Unbelievable Dutch

I just finished watching the 1984 ‘classic’ The Karate Kid and it turns out I have a profound issue with it.

I find it too hard to believe that some kid can train for a karate tournament in two months by painting a fence and waxing a car, then enter said tournament (as a black belt no less) only to win by beating the reigning champ.

Not only were the competitors bigger than Danny, they had also trained for years and were accredited black belts.

If that scenario had happened in real life, Danny would have had his arse handed to him before any of the Cobra Kai had a chance to pummel him in the ring. I like to think that once Danny had awoken from the first round knockout coma he received, the clan would have snuck into his hospital room and beaten him with soap in socks Full Metal Jacket style.

At least Rocky had a boxing history. That real 80’s classic had an ending that made sense - he had a dream, he trained hard, he put on a good fight. Sure I’m probably not meant to giggle when he’s crying out “Adrienne!” after the fight but I do anyway because I’m insensitive.

What has this got to do with video games? Nothing really I'm just annoyed at the ending to a film. However it did make me think about the expectations of the hero and the plot of games.

For example, have you really thought about Super Mario Bros? Essentially it’s about a plumber who eats too many mushrooms, plays with fire and is expected to save a Princess from a giant turtle. Ignoring said mutant turtle, why would you leave your life in the hands of a drugged up arsonist? Personally I’d take my chances with turtle.

Clearly Mario and his world is a work of fiction; he was created solely for entertainment and not to inspire like dodgy films of the 80’s. I’ve got nothing against Mario; I just want to know what his creator was doing when conjuring this amazing mix of crazy elements.

For something a little more real, how about Doom? Yes it too is a work of fiction and it’s sci-fi and there’s absolutely nothing real about it, but you’re one man taking on hordes of insane aliens, running around Mars and its moons with a chainsaw and other Earth developed weapons. Why do humans have the technology to teleport and live on Mars, but we only have two futuristic weapons? How is one man meant to save the world with knuckle dusters and chainsaw? Who does he think he is? Chuck Norris? Have you seen the final boss? It’s fricken huge! I can’t even walkout to the bin of a night time just in case I come across a cane toad.

The same can be said for most first person shooters with a single protagonist – the fate of the world comes down to just one person facing an unknown enemy against the odds. Unless you’re in a Tom Clancy game or Call of Duty World At War, in which case the fate of the world comes down to your unit of allegedly crack soldiers who spend more time taking friendly fire than shooting the enemy.

Although some games may not make sense when analysed out of context, I am grateful they don’t often contain a dodgy montage sequence. Can you imagine Street Fighter if it had a Kickboxer style montage just before the fight with Bison, complete with a motivating tune with an electronic drum breakdown? I think my head would explode.

Have you questioned the plot of any games recently?

Inertia Creeps

Have you ever played a loud game? Sure there are some games that feature frequent crescendos, that create "jump moments," with their use of sound and vision (Dead Space 2 and Resident Evil 4 anyone?). Games like Hydrophobia however, assault your eyes, ears and any other organ used to process a gaming experience, non-stop. The central character, Kate screams constantly while the score continues to pound away. Lighting may be in ample supply, but it flickers and sparks, exhausting your eyes. The camera doesn't do players any favours either, jerking at doorways and creeping in too tight in confined spaces. Movement is justifiably made sluggish by the ever-present water, but combined with the previously listed elements, it leads to a disorienting and eventually, nauseating experience that I'm praying will end soon.



There isn't much of a story to accompany this attack on the senses (at least not in what I've played so far). Basically, terrorists have attacked the Queen of the World, a large sea vessel that makes the titanic look like a drop in the ocean. Our heroine is caught amidst the chaos, and is led by her friend, Scoot to counter the invading Malthusians. The Malthusians have littered the ship with the message: "Save the world. Kill yourself." I'm not sure what that means, but the mystery alone is probably not enough to compel me to stagger to the end. Queasy and defeated, Hydrophobia was a risky investment at 400 Microsoft Points (Xbox Live Deal of the Week), and is nothing short of overpriced now that it has returned to its standard 800MSP price tag.

It's not flat-out terrible, as there are some aspects of the game which have been positive, sometimes even enjoyable. The platforming sections work well and are not as obvious (in terms of direction) as other third person action titles like Uncharted and Prince of Persia. The combat is too much of a mixed bag to be labelled anything other than functional. It is fun to stun an enemy, and then have them drown in the encroaching depths; but the lack of a close-quarters option is of severe detriment to the gameplay. I've seen screenshots of players taking cover, but I don't know how (the game hasn't prompted me, I could pause and search; but...) and I don't see the need to when your opponents are as bereaved of intelligence as the Malthusians are.

All things considered though, Hydrophobia is killed by its own soundtrack. If there was some reprieve from the pounding music, and the attrocious, uber-Scottish accents I might have been able to grin and bear it until the end. As it stands, I don't think I can make it. Especially when you see others playing the survival horror game much more effectively.

I'm talking of course, about Dead Space 2.

My brother brought it over last Saturday to show me through its first few scares. I say "show me," because I have not been able to play a survival horror title since Resident Evil 4 (Alan Wake doesn't count because I don't think anyone could be legitamtely scared, even startled by what Remedy brought to the table). It's not because I don't enjoy games of this particular genre, it's just that I am by nature, a scaredy cat, and only recently has this nature extended to gaming. I played each instalment of the Resident Evil series (except 5) and dabbled in a bit of Silent Hill. Nowadays though, I found myself looking away from the screen when my brother first started playing Visceral Games follow-up to their much-lauded 2008 horror masterpiece (apparently; too scared to play it, so I can't say for myself).



"Just watch!," he pleaded. So I did, and I was blown away. Disgusted, uncomfortable, but blown away all the same. So much so that I actually went and purchased the game for myself. Will I ever play it? Who knows. Based on thirty minutes of terrifying action witnessed second hand however, I'm going to try and find the courage to experience it myself.

What are your thoughts on the survival horror genre? Any favourites?

In case you haven't played it: Fable III Review (X360)

I've never survived any of the previous instalments of the Fable franchise. For all of Peter Molyneux's posturing, I found each of these games to be more sterile than innovative, and quickly lost the will to quest across Albion. Fable III has once again made some lofty promises, allowing players to take the throne; but will a healthy dose of government save the latest instalment from the depths of mediocrity?

The Good
A whimsical journey - Despite all of its flaws (and there are many), Fable III is a stress-less trip across the beautiful land of Albion. You see many sights, talk (fight with, snog) a cast of amusing, cockney-voiced villagers, encountering nothing reminiscent of tension throughout the entire adventure. Even when engaged in combat, rarely did I find myself tested. Fable III  never rocks the boat, and is (I believe) the gaming equivalent of taking a walk in a very big park - very relaxing.

Tinsel Town - I thought this might impacted negatively on the experience at first, but Fable III  is the most heavily-directed action RPG I've ever played. You're directed to your next objective by a glowing trail of fairy dust, so you're never left wondering or wandering as it were.

Charming cast - Each of the central characters in Fable III are made all the more lovable/loathable thanks to some fantastic voice acting. Stand-outs include John Cleese (your ever-present assistant, Jasper), Benard Hill (your mentor, Sir Walter Beck), and Simon Pegg (swashbuckling compatriot, Ben Finn). While the central characters are not always effectively developed, every resident of Albion has a voice. Further to that, you can choose to talk, dance with, whistle to, even marry almost anyone you come across. While choosing to wed the factory supervisor by the swamp doesn't really fit into the epic nature of the tale, it does give you an idea of how much freedom you have to determine your own fate in the timesink that is Albion.

Finding Aurora - While Fable III never manages to be difficult, the journey to the barren land of Aurora is genuinely dark; not the awkward, black comic stylings that permeate throughout the majority of the game. The change in mood, coupled with some stunning visuals served to distract me from the one-dimensional combat and further develop the relationship between the Hero and Walter. A truly enjoyable hour's worth of compelling storytelling. Even after this particularly memorable sequence, each time I returned to Aurora I once again found myself awestruck.

Road to Rule - There are two aspects of the interface which served as a refreshing change from the usual Action RPG fare. The Road to Rule allows players to unlock new abilities and combat upgrades as the story progresses, instead of a traditional levelling system. I found it to be a somewhat shallow version of Final Fantasy X's sphere system, which didn't pose any particularly hard choices; still, a welcome change. The other interface change comes in the form of The Sanctuary, Fable III's playable pause menu; allowing players to wander through a well-furnished armoury and closet, instead of navigating static menus. While it is a lot more time-intensive than a traditional menu, it is an interesting concept and a valid alternative.

The Bad
Nonsensical economy - I found it comical and completely absurd that one could earn more money from making pies, than playing the real estate game. I haven't checked whether this extends to the other minigames (Lute Hero and Blacksmith), but by upgrading the Pie Maker job to the highest level, I was able to make around 30000 dollars in about five minutes. Compare this to purchasing an affordable property or shop, which will earn you between one hundred and a few thousand dollars every five minutes. Why go to the bother of renting out some houses when you can make more than ten times the money by making some pies?

Stuttering - While Fable III is generally speaking, a beautiful-looking game; the frame rate consistently falters during combat, especially when confronting large groups of enemies. Sometimes it looked as though animations were truncated to accommodate more characters on screen, and it very rarely looked pretty. The effect was even more noticable when enemies were further away. It was also interesting to note that the frame rate took a pretty noticable hit any time that I attempted a job after taking the throne. I'm not sure if this was because of the NPCs swarming around me, wanting to give me presents, or if it was the armour I was wearing; but you should have seen the game grind to a halt when it was pie time.

Moral Compass- The final section of the game tasks players with ruling over Albion and making good (or not) on promises you made on your ascension to the throne. This should have made an interesting change of pace from the standard travel here, kill this (or retrieve that), return to quest-giving NPC formula; but what it boils down to are some overly obvious choices from each end of the moral specturm. For example:

• Do you establish an orphange at a cost to your coffers, or do you approve of a whorehouse which will feed millions into your economy?
• Do you allow for child labour in Albion's factories, or do you establish a school?
• Do you drain a lake and mine for resources, or do you maintain the natural beauty of the region?

Most disappointing of all (and something that I didn't properly consider until viewing Yahtzee's review - which is highly recommended), is that there is no way for you to justify some of the more sinister decisions to your constituents given the circumstances in which you have to make them.

The Ugly
Monster Mash - Combat in Fable III is utterly forgettable. Let's forget for a minute that you'll be fighting about eight different types of enemies, each of which employ a similar strategy (read: rush him!) for every encounter. Enemies, even in very large groups are overly fallible and prone to dying well before posing a threat to the Hero. What's worse is that whether you choose melee, ranged or magic to fight the hordes, there's a very slim chance that you could come close to meeting your demise. Come to think of it, I'm not even sure why there is a ranged option when magic can be used for either focussed (with more than adequate range) and radial attacks. If it weren't for the fact that shooting an enemy in the face mid-combo is somewhat amusing, I'd never have even reached for my pistol in first place. You could go through the entire game mashing only on the X button in combat situations, and I would wager that you could survive pretty much every encounter. If you do find yourself injured though, you can always roll away from your opponents until you recover. Fable III is the easiest game I've ever played. I never died, and I've even got the cheevo to prove it (commence celebratory dick-swinging).

That's it? - Now to be entirely clear; I was the good guy, in almost every scenario. For that reason, I can't categorically say that the final confrontation is as disappointing for the more evil players out there when compared to my noble colleagues. What I can say though, is that the final boss fight in Fable III is without a doubt, the most anti-climactic (in terms of both challenge and scale) sequence in recent memory. It's over before it even begins, taking a grand total of about ten minutes to transpire.

Do I get a happy ending? - I must stress this once again: I tried to please everyone. When I (BEGIN SPOILER) took the throne, I was told that the only way to save the kingdom was to make unpopular decisions. I wanted everyone to love me, so almost every decision I made was popular with the people of Albion. Was I punished? No. It seems that the ending I attained was all the more whimsical because I failed to show the backbone required to make the decisions that no one would want to make, in order to keep the kingdom safe (END SPOILER). Lesson learned!

Sanctuary Shop - There are few things that can kill immersion quite like advertising. Nearly everytime I paused the game, I was reminded that there were some new "bits and bobs," in the Sanctuary Shop. If I'm interested in downloadable content, I'll download it from the XBLM or PSN at my own leisure. I'd prefer not to be reminded about these unnecessary additions ad nauseum.

5.0/10 - Fable III is the definition of mediocre, abjectly failing to deliver on its premise of thoughtful rule. Players are made to wade through a series of simplistic, morally-polarized decisions to save or forsake the kingdom of Albion. Save for one particularly memorable sequence, pretty much every aspect of the game fails to stir excitement, and unless you are in desparate need of ten to fifteen hours of walking and talking (and bashing X) this game is best left avoided.

Screaming Yahtzee

Thanks to Dutch’s recent blog on Gameinformer, I was motivated to think about gaming reviews and industry information I’ve read in print recently.

I drew a blank.

As I thought on a much broader scale, I struggled to remember the last magazine of any sort to take up the better part of an afternoon. Had it not been for Forrest Griffin’s fantastic Got Fight? I honestly think the last book I read would’ve been a marketing text from 2005. If that doesn’t count, it may well be A Clockwork Orange; the subject of my Year 12 English assignment... in 2000.

It was at this stage I realised I rarely engage with print, with almost all of my daily information being fed directly from the little blue cord in the wall.

Is this a bad thing? Yes and no but I’m not going to dwell on it. Between Dutch and myself, it is quite clear who is well read; not only due to the topics we write about and their depth of information, but because of our chosen writing styles.

My underlying issue with reading is the fact I have the attention span of a brick. Unless I’m really motivated to get through an article, even on the subjects of interest such as movies or my beloved punk rock, I just lose focus. Even reading Facebook status updates can prove to be a chore and they’re often less than 15 words long. I promise I’m interested but reading is just so hard sometimes.

Despite my idiosyncrasy, I mainly stopped reading magazines because much of the content is often so dry and laboured. Sure, many articles are entertaining gems, but no matter what I read, from Alternative Press to Rolling Stone, Empire and even Better Homes & Gardens (shut up it’s for work), I can just picture a team of reluctant journo’s plodding away on the keyboard hoping to meet a daily word limit so they can hit the nearest wine bar and finish the day in an undeserving Merlot haze. Where’s the passion for the content?

That’s why I enjoy Zero Punctuation, Ben “Yahtzee” Croshaw’s weekly games review on The Escapist. Passionate and straightforward, Yahtzee delivers his reviews through a fast paced flash animation with quite an open and unrelenting dialogue; never have I witnessed a series of reviews containing so many references to a vaginal colloquialism (he’s clearly not a fan of Halo or COD: Black Ops).

More than just strong language and a pessimistic outlook on life, Zero Punctuation is a winner simply because it’s entertaining. Thanks to its speedy pace, both with dialogue and visual cues, you need to stay focussed to understand the flickering mess on the screen, but not so focussed that you feel like you are working and therefore don’t care so much.

While I don’t necessarily agree with his point of view on many games (this is often my prerequisite for any consistently accessed media review), his thoughts and criticisms are delivered with a certain panache you just don’t find in print.

A refreshing change of pace from standards such as Good Game, IGN.com or GameSpot, Yahtzee may have a glass-half-empty perception, but he can definitely deliver an entertaining critique.

Have you seen any of Yahtzee’s work? What are your thoughts on his excessively negative outlook?

NGP and Other Acronyms

NGP - Next Generation Portable
Please tell me that you have all read about the NGP (that's the "codename," for now)? It's the most beautiful machine mine eyes hath ever seen. The quad-core portable messiah if you will. If you haven't yet seen it in all of its glory then at the very least, check the official word from Sony; if that won't do, then pretty much every videogame website worth a damn has features dedicated to it.

There are of course a few lingering questions that remain unanswered. The most obvious of which is the price: I mean, how much can what is essentially, a portable Playstation 3 with touch-screen controls cost? The guys at Penny Arcade have made a particularly ominous, illustrated statement about why such a figure is yet to be revealed, however I am cautiously optimistic that this wonderous machine will cost me less than 1000 dollars at launch. The other looming question is, of course: what is the Australian release date for the NGP? Kotaku AU have reported that SCEA President, Jack Tretton, stated that the NGP would launch in at “at least one territory” by Christmas 2011 (Serrels, 2011: http://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/01/sonys-ngp-in-australia-by-christmas/). So from that we can conclude that it's a safe bet that the NGP won't be launching in Australia until 2012.

Despite some very impressive early footage and some big announcements on the software front, the reason I'm most excited (read: not disappointed) about the NGP is that PSP and PSone games that I've purchased via the Playstation Network should be playable on the new machine. So ideally, all of the money I've spent over the past five years won't have amounted to nothing. Granted, I can't fathom why one would bother playing the likes of Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories, when you could be playing the new Uncharted or Killzone instalment on this wonderportable; but then again, who am I to judge? Trophy support is also very much appreciated, even if it isn't entirely necessary. Some of the other feautures, such as 3G capabilitiy, front and rear cameras, and the touch pads are interesting, but Sony have already made their first sale.
 

 
Are you interested in the NGP? Will you be picking one up on day one (whenever that may be)?
 
MNCoPC - Monday Night Combat on PC
I've already imparted my impressions from the XBLA release, but I also decided to acquire the PC version (via Steam) to see how it handled. Long story short: the PC version of MNC takes all the good ideas from the XBLA release, and makes it a great game. It is genuinely difficult to find a playable match on Xbox Live, and while there is a single player offering; you don't play Monday Night Combat by yourself. Conversely, on the PC, lobbies with servicable (even good) connection quality are plentiful. Throw in some Team Fortress 2-themed in-game items for early adopters (sorry guys, the offer ended on February 1st), and MNC on PC presents solid value.
 
The mutual item unlocks (that's right, early adopters received in-game items for TF2 as well) was not the sole motivation for purchase. I actually read about these unlocks after I'd paid for the game. I bought MNC twice because as reported by Penny Arcade, the game had actually undergone several changes since the console release. I'm not just talking about infastructure (the most obvious change) either, the player classes had been changed (at least in the case of the Sniper) significantly. For full details, check the previous link; but rest assured Monday Night Combat has seen two different releases on two platforms. No prizes for guessing which one I think is better either.
 
FBIIIRI - Fable III Review Incoming
The theme of this post is being extended to its limit, but as above, I should have a review of Fable III ready for next week. This is the first instalment of the franchise that I have actually been able to finish, as its predecessors were just too uneventful to hold my attention. Much to my surprise, I've actually enjoyed the latest from Lionhead Studios. If you want to know how much I enjoyed it, you'll need to come back next week.
 

 
What are you guys playing this week/end?

Blankets and Yardsticks

On Monday I received the earth-shattering news that I had "Two Lives Left." That means that only two more issues of Gameinformer (Australia) magazine will be delivered to my doorstep.

I am indebted to my brother for the one year subscription to Gameinformer magazine that he gifted me with last year. Not because it's a particularly well-written publication (which it is not), but rather it has often provided me with inspiration to continue writing. Why? Because it is the highest-selling gaming publication in Australia, so I have decided to use it as a yardstick for this blog. I'm not saying that this is the definitive source for all your gaming information needs, nor is it the best written one. Throughout my time writing however, I believe I have shown an ability to engage with videogames critically, and make some bold statements (at least when compared to the yardstick).

Why all the hate, you may ask?

Is it jealousy? Possibly. I must admit that being paid to write about videogames would qualify as somewhat of a dream job. Further to that, having access to review code would allow me to save thousands of dollars for any hopes and dreams that I (and/or my lovely wife) might have for life away from the living room.

Is it a difference of opinion? Not exactly. Gameinformer have run two features within the past three months that have infuriated me to no end. The first of which I had discussed previously in the post "Response to Kotaku AU's Open Letter to Metacritic," where I highlighted the contradictory nature of some comments found in their list of the 30 characters that defined a decade. I disagreed with their list, not only in terms of order but content as well. My latest beef is with their "Top 50 Games of 2010," visual feature. That's right dear readers, fifty (5-0) games. To put this into perspective, the list of titles I considered for the High Horse Audit totalled forty-one. I am aware that Gameinformer features the work of more than two writers (sorry I didn't consult you for the list, Dawson), but you might as well have stated that every game released last year was awesome, a must-own if you will.

Am I being a little too dramatic? Of course! But then again, people wouldn't bother to read opinion pieces (or pages worth of forum trolling) if they weren't looking for drama. More to the point though: how much thought goes into a list of fifty good games released in a calendar year? Final Fantasy XIII, Darksiders, Modnations Racers, Scott Pilgrim Vs The World: The Videogame, and several other undeserving titles are included in this feature; as are those that are of high quality like Just Cause 2, Battlefield: Bad Company 2 and Red Dead Redemption (Stead, 2011:1-2). But so are those that were good, but definitely not "Game of the Year," qualifiers like Alan Wake, Mafia II, Fable III (which I'm currently being led through by a trail of tinsel), and Blur. It is a list bereft of integrity, designed so as not to offend anyone, and celebrate everything.

I have a great many gripes with Gameinformer, from high review scores, to the ratio of preview to review space (Ninety percent hype, with ten percent post-mortem). I understand that the publication needs to cater to as many EBGames customers as possible; but is it possible to perhaps engage with games on a higher level? I'm not talking about the Games = Art debate either. If I want pre-release hype, I'll hit up YouTube for a trailer rather than turn to Gameinformer for a six-page spread with large text and big screenshots. What I want from a gaming publication is a second opinion. A thoughtful rebuttal to my praise, or another soul to join the angry mob. The review for Scott Pilgrim Vs The World: The Videogame, one of "The Top 50 Games of 2010," is forty-seven words long for fuck's sake (Stead, 2010: 97)!

Finally, I'd just like to share some gaffs I've come across over the course of my subscription. The most obvious of which can be found in issue 12, where rumours and speculation regarding the PSP2 are put to print. The short story ends with the following embellishment "C'mon Sony it's time to fess up: we've even found this leaked image!" (Stead, 2010: 21):

Now you may not have seen this image before, but I have. Several times, and well before November 2010. I did a quick search for "psp2," at Kotaku, and this image surfaced as early as November 2008! Apparently the guys at Gameinformer took more than two years to catch up to the online competition (perhaps even funnier, the newly announced NGP looks nothing like the mock-up above). Also worthy of a laugh (and I'll admit that this is very petty of me) is the September issue (released in August), where it's claimed that "Batman: Arkham Asylum rocked the gaming world two years ago," (Stead, 2010: 5). Batman: Arkham Asylum was released on the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 on September 3rd, 2009. Now mathematics is not my strong suit (particularly when time is involved), but by my calculations, when this rubbish had been printed not even one calendar year had passed since the game's initial release.

Sour grapes? Yeah. I want to work in the industry, and I'm sure that attacking a popular publication is not the best way to put my name out there. With that being said however, I can't believe that so many people turn to this magazine for information, opinion and validation.

After I lose my final two lives, I will not dispose of all the glossy trash as I may need it somewhere down the line. To inspire me, to ignite my will. I know one thing for sure however, I will not be searching for a 1UP from Gameinformer.

Does anybody else read Gameinformer? What are your thoughts?

References (any web references are linked in text):
1. Stead, C (Editor) (2010). Contents. Gameinformer, Issue 9, p4-5.
2. Stead, C (Editor) (2010). The Score. Gameinformer, Issue 10, p97.
3. Stead, C (Editor) (2010). The 30 Characters Who Defined a Decade. Gameinformer, Issue 12, p26-49.
4. Stead, C (Editor) (2011). The Top 50 Games of 2010. Gameinformer, Issue 14, p1-2.
5. Stead, C (Editor) (2010). The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. Gameinformer, Issue 12, p21.

Weekend Update: Gimme' Shelter (from the Bulletstorm)

Bulletstorm asks players to kill a "metric-fuck-ton," of enemies with skill. There doesn't seem to be a compelling motive for this undertaking; if there is, it's not apparent in the demo recently published on Xbox Live and the Playstation Network. Apart from the obvious objective of survival, the only other reason you're given to play is to out-score your friends; there's no greater good that you're fighting for, and no civilians to save. People Can Fly have tasked gamers to kill throngs of people and monsters in elaborate fashions because it is amusing to behold, and humans are by nature, comtpetitive. The me of 5 years ago wouldn't have had much of a problem with this; however these days, the older, infinitely-more principled (read: boring) me needs some greater purpose to take a life. Bulletstorm may be a reasonably good-looking game, with some interesting weapons and score mechanics, but ultimately (at least in its demo form) it seems pointless.



Don't get me wrong: I chuckled the first time I scored a "Gag Reflex," and a "Voodoo Doll." I laughed out loud (lol'd if you will) when I performed the "Mercy," skillshot. The mirth began to fade after I played the game as intended; witnessing these gory, sometimes humorous death animations several hundred times over on repeated playthoughs, trying to best my previous scores. I'm sure the full retail version will have some form of narrative, and enough change-ups in pacing to engage me for a few hours (maybe even a single plathrough); but at the moment I can't help but feel it will be Vanquish all over again. A squad of potty-mouthed, murderous rogues exhausting me with their radbaditude.



In other demo-related news, the multiplayer demo (or closed beta as its advertised on the XBLM) for Crysis 2 went live on Wednesday, and I must say that I am disappointed with what I have seen and played. For all of Crytek's huffing and puffing, the game does not appear to be any more attractive than most recent FPS releases, and plays much like your average Call of Duty instalment. Granted you can cloak, and jump a fair bit higher thanks to the nanosuit; but in the end Crysis 2's multiplayer offering doesn't appear to be the breath of fresh air I hoped it would be (to qualify once again, at least in demo form). The game also features a now, clichéd rank and unlock system. I'm sure once again, that the full version will feature some interesting upgrades to your nanosuit which should hopefully serve to differentiate it from the competition. There is of course, a single player campaign to consider as well, which is not featured in the demo: so I'm not quite ready to remove Crysis 2 from the list of potential purchases in 2011. With that being said however, I wrote to a friend recently:

"I was hoping to spend less on games this year, but if there is any hype behind it, odds are that you'll find it at my house. Shooter or otherwise."

I know this may read like a future FPS troll-fest, but I was hoping that at the very least, Bulletstorm would not be a blood-soaked, one-hundred-dollar ticket to the Gears of War 3 beta. I guess that "Kill with Skill," is the first tagline in recent memory to hold a candle to that of Bizarre Creations’ 2008 release, The Club. “The Club rewards stylish kills,” after all.

What’s your favourite regrettable quote or tagline from a videogame? What have you guys been playing recently?