with a good feeling of how heavy a car is in realation to the opposition. Being an arcade racer, cars either fling through corners at breakneck speeds without ever losing grip, or drift wildly through turns, screeching tires protesting loudly. Cars accelerate quickly, and using a wall to turn is a perfectly legitimate strategy. If you like arcade racers, Bizzare has a pretty solid one right here.
Speaking of which, Blur's online component is full of unlockables, modes, mods, cars, and all the goodness that holds it all together. Modes vary widely for a racing game, with team modes, destruction derby-style events, a powerup-free hardcore mode, and a playlist that randomizes all of the rules.
Online multiplayer is set up very similar to the system popularized by COD4. You gain on-track fans to increase in rank and thus unlock new vehicles and mods. The mods are analogous to COD's perks, and there's a few that are pretty interesting, like one that causes your car to be invisible, or split mines into smaller ones as you drive close to them.
Combat feels fast and powerful, with music deafened by the force behind attacks. Unleashing a powerup makes your screen come alive with neon pyrotechnics, and sends other cars flying into the air or into walls.
Much like other combat racers, getting hit once can be your demise as you fall into the waiting hands of the pack. Particularly online, opponents are ever-willing to destroy you and wear your bumper as a trophy. This can get a bit irritating, but there are enough powerups scattered about that you should be able to quickly find one with which to seek your revenge.
Blur is pretty well-balanced, with cars unlocked later not being horribly better than previous cars, and powerups having very clearly defined roles. Mods can save your ass, but never make a player overpowered. Even so, joining late might be a bit less enjoyable that starting day one, since you do unlock nicer stuff later on.
_________________________
Bottom Line: Blur is a solid racer with a unique graphical spin on combat racers. If you liked a Kart game at some point, you have a new - more mature - home.
Developer: Bizzare Creations
Release Date: 5/25/10
Multiplayer: Online, 2-20; Splitscreen up to 4; System Link, 2-20
Distribution Method: Disc (Retail)
Price: $60.00
Anyone paying at least a little attention to my Twitter feed (shameless plug: @Takarias) has surely noticed a deluge of updates bearing the hashtag #blurthegame. Most of these were from the Beta, but now that the full game is out, you should expect to see a lot more. I also feel it would now be prudent to write up a review and finally end my spree of not updating this blog for no good reason. So, let us now begin:
Blur may be trying to market itself as something unique by saying that it's 'powered-up racing,' but really, it's a kart racer in every sense of the term. The world is colorful and easy to read, and the tracks are generously dotted with the various powerups you'll be using to rip your opponents a new one. But that's not to say that the game is little more than a generic rip-off of a tried-and-true genre, Blur is very much a good game in its own right.
Steering clear of the usual big head/little car asthetic, Blur takes a much more mature and realistic approach, with all of the cars liscensed and looking good. Blur manages to step away from the pack by also having very colorful imagery, despite the realistic spin on things. Scenery is detailed, but also vibrantly colored, clearly identifying walls and other objects as they whiz by. Powerups cast colorful light on the track, and attacks are glowing supernovas that wouldn't look out of place in a Devil May Cry game.
The UI is similarly alive with animations, colors, particles, and plenty of nice touches, though some text might be a little too small for a smaller SDTV. Since almost all menu text is one of a few shades of blue, some of the information can blend together a bit, but this doesn't pose too much of a problem.
While racing, the HUD is awash with points and various counters, yet still manages to make the most important information very easy to read. Large neon color-coded icons float behind your car, letting you easily see what powerups you have, the map is on the large side and clearly shows approaching turns, and your current position is emblazoned in the opposite corner. Your speed, however, seems at first to have been left out - which would be fine - but it's actually tucked away into a corner of the map and is rather small.
Vehicles handle quite well, with a good feeling of how heavy a car is in realation to the opposition. Being an arcade racer, cars either fling through corners at breakneck speeds without ever losing grip, or drift wildly through turns, screeching tires protesting loudly. Cars accelerate quickly, and using a wall to turn is a perfectly legitimate strategy. If you like arcade racers, Bizzare has a pretty solid one right here.
Speaking of which, Blur's online component is full of unlockables, modes, mods, cars, and all the goodness that holds it all together. Modes vary widely for a racing game, with team modes, destruction derby-style events, a powerup-free hardcore mode, and a playlist that randomizes all of the rules.
Online multiplayer is set up very similar to the system popularized by COD4. You gain on-track fans to increase in rank and thus unlock new vehicles and mods. The mods are analogous to COD's perks, and there's a few that are pretty interesting, like one that causes your car to be invisible, or split mines into smaller ones as you drive close to them.
Combat feels fast and powerful, with music deafened by the force behind attacks. Unleashing a powerup makes your screen come alive with neon pyrotechnics, and sends other cars flying into the air or into walls.
Much like other combat racers, getting hit once can be your demise as you fall into the waiting hands of the pack. Particularly online, opponents are ever-willing to destroy you and wear your bumper as a trophy. This can get a bit irritating, but there are enough powerups scattered about that you should be able to quickly find one with which to seek your revenge.
Blur is pretty well-balanced, with cars unlocked later not being horribly better than previous cars, and powerups having very clearly defined roles. Mods can save your ass, but never make a player overpowered. Even so, joining late might be a bit less enjoyable that starting day one, since you do unlock nicer stuff later on.
_________________________
Bottom Line: Blur is a solid racer with a unique graphical spin on combat racers. If you liked a Kart game at some point, you have a new - more mature - home.
2.11.2010
Mass Effect 2
Game: Mass Effect 2
Developer: BioWare
Release Date: 1/26/10
Multiplayer: None
Distribution Method: Disc (X2) (Retail)
Price: $60.00 USD
Mass Effect 2 had perhaps the perfect hype machine, giving us just enough details to keep us interested, but never blowing itself out of proportion. The game itself is a similarly orcestrated concentration of good, never overloading you on flashy graphics and cutscenes, but still leaving you begging for more.
Perhaps the weakest element in the original Mass Effect was the gunplay. While it was interesting for a while, it quickly became repetitious and somewhat stale. This is no longer the case, as combat feels powerful and threatening. Enemies constantly push forward, making cover both invaluble and easy to lose.
Biotic and tech powers come back into play, and are considerably more useful than in the original game. This comes with improved squad control, with often-used commands mapped to the D-pad. While the D-pad makes moving your squad to cover a simple point-and-click away, aiming and timing squad (and your own) powers is often better suited for the scene-pausing power wheel.
Gunplay feels very solid, with weapons sounding more impressive, and being more visually noisy, than their earlier versions. The main change to gunplay comes by the way of 'heat clips,' ejectible heatsinks that translate to ammo. In some ways, it's a welcome change; it challenges the player to be better with more weapon types, helps reinforce the importance of cover, and ejecting a used clip looks and sounds badass. In other ways, it's not such a welcome change; ammo is hard to come by mid-battle, weapon juggling is a new issue, and even though the clips are said to be universal, they 'lock' to a weapon once picked up, rather than adding to a shared stock.
Conversation is greatly impoved, in large part due to the greatly improved animations. While the conversation animations in Mass Effect 1 weren't bad, they seemed a little flat and sometimes ended strangely. In Mass Effect 2, characters walk around each other and animate more freely than before, and the animations don't end with the strange turn of old. This said, Miranda always seems to have a smirk on her face through the entire game, and is animated a bit more stiffly than every other character in the game. Because of this, I was expecting her to stab me in the back and never used her in my party.
Conversation itself is also improved, with some of the dilogue automatically chosen based on your last choice, and just more interesting options in general. Sadly, the "I should go" ending option is still more common than it should be.
The story is just as interesting as in the original game, and offers a good ramp up to a massive final game. There is plenty backstory and other new codex entries to explore, though the exclusion of the Mako is a little saddening. Driving about has been replaced with scaning planets for resources from orbit, essentially a game of pressing A when the controller vibrates.
Enemies lack variation, and the mindless and weak 'mechs' get boring fast, but come at you in droves. This doesn't detract from the core gunplay, but considering there are two discs, it would have been nice to see more enemy types.
The only real RPG aspect of Mass Effect 1, guns and gun mods, has been largely removed. Instead of a few hundred or so guns, there is now only a handful, though each one feels considerably more unique. Gun mods have been entirely removed, so assault rifles that never overheat, handcannons that can kill bosses in two hits, and shotguns that are more effective as multi-target sniper rifles are a thing of the past.
Overall, Mass Effect 2 is markedly better than the original, and sticks to what the original was close enough that it doesn't dissapoint. It's missing a few things that made the original game great many hours after the core game, but I've put maybe 50 hours into it and feel like there is a damn good amount I haven't seen yet.
_________________________
Bottom Line:
If you liked the first, you'll love it. It improves what was good about the original and adds more to it.
Developer: BioWare
Release Date: 1/26/10
Multiplayer: None
Distribution Method: Disc (X2) (Retail)
Price: $60.00 USD
Mass Effect 2 had perhaps the perfect hype machine, giving us just enough details to keep us interested, but never blowing itself out of proportion. The game itself is a similarly orcestrated concentration of good, never overloading you on flashy graphics and cutscenes, but still leaving you begging for more.
Perhaps the weakest element in the original Mass Effect was the gunplay. While it was interesting for a while, it quickly became repetitious and somewhat stale. This is no longer the case, as combat feels powerful and threatening. Enemies constantly push forward, making cover both invaluble and easy to lose.
Biotic and tech powers come back into play, and are considerably more useful than in the original game. This comes with improved squad control, with often-used commands mapped to the D-pad. While the D-pad makes moving your squad to cover a simple point-and-click away, aiming and timing squad (and your own) powers is often better suited for the scene-pausing power wheel.
Gunplay feels very solid, with weapons sounding more impressive, and being more visually noisy, than their earlier versions. The main change to gunplay comes by the way of 'heat clips,' ejectible heatsinks that translate to ammo. In some ways, it's a welcome change; it challenges the player to be better with more weapon types, helps reinforce the importance of cover, and ejecting a used clip looks and sounds badass. In other ways, it's not such a welcome change; ammo is hard to come by mid-battle, weapon juggling is a new issue, and even though the clips are said to be universal, they 'lock' to a weapon once picked up, rather than adding to a shared stock.
Conversation is greatly impoved, in large part due to the greatly improved animations. While the conversation animations in Mass Effect 1 weren't bad, they seemed a little flat and sometimes ended strangely. In Mass Effect 2, characters walk around each other and animate more freely than before, and the animations don't end with the strange turn of old. This said, Miranda always seems to have a smirk on her face through the entire game, and is animated a bit more stiffly than every other character in the game. Because of this, I was expecting her to stab me in the back and never used her in my party.
Conversation itself is also improved, with some of the dilogue automatically chosen based on your last choice, and just more interesting options in general. Sadly, the "I should go" ending option is still more common than it should be.
The story is just as interesting as in the original game, and offers a good ramp up to a massive final game. There is plenty backstory and other new codex entries to explore, though the exclusion of the Mako is a little saddening. Driving about has been replaced with scaning planets for resources from orbit, essentially a game of pressing A when the controller vibrates.
Enemies lack variation, and the mindless and weak 'mechs' get boring fast, but come at you in droves. This doesn't detract from the core gunplay, but considering there are two discs, it would have been nice to see more enemy types.
The only real RPG aspect of Mass Effect 1, guns and gun mods, has been largely removed. Instead of a few hundred or so guns, there is now only a handful, though each one feels considerably more unique. Gun mods have been entirely removed, so assault rifles that never overheat, handcannons that can kill bosses in two hits, and shotguns that are more effective as multi-target sniper rifles are a thing of the past.
Overall, Mass Effect 2 is markedly better than the original, and sticks to what the original was close enough that it doesn't dissapoint. It's missing a few things that made the original game great many hours after the core game, but I've put maybe 50 hours into it and feel like there is a damn good amount I haven't seen yet.
_________________________
Bottom Line:
If you liked the first, you'll love it. It improves what was good about the original and adds more to it.
1.28.2010
Serious Sam HD: The First Encounter
Game: Serious Sam HD: The First Encounter
Developer: Croteam
Release Date: 1/13/10
Multiplayer: Online Co-op, 2
Distribution Method: XBLA (Download)
Price: 1,200 MSP ($15.00 USD)
First, I must apologize for not updating my reviews as consistently as I should. I realize that you are all terribly disappointed in me and I likely no longer have any loyal readers. But, for those of you who have trudged through the days of nothingness, hoping against the goddess that I would update once again, I bring you: A review of Serious Sam HD: The First Enconter.
I must be frank with my readers that still remain; I have never played Serious Sam before. Heard of its near-infinite greatness, sure, but seen it for myself? No. With these expectations of grandeur, I began playing.
Turns out, Serious Sam is really effin' hard! It's also preposterously fun. The latter observation came first however, and this is what sucks you into the game. Within a few levels, however, it becomes clear that Croteam is comprised of experts in giving you just barely enough ammo to get by.
Serious Sam is a game of huge proportions, with some levels including massive open areas that feel like they must be able to contain entire levels from other games. Bosses are massive, filling these gargantuan areas and making them suddenly seem not so large.
While the game's bosses are irritating to be sure, they are often not as difficult as the rest of the level they are in. Enemies are often hidden around corners, spawned in odd areas, or spawn as you become trapped in a secret.
Each level is riddled with secrets, with most of them blessing you with hidden ammo, armor, or health. Sadly, most of these secrets turn into deadly traps that cripple you for the rest of the level. This makes secrets something to avoid rather than hunt for.
Gameplay is often a mix between tearing through week foes while running from bomb-laden suicide troops and desperately trying to gun stronger enemies down from afar. While this sounds incredibly entertaining - and very well can be - it often becomes trying and irritating. Croteam spawns hundreds of enemies at you, often all at once, and gives you barely enough ammo to kill them.
Given this difficulty, I ended up restarting the game and lowering the difficulty twice, giving myself infinite ammo the second time. While this didn't make the game the insanity-fuled run-and-gun game I was hoping for, it made the game playable.
_________________________
Bottom Line:
A pretty arcade game with very solid core gameplay, but numerous issues that lead to a difficult and often irritating experience.
Developer: Croteam
Release Date: 1/13/10
Multiplayer: Online Co-op, 2
Distribution Method: XBLA (Download)
Price: 1,200 MSP ($15.00 USD)
First, I must apologize for not updating my reviews as consistently as I should. I realize that you are all terribly disappointed in me and I likely no longer have any loyal readers. But, for those of you who have trudged through the days of nothingness, hoping against the goddess that I would update once again, I bring you: A review of Serious Sam HD: The First Enconter.
I must be frank with my readers that still remain; I have never played Serious Sam before. Heard of its near-infinite greatness, sure, but seen it for myself? No. With these expectations of grandeur, I began playing.
Turns out, Serious Sam is really effin' hard! It's also preposterously fun. The latter observation came first however, and this is what sucks you into the game. Within a few levels, however, it becomes clear that Croteam is comprised of experts in giving you just barely enough ammo to get by.
Serious Sam is a game of huge proportions, with some levels including massive open areas that feel like they must be able to contain entire levels from other games. Bosses are massive, filling these gargantuan areas and making them suddenly seem not so large.
While the game's bosses are irritating to be sure, they are often not as difficult as the rest of the level they are in. Enemies are often hidden around corners, spawned in odd areas, or spawn as you become trapped in a secret.
Each level is riddled with secrets, with most of them blessing you with hidden ammo, armor, or health. Sadly, most of these secrets turn into deadly traps that cripple you for the rest of the level. This makes secrets something to avoid rather than hunt for.
Gameplay is often a mix between tearing through week foes while running from bomb-laden suicide troops and desperately trying to gun stronger enemies down from afar. While this sounds incredibly entertaining - and very well can be - it often becomes trying and irritating. Croteam spawns hundreds of enemies at you, often all at once, and gives you barely enough ammo to kill them.
Given this difficulty, I ended up restarting the game and lowering the difficulty twice, giving myself infinite ammo the second time. While this didn't make the game the insanity-fuled run-and-gun game I was hoping for, it made the game playable.
_________________________
Bottom Line:
A pretty arcade game with very solid core gameplay, but numerous issues that lead to a difficult and often irritating experience.
1.18.2010
F.E.A.R. First Encounter Assault Recon
Game: F.E.A.R. First Encounter Assault Recon
Developer: Monolith
Release Date: 10/31/06
Multiplayer: Online, 2-16
Distribution Method: Disc (Retail)
Price: $14.99 USD (Used, good condition)
For the most part, I review new games to let you know if you should buy them or not, but every so often, I have to pick up an old game that people keep telling me about. Whilst browsing the shelves of my local game store, I happened upon FEAR and purchased it.
Starting out, the game feels very outdated in gameplay design, but as the game progresses, situations become more varied and help the game feel much newer. Enemies are split into groups defined by the various rooms, but this changes as the story ramps up, adding extra energy to the gameplay.
The main gameplay twist is the introduction of reflex time, which is essentially bullet time. This mode allows the player to run from cover to cover, dodging enemy bullets and firing your own with deadly accuracy. The mode is limited in use, and recharges over time, further emphasizing cover and adding a layer of strategy.
Finding good cover is especially important, as the AI will try to flank you restlessly. The AI is highly mobile, able to leap over objects and generally keep you guessing as to their next move. While not very effective while you're charging them in reflex mode, they are also able to pull tables out from walls to create cover for themselves.
Playing FEAR, several things become very readily apparent. Monolith is incredibly good at lighting engines, level design, scripted events, and sound design. Starting with the lighting engine, the game is very pretty. While some graphical flourishes are absent, the exaggerated lighting and particles make the game feel very high-energy.
Sound plays a key role in the world of FEAR, and is best experienced with a good sound system. Enemies are highly vocal, cluing you in to their locations and status, and almost everything in the game world make some kind of noise. Scare noises aren't overdone, and enhance rather than create the jump.
Level design and scripted events go hand in hand in the case of FEAR, and are done so well that I almost wish they would make a game that didn't have any gameplay beyond walking through a series of such events. Without any blatant clues like arrows or nav points, Monolith skillfully leads you through each level, pointing you in the right direction. Though it is highly rewarding to explore and find each of the health and reflex extenders.
While FEAR's level design is superb in most areas, the lack of any on-screen navigation or objective assistant can also be the game's downfall. Each level has one objective, rather than holding your hand the entire way. It is a welcome change from the 'follow the nav point' system most games have adopted, but it would be nice if the game had some system for detecting when you were lost and helping you out. To help any players stuck where I was, if you see barrels on a conveyor system, ride them.
The use of sound and audio cues is another grating error in very few instances. Some phones can be interacted with to learn more about the game's story, and there are a few phones that make a dial tone, but don't seem to actually exist in the level. I have spent a good amount of time trying to hunt these down to no avail.
_________________________
Bottom Line:
FEAR is a finely crafted experience that is a fun ride that holds up to this day. Worth a playthrough and fairly priced.
Developer: Monolith
Release Date: 10/31/06
Multiplayer: Online, 2-16
Distribution Method: Disc (Retail)
Price: $14.99 USD (Used, good condition)
For the most part, I review new games to let you know if you should buy them or not, but every so often, I have to pick up an old game that people keep telling me about. Whilst browsing the shelves of my local game store, I happened upon FEAR and purchased it.
Starting out, the game feels very outdated in gameplay design, but as the game progresses, situations become more varied and help the game feel much newer. Enemies are split into groups defined by the various rooms, but this changes as the story ramps up, adding extra energy to the gameplay.
The main gameplay twist is the introduction of reflex time, which is essentially bullet time. This mode allows the player to run from cover to cover, dodging enemy bullets and firing your own with deadly accuracy. The mode is limited in use, and recharges over time, further emphasizing cover and adding a layer of strategy.
Finding good cover is especially important, as the AI will try to flank you restlessly. The AI is highly mobile, able to leap over objects and generally keep you guessing as to their next move. While not very effective while you're charging them in reflex mode, they are also able to pull tables out from walls to create cover for themselves.
Playing FEAR, several things become very readily apparent. Monolith is incredibly good at lighting engines, level design, scripted events, and sound design. Starting with the lighting engine, the game is very pretty. While some graphical flourishes are absent, the exaggerated lighting and particles make the game feel very high-energy.
Sound plays a key role in the world of FEAR, and is best experienced with a good sound system. Enemies are highly vocal, cluing you in to their locations and status, and almost everything in the game world make some kind of noise. Scare noises aren't overdone, and enhance rather than create the jump.
Level design and scripted events go hand in hand in the case of FEAR, and are done so well that I almost wish they would make a game that didn't have any gameplay beyond walking through a series of such events. Without any blatant clues like arrows or nav points, Monolith skillfully leads you through each level, pointing you in the right direction. Though it is highly rewarding to explore and find each of the health and reflex extenders.
While FEAR's level design is superb in most areas, the lack of any on-screen navigation or objective assistant can also be the game's downfall. Each level has one objective, rather than holding your hand the entire way. It is a welcome change from the 'follow the nav point' system most games have adopted, but it would be nice if the game had some system for detecting when you were lost and helping you out. To help any players stuck where I was, if you see barrels on a conveyor system, ride them.
The use of sound and audio cues is another grating error in very few instances. Some phones can be interacted with to learn more about the game's story, and there are a few phones that make a dial tone, but don't seem to actually exist in the level. I have spent a good amount of time trying to hunt these down to no avail.
_________________________
Bottom Line:
FEAR is a finely crafted experience that is a fun ride that holds up to this day. Worth a playthrough and fairly priced.
1.12.2010
Slide Colors
Game: Slide Colors
Developer: Taykron Games
Release Date: 1/12/10
Multiplayer: None
Distribution Method: XBLIG (Download)
Price: 80 MSP ($1.00 USD)
Going through Indie Games is always an interesting task, and is very hit-or-miss. Sometimes, you stumble into a game that hardly has its controls figured out, and sometimes you find your way to a fine example of polished design at work. Slide Colors is considerably closer to the latter.
Though puzzle games are not generally my favorite genre, a well thought-out puzzle game can suck many hours of my free time into its square-shaped hell. Slide Colors does a damn good job of trapping my soul - in a good way - in an interesting twist on the tried-and-true gameplay of matching three colored blocks in a row.
Controls are simple, intuitive, and effective, and the menus are acceptably simple, intuitive, effective, and easy on the eyes. The playing field is a 7x7 grid of colored squares. Each color is also identified by a distinct symbol, making the game colorblind friendly. This is a nice feature, and unlike other games with colorblind modes that are hidden in the options, is not distracting to those that are not colorblind.
Slide Colors' simple gameplay is matched by being extremely easy to pick up on, but the game still manages to be an entertaining challenge. The real difference here is how you make matches, by 'sliding' entire rows and columns. This make the game seem a lot faster than Bejeweled, since you can make more than one match at a time, filling large sections of the screen with particles.
The three modes are surprisingly varied, with Time attack being your standard 'go as long as you can' mode. Puzzle mode eliminates your need to make matches, and instead challenges you to place blocks in marked positions. (It's actually more challenging than it at first appears.) Clear Blocks mode is perhaps the most interesting, as it tasks the player with having to remove all of the blocks you start the game with. Power ups and lots of quick thinking are your best friends here.
While a very good game, there are a few problems, mostly in sound design. The music is decent, though not perfect, but is far from the problem. The real problem is the sound for making a match, which Mac users will know very well as the sound you hear whenever a task is completed. It sounds nice at first, but gets irritating fast.
At only 80 MSP, Slide Colors is a well polished and thought-out puzzle game for your 360. While the sound design might be a bit lacking, it still stands as one of the most playable and entertaining Indie Games available. It is also among the few Indie Game puzzle games that I have enjoyed.
_________________________
Bottom Line:
Simple and interesting puzzle game that's a steal for only 80 MSP.
Developer: Taykron Games
Release Date: 1/12/10
Multiplayer: None
Distribution Method: XBLIG (Download)
Price: 80 MSP ($1.00 USD)
Going through Indie Games is always an interesting task, and is very hit-or-miss. Sometimes, you stumble into a game that hardly has its controls figured out, and sometimes you find your way to a fine example of polished design at work. Slide Colors is considerably closer to the latter.
Though puzzle games are not generally my favorite genre, a well thought-out puzzle game can suck many hours of my free time into its square-shaped hell. Slide Colors does a damn good job of trapping my soul - in a good way - in an interesting twist on the tried-and-true gameplay of matching three colored blocks in a row.
Controls are simple, intuitive, and effective, and the menus are acceptably simple, intuitive, effective, and easy on the eyes. The playing field is a 7x7 grid of colored squares. Each color is also identified by a distinct symbol, making the game colorblind friendly. This is a nice feature, and unlike other games with colorblind modes that are hidden in the options, is not distracting to those that are not colorblind.
Slide Colors' simple gameplay is matched by being extremely easy to pick up on, but the game still manages to be an entertaining challenge. The real difference here is how you make matches, by 'sliding' entire rows and columns. This make the game seem a lot faster than Bejeweled, since you can make more than one match at a time, filling large sections of the screen with particles.
The three modes are surprisingly varied, with Time attack being your standard 'go as long as you can' mode. Puzzle mode eliminates your need to make matches, and instead challenges you to place blocks in marked positions. (It's actually more challenging than it at first appears.) Clear Blocks mode is perhaps the most interesting, as it tasks the player with having to remove all of the blocks you start the game with. Power ups and lots of quick thinking are your best friends here.
While a very good game, there are a few problems, mostly in sound design. The music is decent, though not perfect, but is far from the problem. The real problem is the sound for making a match, which Mac users will know very well as the sound you hear whenever a task is completed. It sounds nice at first, but gets irritating fast.
At only 80 MSP, Slide Colors is a well polished and thought-out puzzle game for your 360. While the sound design might be a bit lacking, it still stands as one of the most playable and entertaining Indie Games available. It is also among the few Indie Game puzzle games that I have enjoyed.
_________________________
Bottom Line:
Simple and interesting puzzle game that's a steal for only 80 MSP.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)