Danger close!
Like I have proclaimed many times in this 'ere blog, I did in fact get MW3 on its release day. Having played through the campaign mostly on Hardened difficulty in five hours, I sort of regret getting it though. The old Call of Duty games that took place in WWII were really good (-spinoffs on Medal of Honor), and I mostly consider the four last entries guilty pleasures. Call of Duty 4, MW2 and Black Ops are not much more than interactive movies, but once you realize this they are actually quite enjoyable - if very linear - experiences. Personally I'm not a huge fan of the multiplayer mode in these games (epic quickscope ecks dee, ecks dee) so I disregard it when discussing them. In the last entry in the series it is painfully obvious that what the now ousted developer Infinity Ward brought to the table was something special and not easily replaced. On its surface, MW3 looks and plays just like the previous games, but once you look past that you'll notice that something is missing. The three previous games made you feel something - they really felt larger than life and visceral, like computer games directed by Michael Bay. That's why they sold in droves and that's why people keep coming back to the franchise for more.
Essentially MW2 and Black Ops were just reiterations of the first game just as much as MW3, but the "soul" is missing in the latter one. World War III is in full rage in New York, but it just feels meh because there are no memorable characters to connect to. That and the graphics have not evolved one iota since Black Ops. Battlefield 3 has a new graphics engine called Frostbite 2 which looks insanely good, bordering on photorealistic on the highest settings. Compare that to MW3's plastasene, unconvincing and tired old graphics. The weapon models still look pretty nice but that's about it. The computer game industry moves so quickly these days that not keeping up is just not forgivable. Five hours is inadequate for a full price game, and when the multiplayer is deathmatchy, run-and-gun, strategy-less and infested with kids who aren't old enough to play the game that's no excuse. Bottom line: A very dissapointing entrance to the franchise and (spoiler alert) thank God it seems like it's the last one continuing with this storyline.
I've also bought BF3 which I have not been able to play that much due not having a lot of spare time and it crashing on me a lot. I've finally managed to get it to work though and will play it over the weekend to a great extent. From what I've played so far I've enjoyed it a lot more than MW3 to be sure. I'll save it for another blog entry though once I've finished the campaign and played some more multiplayer. Next week will be pretty busy too, with two huge bombs dropping from Nintendo: The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword and Super Mario 3D Land. Well until next time, I'm Oscar Mike out of here and Ramirez - do everything!
Stay frosty!™
fredag 11 november 2011
söndag 7 augusti 2011
Fable III
Hi!
As I have mentioned in a previous entry not too long ago I got a new X-Box 360 Slim when my old one RRoD'ed. The guy who sold it to me managed to convince me to buy the package deal with two extra games - Halo: Reach and Fable III. Since I don't have anything to play right now, I decided to at least give Fable III a chance and check it out.
Fable III is an RPG that takes place in a fantasy world called Albion (an anagram of Albino perhaps??). It says in the intro of the game that it takes place in the age of industry, but when playing the game it becomes apparent that it's really about Fable III being steam punk rather than fantasy. At first I thought this was a bit of a bummer, because I prefer straight-up high fantasy to steam punk, but the latter works fine in Fable III. This is a fantasy-skewed steam punk where there still is a lot of magic and melee combat involved (I don't know about you, but did they really use swords in combat after the age of industry had been introduced here on Earth?).
The game plays pretty much like any other RPG. You are a man or woman on a quest to bring the people together to overthrow the evil dictator who rules the kingdom, this person also happens to be your brother. You hack and slash through monsters to level up. I didn't realize it until I had finished the game and saw the credits, but this actually is a Peter Molyneux game, which makes a lot of sense when you think about it. As you play the game you can decide to go on all these strange side quests, like interacting and becoming friends with NPCs. You can also marry people and have children... All for an extremely mariginal gain, it's just thrown in there. There are also many choices throughout the game to determine whether you are good or evil - which I suppose change the ending, I've only finished it while being a goody two shoes.
I think Fable III was a nice experience, not something you write home to your parents about, but perfectly fine all things considered. The graphics are of varied quality, the characters for example look so-so. I get that they are supposed to be at least somewhat stylized, but their textures and models look only slightly better than those found in The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess which is an old game by now. The enviroments look awesome though, probably the best I've seen in a game so far actually. Normally I'm not a huge fan of RPGs outside of Zelda or Pokémon, but they did a good job here of mixing it up with hack n' slash and it also has some good voice acting by who has to be John Cleese among others. My main complaint concerns the story and pacing of the game. It's hard to say too much without spoiling it, but when you think the game is going to be over, a deus-ex-machina-like revelation occurs and you have to continue playing through a seemingly pointless and strange final portion of the game. They could've handled this part better for sure, but it's just a minor annoyance in an otherwise nice game.
Laters!
As I have mentioned in a previous entry not too long ago I got a new X-Box 360 Slim when my old one RRoD'ed. The guy who sold it to me managed to convince me to buy the package deal with two extra games - Halo: Reach and Fable III. Since I don't have anything to play right now, I decided to at least give Fable III a chance and check it out.
Fable III is an RPG that takes place in a fantasy world called Albion (an anagram of Albino perhaps??). It says in the intro of the game that it takes place in the age of industry, but when playing the game it becomes apparent that it's really about Fable III being steam punk rather than fantasy. At first I thought this was a bit of a bummer, because I prefer straight-up high fantasy to steam punk, but the latter works fine in Fable III. This is a fantasy-skewed steam punk where there still is a lot of magic and melee combat involved (I don't know about you, but did they really use swords in combat after the age of industry had been introduced here on Earth?).
The game plays pretty much like any other RPG. You are a man or woman on a quest to bring the people together to overthrow the evil dictator who rules the kingdom, this person also happens to be your brother. You hack and slash through monsters to level up. I didn't realize it until I had finished the game and saw the credits, but this actually is a Peter Molyneux game, which makes a lot of sense when you think about it. As you play the game you can decide to go on all these strange side quests, like interacting and becoming friends with NPCs. You can also marry people and have children... All for an extremely mariginal gain, it's just thrown in there. There are also many choices throughout the game to determine whether you are good or evil - which I suppose change the ending, I've only finished it while being a goody two shoes.
I think Fable III was a nice experience, not something you write home to your parents about, but perfectly fine all things considered. The graphics are of varied quality, the characters for example look so-so. I get that they are supposed to be at least somewhat stylized, but their textures and models look only slightly better than those found in The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess which is an old game by now. The enviroments look awesome though, probably the best I've seen in a game so far actually. Normally I'm not a huge fan of RPGs outside of Zelda or Pokémon, but they did a good job here of mixing it up with hack n' slash and it also has some good voice acting by who has to be John Cleese among others. My main complaint concerns the story and pacing of the game. It's hard to say too much without spoiling it, but when you think the game is going to be over, a deus-ex-machina-like revelation occurs and you have to continue playing through a seemingly pointless and strange final portion of the game. They could've handled this part better for sure, but it's just a minor annoyance in an otherwise nice game.
Laters!
torsdag 28 juli 2011
Dules of the Planeswalkers 2012
Hello!
I thought that I'd already written something about DotP12, but it appears I've only ever so briefly mentioned it, so here are a few short words about it. It's basically the same game as the first one only a bit updated. The decks now each have a planeswalker associated with it, and there is a multiplayer "Archenemy"-mode. The AI has been slightly improved, the amount of incredibly stupid plays it does has been cut down significantly. The Archenemy mode works fine, I've only played it with computer allies so I think this one would be a lot more fun with other people. One of my biggest gripes with the game is that the decks are not varied enough.
While it's good that you now can take any card out of the decks (not just the ones you unlock like in the first one) and that the lands are changed automatically based on how many other cards are in the deck, they are all basicly aggro decks where you play creatures and attack with them. This means you get tired of them quickly, the only real fun deck that does something different is the Kiora Atua's blue-green manaramp deck. It however has some bad matchups, if you play against the illusion deck you are basically going to win one out of ten games. Speaking of Jace's deck, that one should not have been in the game to start with. The illusions are stupid creatures to base a deck around since if your opponent has access to removal they suck, if not you are just going to straight up win. Worst of all though is that Jace always seems to have the Lord of the Unreal which just makes the game very non-interactive which in Magic is never fun. All in all I would still very much recommend the game to new players and old alike, even though it is simple it's fun and worth the money.
Later!
I thought that I'd already written something about DotP12, but it appears I've only ever so briefly mentioned it, so here are a few short words about it. It's basically the same game as the first one only a bit updated. The decks now each have a planeswalker associated with it, and there is a multiplayer "Archenemy"-mode. The AI has been slightly improved, the amount of incredibly stupid plays it does has been cut down significantly. The Archenemy mode works fine, I've only played it with computer allies so I think this one would be a lot more fun with other people. One of my biggest gripes with the game is that the decks are not varied enough.
While it's good that you now can take any card out of the decks (not just the ones you unlock like in the first one) and that the lands are changed automatically based on how many other cards are in the deck, they are all basicly aggro decks where you play creatures and attack with them. This means you get tired of them quickly, the only real fun deck that does something different is the Kiora Atua's blue-green manaramp deck. It however has some bad matchups, if you play against the illusion deck you are basically going to win one out of ten games. Speaking of Jace's deck, that one should not have been in the game to start with. The illusions are stupid creatures to base a deck around since if your opponent has access to removal they suck, if not you are just going to straight up win. Worst of all though is that Jace always seems to have the Lord of the Unreal which just makes the game very non-interactive which in Magic is never fun. All in all I would still very much recommend the game to new players and old alike, even though it is simple it's fun and worth the money.
Later!
onsdag 27 juli 2011
Mirror's Edge
Hi!
It's slower than slow on the video game front right now, I guess it's the time of the year. You're supposed to be outside and play in the sun, not be indoors and play vidya gaems. The next game I'm interested in won't be out until September, and that's Dead Island (talk about an unfortunate title considering the terrible recent events that took place in Norway). Gotta keep busy somehow though, so I downloaded Mirror's Edge from Steam. I've always been hesitant about getting this game from the reviews and what I've heard about Mirror's Edge, but it was cheap and like I said I have no other game right now to play.
When playing the game it becomes clear that it was advertised completely wrong (I believe most of the reviews touched upon this as well). If you've seen the movie Fight Club, it was advertised as an action film in the trailers, even though it's more of a psychological thriller/drama with a very small numbers of action scenes in it. In a similar fashion, Mirror's Edge was wrongly portrayed as an FPS, when it's really Le Parkour-the game. If you're not familiar with Le Parkour, it's a kind of urban "sport", where the participant jumps from buildings to buildings and do flips and other crazy stunts, originating from France. And that's what you do in this game, as a "runner" -- a sort of unlawful Robin Hoodesque character, although you are gathering information instead of riches.
In the game you are Faith, who lives in a 1984-inspired heavily controlled world, a sort of police state. Most buildings and surfaces in the city are white - supposedly heightening the feeling that everything is ordered and under control - although the feeling it creates to me is more that it feels like you are in a hospital or a big playground with bright colors (not just the whites). In fact I think that if the city was more gritty and grey, it would feel more realistic and heighten the tension because as it is now you never really take the game seriously since the world it takes place in feels so plastascene.
Personally I really liked the game, it was a pleasant surprise. As mentioned I was very hesitant after having read the reviews for the game, but I don't really agree with the points that seemed to be the consensus of the reviews. That's a first right, me not agreeing with professional reviews of computer games? First of all, this game never claims to be an FPS, it just so happens there are guards that try to stop you and sometimes you have no other choice than to unarm them and use their gun against them. Faith is not supposed to be professional at handling weapons, so it's only natural you can't aim down the sights, that the accuracy of the weapons is not perfect and so on. The game was made by DICE after all, the creators of the Battlefield franchise, so if they wanted perfect weapon handling they would have no problem implementing it, that's for certain.
Another common critisism was that the game is too short, and while it's certainly not Heroes of Might and Magic-length, eight hours is fine. Most games today are a lot shorter - Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, CoD: Black Ops and Portal are all much shorter and they have never gotten much of any critisism for that. And speaking of Portal, that's one game this one really reminds me of which makes Mirror's Edge flopping even more confounding. Portal has absolutely zero gunplay, but still was a huge success and has a big following on the Internet. DICE probably almost literally shot themselves in the foot by including guns in ME at all, if they wouldn't have, maybe the puzzle fanatics would've found this gem instead of being turned off by the huge FPS-stamp on its figurative forehead. Because to me ME is everything Portal ever wanted to be and then some.
When playing Mirror's Edge it felt like a breath of fresh air in a more and more homogenic video game market, which is probably one of the reasons why it supposedly didn't sell that well. It was just too different in a way that its supposed target audience (FPS-fans), did not know what to make of. I also think that it lies in the nature of people who like this genre that running away is not what you want to do, you want to have a weapon and confront every danger with your own lethal force. Oh well, I sure hope they make a sequel. And now I'm going back to thinking what the hell I'm going to spend my spare time with until September. Emulators I guess?
Until next time, signing off.
It's slower than slow on the video game front right now, I guess it's the time of the year. You're supposed to be outside and play in the sun, not be indoors and play vidya gaems. The next game I'm interested in won't be out until September, and that's Dead Island (talk about an unfortunate title considering the terrible recent events that took place in Norway). Gotta keep busy somehow though, so I downloaded Mirror's Edge from Steam. I've always been hesitant about getting this game from the reviews and what I've heard about Mirror's Edge, but it was cheap and like I said I have no other game right now to play.
When playing the game it becomes clear that it was advertised completely wrong (I believe most of the reviews touched upon this as well). If you've seen the movie Fight Club, it was advertised as an action film in the trailers, even though it's more of a psychological thriller/drama with a very small numbers of action scenes in it. In a similar fashion, Mirror's Edge was wrongly portrayed as an FPS, when it's really Le Parkour-the game. If you're not familiar with Le Parkour, it's a kind of urban "sport", where the participant jumps from buildings to buildings and do flips and other crazy stunts, originating from France. And that's what you do in this game, as a "runner" -- a sort of unlawful Robin Hoodesque character, although you are gathering information instead of riches.
In the game you are Faith, who lives in a 1984-inspired heavily controlled world, a sort of police state. Most buildings and surfaces in the city are white - supposedly heightening the feeling that everything is ordered and under control - although the feeling it creates to me is more that it feels like you are in a hospital or a big playground with bright colors (not just the whites). In fact I think that if the city was more gritty and grey, it would feel more realistic and heighten the tension because as it is now you never really take the game seriously since the world it takes place in feels so plastascene.
Personally I really liked the game, it was a pleasant surprise. As mentioned I was very hesitant after having read the reviews for the game, but I don't really agree with the points that seemed to be the consensus of the reviews. That's a first right, me not agreeing with professional reviews of computer games? First of all, this game never claims to be an FPS, it just so happens there are guards that try to stop you and sometimes you have no other choice than to unarm them and use their gun against them. Faith is not supposed to be professional at handling weapons, so it's only natural you can't aim down the sights, that the accuracy of the weapons is not perfect and so on. The game was made by DICE after all, the creators of the Battlefield franchise, so if they wanted perfect weapon handling they would have no problem implementing it, that's for certain.
Another common critisism was that the game is too short, and while it's certainly not Heroes of Might and Magic-length, eight hours is fine. Most games today are a lot shorter - Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, CoD: Black Ops and Portal are all much shorter and they have never gotten much of any critisism for that. And speaking of Portal, that's one game this one really reminds me of which makes Mirror's Edge flopping even more confounding. Portal has absolutely zero gunplay, but still was a huge success and has a big following on the Internet. DICE probably almost literally shot themselves in the foot by including guns in ME at all, if they wouldn't have, maybe the puzzle fanatics would've found this gem instead of being turned off by the huge FPS-stamp on its figurative forehead. Because to me ME is everything Portal ever wanted to be and then some.
When playing Mirror's Edge it felt like a breath of fresh air in a more and more homogenic video game market, which is probably one of the reasons why it supposedly didn't sell that well. It was just too different in a way that its supposed target audience (FPS-fans), did not know what to make of. I also think that it lies in the nature of people who like this genre that running away is not what you want to do, you want to have a weapon and confront every danger with your own lethal force. Oh well, I sure hope they make a sequel. And now I'm going back to thinking what the hell I'm going to spend my spare time with until September. Emulators I guess?
Until next time, signing off.
fredag 8 juli 2011
Games on mobile devices
Hello!
I've recently given in to temptation and bought myself an iPhone 4. Like any computer nerd worth his salt, I've always reviled Apple and their products (namely Mac's), but I guess even my self-imposed restrictiveness when it comes to electronic gadgets has a limit. To be fair I've owned an iPod for quite some time, since my previous mp3-player by Sony did not like when you played *cough* *cough* "home-made" mp3-files on it (i.e. ones not downloaded legally or ripped from a CD you own). Not to mention that the iPod had a much better interface than my previous mp3-player.
This is a blog about video games so that's what I had in mind writing about, believe it or not! I've downloaded Resident Evil 4 Lite for my iPhone, as well as Mega Man II Lite. Now, my favorite genre when it comes to video games is without a doubt games that include some sort of action component. For example Mega Man is an action game where timing is of the outmost essence. This becomes a bit of a hassle when it comes to playing a game like this on a mobile device which - unlike the 3DS for example - has no buttons. You instead need to use the touch screen to control the game, and it's not perfect since you can never really tell when you've "pushed" the right button, and it doesn't always respond. Unlike on a real console where pressing a button always nets you the same result. Games like Angry Birds work fine on an iPhone since it's a slower kind of game, but trying to jump in Mega Man and failing is equal to dying instantly.
Some people on various discussion forums on the Internet claim that the iPhone and its imitators is going to take over the handheld gaming scene completely, which I think will not be the case because of the reasons I've discussed in this post. The library of games available might be very extensive, and downloading a game sure is cheap (although at least on my iPhone I have to download it to the computer via iTunes first, because of limitations imposed by my operator (I think)), but a console like 3DS is made purely (well) for gaming and it shows.
Laters!
I've recently given in to temptation and bought myself an iPhone 4. Like any computer nerd worth his salt, I've always reviled Apple and their products (namely Mac's), but I guess even my self-imposed restrictiveness when it comes to electronic gadgets has a limit. To be fair I've owned an iPod for quite some time, since my previous mp3-player by Sony did not like when you played *cough* *cough* "home-made" mp3-files on it (i.e. ones not downloaded legally or ripped from a CD you own). Not to mention that the iPod had a much better interface than my previous mp3-player.
This is a blog about video games so that's what I had in mind writing about, believe it or not! I've downloaded Resident Evil 4 Lite for my iPhone, as well as Mega Man II Lite. Now, my favorite genre when it comes to video games is without a doubt games that include some sort of action component. For example Mega Man is an action game where timing is of the outmost essence. This becomes a bit of a hassle when it comes to playing a game like this on a mobile device which - unlike the 3DS for example - has no buttons. You instead need to use the touch screen to control the game, and it's not perfect since you can never really tell when you've "pushed" the right button, and it doesn't always respond. Unlike on a real console where pressing a button always nets you the same result. Games like Angry Birds work fine on an iPhone since it's a slower kind of game, but trying to jump in Mega Man and failing is equal to dying instantly.
Some people on various discussion forums on the Internet claim that the iPhone and its imitators is going to take over the handheld gaming scene completely, which I think will not be the case because of the reasons I've discussed in this post. The library of games available might be very extensive, and downloading a game sure is cheap (although at least on my iPhone I have to download it to the computer via iTunes first, because of limitations imposed by my operator (I think)), but a console like 3DS is made purely (well) for gaming and it shows.
Laters!
fredag 17 juni 2011
L. A. Noire
Hi!
Even though L.A. Noire has gotten a lot of praise in the review department, and I recognize it as a very good game, it's interesting that there are far less points to talk about in it, compared to Duke Nukem Forever. The controversy surrounding all the negative reviews gives you a lot to talk about and discuss when it comes to DNF, whereas L.A. Noire is "just another game".
The game borrows much from the motion picture L. A. Confidential, one of my absolute favorites. That movie also happens to be based on a book written by my favorite author: James Ellroy. So you can imagine I was stoked about getting to play this game.
The graphics are really nice and detailed, much like the GTA games that use the same engine. The most interesting part is of course the hyped "motion captured" faces, that express more than any other game has done before. This is crucial because the core of the gameplay is trying to guess whether people you are interrogating are lying or not. To me it feels like Team Bondi, the developers of the game, put a little too much faith into their new fangled toy. Because, even though it looks awesome, it's still really hard to tell whether an animated character in a video game is lying or not. That is unless of course you can figure it out by logic and prove that they are lying with a clue that you've found. As mentioned, this guessing game is the core of the game which proves a bit problematic since it's just too damned hard. Of course, you can't really fail a case, you will progress further even though you end up killing an innocent person, and you can even restart the cases to try again. Since you already know at least one wrong answer, trying again just seems like a chore of coming up with the right answer by trial and error. Another problem with failing to guess the correct answer, is that once you do you will get less clues which turns into a downward spiral of failure. Except for the interrogations, there is nothing to complain about when it comes to gameplay. Searching for clues and trying to figure out whodunit is a nice relaxing exercise, and for once you actually have to think while playing a game which is nice.
The story is everything you would want from a game like this, ridden with clichés/genre conventions - whatever you want to call them. A highly recommended game if you are a fan of noire/crime fiction in general.
Later!
Even though L.A. Noire has gotten a lot of praise in the review department, and I recognize it as a very good game, it's interesting that there are far less points to talk about in it, compared to Duke Nukem Forever. The controversy surrounding all the negative reviews gives you a lot to talk about and discuss when it comes to DNF, whereas L.A. Noire is "just another game".
The game borrows much from the motion picture L. A. Confidential, one of my absolute favorites. That movie also happens to be based on a book written by my favorite author: James Ellroy. So you can imagine I was stoked about getting to play this game.
The graphics are really nice and detailed, much like the GTA games that use the same engine. The most interesting part is of course the hyped "motion captured" faces, that express more than any other game has done before. This is crucial because the core of the gameplay is trying to guess whether people you are interrogating are lying or not. To me it feels like Team Bondi, the developers of the game, put a little too much faith into their new fangled toy. Because, even though it looks awesome, it's still really hard to tell whether an animated character in a video game is lying or not. That is unless of course you can figure it out by logic and prove that they are lying with a clue that you've found. As mentioned, this guessing game is the core of the game which proves a bit problematic since it's just too damned hard. Of course, you can't really fail a case, you will progress further even though you end up killing an innocent person, and you can even restart the cases to try again. Since you already know at least one wrong answer, trying again just seems like a chore of coming up with the right answer by trial and error. Another problem with failing to guess the correct answer, is that once you do you will get less clues which turns into a downward spiral of failure. Except for the interrogations, there is nothing to complain about when it comes to gameplay. Searching for clues and trying to figure out whodunit is a nice relaxing exercise, and for once you actually have to think while playing a game which is nice.
The story is everything you would want from a game like this, ridden with clichés/genre conventions - whatever you want to call them. A highly recommended game if you are a fan of noire/crime fiction in general.
Later!
torsdag 16 juni 2011
"I'm from Las Vegas and I say kill 'em all!"
Hi!
It's busy times now when it comes to video games for me. Got L.A. Noire on release date but I got sick so I didn't play it until a few weeks later. Yesterday I downloaded Duels of the Planeswalkers 2012, which doesn't seem like it adds that much but still is enjoyable. However, I'll save those two for other entries since I want to talk about something that is hot off the presses right now; namely the Dukester himself's return to form (?): Duke Nukem Forever has finally been released!
I'm an old school gamer and for sure I played Duke Nukem 3D back in the day, in fact I even played the 2D-ones. Duke 3D took the Doom-engine in a whole new direction with the interactive enviroments, much more advanced level structuring and probably most of all, letting you play an actual defined character. The Duke has always been a walking stereotype, much like the borrowed movie quotes he keeps yapping; a mish-mash of various campy 80's and 90's action flicks' mary-sue-like anti-heroes. It really feels wrong calling the Duke mary-sue, but he sure is the male variant of that, even more so in the new game since his health regenerates (sadly) and it takes a lot before he dies. Even though D3D was fun and enjoyable for its time, I still have a feeling that most people remember it as much better than it actually was. Most of the hype concerned how innovative it was, not so much about the quality of the game itself. The game shone in the first episode, the other were more of the same and the gameplay became rather tedious (a bit like Doom in that the first episode - Knee Deep in the Mud - is hands down the best.
The fact that it's been 14 years is most assuredly a contributing factor to people (well video game reviewers, it's not confirmed that you can call them people) forgetting that D3D was not the paragon of gaming people remember it as, greatly influencing their confounding stellar expectations of DNF. It reminds me very much of the Star Wars-prequels that - all things considered - were never going to live up to people's expectations. DNF has gotten awful reviews, the meanest one being the one on Gamespot where the X-box 360-version got 3.0. When reading these reviews it feels like the reviewer has decided what to think about this game before even playing it. Big parts of the texts is just downright bashing, far from any sort of constructive critisism. The reviewers are really scrutinizing the game with a magnifying glass looking for even the smallest detail to hate on. It's rather embarrassing to be honest, but I suppose the 14 year wait warrants it, not to say calls for it. It feels like the reviewers are mad that George Broussard didn't invite them to his birthday party when they were kids or something, and this is their long in coming way of getting back at him.
I bought this game expecting very little. Through the years I've read the reports and seen the screenshots of the latest engine they've used for the game. The last one was the video that a guy who worked on the game leaked right about the time when 3D Realms said they pulled the plug for good. I really liked the look of that video, and judging from the final game that's exactly the graphics they've used in the end. They've sort of stitched together what they had as best they could in order to make it as coherent of a game as possible. And with me, that is perfectly fine.
At the time of writing this I've played through probably around 3/4's of the game, and the bottom line is that it's FUN. Period. I am actually enjoying myself playing this video game. There's a challenge and I want to continue playing and exploring the area that comes next. And to be fair, I don't think you can ask for more from a game. It is sad, if not deplorable, that Call of Duty: Modern Warfare part ad nauseam is the measuring standard for a good FPS game today. In my opinion, by now CoD is not much of a game, it's more of an interactive film. And like I've said before I get the CoD's on release, but when all FPS-games just have to be CoD that really puts a hampering limitation on the genre.
There are a lot of problems with DNF. DNF is not a great game, by any means. The graphics are fine but dated, especially certain parts. Coming from the extremely advanced facial animation in L.A. Noire and playing a supposedly brand new game with barely any facial animation at all like in DNF, is not very nice. There's a strange blur effect on all textures that are far away which I think they could've gotten rid of all together. But the graphics are still functional and do what they need to, I mean look at Minecraft! Graphics have never been everything in a game and it sure as hell rings true for DNF as well.
The sound is not more than OK. It was a part of D3D that was really good, the weapons sound a bit weak here and overall it's not as spot on as in the predecessor. The intro version of the Duke Nukem-theme rocks, but the rest of the music is quite forgettable.
The game plays like an ancient relic from the Half-Life 2-era. A lot of water has passed under the bridges since then, which poses a bit of a problem. The regenerating health and two weapon-limitation is a Cod/Halo-era feature that they've jammed into the game with brute force. It clashes with the HL2-era mechanics like a high speed train into a rock wall. I'm just going to say that I hate the aforementioned two alterations to the Duke formula and leave it at that, they add nothing and just take away from the experience. The Half-Life games brought scripted events into the world of gaming, which were at the time considered the best thing since sliced bread, but now just feel unendingly stale. My hope is that the reason the game reviewers are not aware why the scripted events exist in the game, is because they simply didn't play games back then. Because if they did and still can't make the connection there is simply no excuse for what they are writing in their reviews. There is no question that if DNF was released a couple of years after HL2, the reviewers would praise the scripted events and how they provided a nice pause from the action at points in the game - instead of them being a negative. Of course, today we live in the CoD-land where the action has to be in warp nine at all times, otherwise it's a bad game. I for one think the variety of the gameplay in DNF feels like a breath of fresh air, as weird as it sounds, compared to the on-rails feeling of games like CoD. And don't get me started on the turret sequences, CoD has TONS of turret sequences yet the ones in DNF get all the bad rap? You have to be kidding me.
People should play this game and judge for themselves, it's possible I like it mostly because of the nostalgia. But that doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing, the old school gamers who played D3D is the target audience Gearbox should've gone for, not the CoD/Halo-kids with ADHD who have not taken their pills. Next up: I will discuss L.A. Noire and trying to detect lies successfully.
Later!
It's busy times now when it comes to video games for me. Got L.A. Noire on release date but I got sick so I didn't play it until a few weeks later. Yesterday I downloaded Duels of the Planeswalkers 2012, which doesn't seem like it adds that much but still is enjoyable. However, I'll save those two for other entries since I want to talk about something that is hot off the presses right now; namely the Dukester himself's return to form (?): Duke Nukem Forever has finally been released!
I'm an old school gamer and for sure I played Duke Nukem 3D back in the day, in fact I even played the 2D-ones. Duke 3D took the Doom-engine in a whole new direction with the interactive enviroments, much more advanced level structuring and probably most of all, letting you play an actual defined character. The Duke has always been a walking stereotype, much like the borrowed movie quotes he keeps yapping; a mish-mash of various campy 80's and 90's action flicks' mary-sue-like anti-heroes. It really feels wrong calling the Duke mary-sue, but he sure is the male variant of that, even more so in the new game since his health regenerates (sadly) and it takes a lot before he dies. Even though D3D was fun and enjoyable for its time, I still have a feeling that most people remember it as much better than it actually was. Most of the hype concerned how innovative it was, not so much about the quality of the game itself. The game shone in the first episode, the other were more of the same and the gameplay became rather tedious (a bit like Doom in that the first episode - Knee Deep in the Mud - is hands down the best.
The fact that it's been 14 years is most assuredly a contributing factor to people (well video game reviewers, it's not confirmed that you can call them people) forgetting that D3D was not the paragon of gaming people remember it as, greatly influencing their confounding stellar expectations of DNF. It reminds me very much of the Star Wars-prequels that - all things considered - were never going to live up to people's expectations. DNF has gotten awful reviews, the meanest one being the one on Gamespot where the X-box 360-version got 3.0. When reading these reviews it feels like the reviewer has decided what to think about this game before even playing it. Big parts of the texts is just downright bashing, far from any sort of constructive critisism. The reviewers are really scrutinizing the game with a magnifying glass looking for even the smallest detail to hate on. It's rather embarrassing to be honest, but I suppose the 14 year wait warrants it, not to say calls for it. It feels like the reviewers are mad that George Broussard didn't invite them to his birthday party when they were kids or something, and this is their long in coming way of getting back at him.
I bought this game expecting very little. Through the years I've read the reports and seen the screenshots of the latest engine they've used for the game. The last one was the video that a guy who worked on the game leaked right about the time when 3D Realms said they pulled the plug for good. I really liked the look of that video, and judging from the final game that's exactly the graphics they've used in the end. They've sort of stitched together what they had as best they could in order to make it as coherent of a game as possible. And with me, that is perfectly fine.
At the time of writing this I've played through probably around 3/4's of the game, and the bottom line is that it's FUN. Period. I am actually enjoying myself playing this video game. There's a challenge and I want to continue playing and exploring the area that comes next. And to be fair, I don't think you can ask for more from a game. It is sad, if not deplorable, that Call of Duty: Modern Warfare part ad nauseam is the measuring standard for a good FPS game today. In my opinion, by now CoD is not much of a game, it's more of an interactive film. And like I've said before I get the CoD's on release, but when all FPS-games just have to be CoD that really puts a hampering limitation on the genre.
There are a lot of problems with DNF. DNF is not a great game, by any means. The graphics are fine but dated, especially certain parts. Coming from the extremely advanced facial animation in L.A. Noire and playing a supposedly brand new game with barely any facial animation at all like in DNF, is not very nice. There's a strange blur effect on all textures that are far away which I think they could've gotten rid of all together. But the graphics are still functional and do what they need to, I mean look at Minecraft! Graphics have never been everything in a game and it sure as hell rings true for DNF as well.
The sound is not more than OK. It was a part of D3D that was really good, the weapons sound a bit weak here and overall it's not as spot on as in the predecessor. The intro version of the Duke Nukem-theme rocks, but the rest of the music is quite forgettable.
The game plays like an ancient relic from the Half-Life 2-era. A lot of water has passed under the bridges since then, which poses a bit of a problem. The regenerating health and two weapon-limitation is a Cod/Halo-era feature that they've jammed into the game with brute force. It clashes with the HL2-era mechanics like a high speed train into a rock wall. I'm just going to say that I hate the aforementioned two alterations to the Duke formula and leave it at that, they add nothing and just take away from the experience. The Half-Life games brought scripted events into the world of gaming, which were at the time considered the best thing since sliced bread, but now just feel unendingly stale. My hope is that the reason the game reviewers are not aware why the scripted events exist in the game, is because they simply didn't play games back then. Because if they did and still can't make the connection there is simply no excuse for what they are writing in their reviews. There is no question that if DNF was released a couple of years after HL2, the reviewers would praise the scripted events and how they provided a nice pause from the action at points in the game - instead of them being a negative. Of course, today we live in the CoD-land where the action has to be in warp nine at all times, otherwise it's a bad game. I for one think the variety of the gameplay in DNF feels like a breath of fresh air, as weird as it sounds, compared to the on-rails feeling of games like CoD. And don't get me started on the turret sequences, CoD has TONS of turret sequences yet the ones in DNF get all the bad rap? You have to be kidding me.
People should play this game and judge for themselves, it's possible I like it mostly because of the nostalgia. But that doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing, the old school gamers who played D3D is the target audience Gearbox should've gone for, not the CoD/Halo-kids with ADHD who have not taken their pills. Next up: I will discuss L.A. Noire and trying to detect lies successfully.
Later!
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)