As promised, here is my first printable game guide, for The Dark Spire. I hope you all find it as useful as I did. If you like it, send your friends my way!
More will come; right now I'm working on a strategy guide for Monster Hunter Tri. As you can imagine, the sheer scope of the game means that it will be a MUCH bigger project. I will probably release the Monster Hunter Tri guide in increments, since you could be waiting months for the final release candidate.
Anyhow, the link for the Dark Spire guide is here. Enjoy!
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
New Feature: Unofficial Strategy Guides
So basically, unless your game has "Halo," "Grand Theft Auto," or "Mario" in the title, a strategy guide is rarely made. This is a problem for those of us who enjoy less "popular" games like The Dark Spire, Monster Hunter Tri, and the like.
So what's the big deal? I mean, with the intarwebs, you can find just about anything you wanna know. Well, I personally don't like having to jump up and check the computer for help with a game--I want to have something in paper format right in front of me that I can use. Hence, my doejo branded guides.
With this in mind, I've begun making strategy guides for the "neglected" games. The first such strategy guide is for The Dark Spire, a personal favorite of mine. These are completely free for you to use. Print it. Take it to Kinko's and bind it. I don't care. All I ask is that you give credit where credit is due. These are Doejo productions. Please reference me when you use them.
So what's the big deal? I mean, with the intarwebs, you can find just about anything you wanna know. Well, I personally don't like having to jump up and check the computer for help with a game--I want to have something in paper format right in front of me that I can use. Hence, my doejo branded guides.
With this in mind, I've begun making strategy guides for the "neglected" games. The first such strategy guide is for The Dark Spire, a personal favorite of mine. These are completely free for you to use. Print it. Take it to Kinko's and bind it. I don't care. All I ask is that you give credit where credit is due. These are Doejo productions. Please reference me when you use them.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Review: Monster Hunter Tri
The monster hunter series really is terrific. Or its horrible. It totally depends on your tastes, probably more than most any other series of games out there.
Monster Hunter doesn't really fit into a genre, and has no analogue experience against which it can be compared. If forced, I guess I would call it an offline/4 player online MMO/action/adventure/RPG(?)
Premise:
There's no plot. You can't "beat the game," because the game has no true end-point, or story for that matter. Instead, its all based on a premise, which is that you are the village monster hunter. Your sole task is taking on jobs (some involving killing X number of monsters, some involving killing some huge, odious beast, and some involving gathering resources for someone in the village while being beaten on by monsters). The jobs are organized by "ranks;" you must clear certain 1 star missions before you open the next rank of missions, etc.
There's no leveling in the game, but in its place is equipment upgrades--you will quickly reach the end of your ability to take on the next level of monster if you don't get the latest-and-greatest in gear. But you can't just buy it, you have to have the blacksmith craft it from items you collect. This means gathering the skins, scales, and bones of the most deadly monsters you can take down--because after all, if the monster is hard to kill, his hide will surely make a fine breastplate!
Speaking of crafting, the game also has a system for crafting virtually all consumables in the game. In fact, it is so rich that IMO, it puts most MMOs to shame. Need potions? Combine blue mushrooms and herbs. Need mega-potions? Combine potions and honey. Traps, poisons, antidotes, paintballs (for tracking your quarry when they try and run), you name it, you can make it.
Gameplay:
This is where Monster Hunter Tri has to prove its mettle. Previous games have been very enjoyable and addictive (just one more hunt!), but the controls have, er, sucked. Does Tri make things better?
Well, you can play with the nunchuck/wiimote. And, frankly, the game functions very competently with these controls (although I accidentally swung my sword a few times when scratching my nose). But honestly, when you start fighting monsters that can kill you in two hits, you realize that this is a series about perfectly timed, perfectly placed swings. Motion controls just don't work.
The classic controller pro is definately the way to go, and compared to previous games, is amazing. Its like comparing a NES pad to a Dualshock 3--you didn't realize you could play the game without your hands hurting before!
The game also offers several different weapon types you can use. This falls under gameplay because each weapon has its own system of functioning. Sword and shield is fast, and you have the ability to block with the shield. Greatsword does massive damage with each swing, but you move slower and the combos are totally different than sword and shield. Bowgun is a ranged weapon, and has its own unique set of moves and combos. This gives the game enormous depth, as mastery of one weapon means you've only bested a fraction of the game--there are still other weapons to master.
All in all, I can't help but give the gameplay a perfect score. This game is a joy from the moment you start. Just don't even bother with the nunchuck/ wiimote setup--save that for a game where it fits, like RE4.
Score: 10/10
Graphics and Level Design:
The game is pretty. Overall. Kinda.
But, well, it has this kind of graininess that you can't overlook. Its hard to describe. Maybe its because the wii isn't HD. Maybe its because they don't use anisotropic filtering or anti-aliasing. Maybe its because the models and textures are too low res. I can't really place it. But there's just . . . something that takes this otherwise pretty game and adds a certain uglification to it.
Oh, and while I'm complaining, the game uses this tiny font that is damn near impossible to read! I don't know why you would do that on a game system made for SDTVs, but there it is. Maybe there is a setting to change this--if there is, I didn't see it--but its definitely a "con" graphically.
There are other factors that do look really nice. For instance, the "torch" mechanic, which lights up darkened caves, has a nice light source effect. And the water areas, both above and below, look pretty cool.
Another "pro" in the graphics column is the variety in the areas of the game. Dark jungles, scalding volcanos, arctic tundras, and searing deserts are just a few of the places you will do battle. The game uses a broad pallette of colors, which makes me happy--I hate it when games try to look realistic by replacing virtually all colors with grey-tones *cough!* *Gears of War!* *cough!* The real world is colorful, and Monster Hunter Tri captures that beautifully.
So overall, eh, the game gets a 6 visually from me. Games like Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, and Super Smash Bros Brawl prove to me that the Wii can do better. As far as level design goes, this game is a big ol' 10. Good design, crappy engine.
Graphics score: 6/10
Level design score: 10/10
Audio:
Monster hunter games are kinda like silent movies--there's music, but all talking is done with text. You'd think that at this point they'd realize that a dvd-9 is plenty big enough to fit compressed audio voice-overs, but here we are.
The music and sound effects are . . . eh. They get the job done, but they won't turn your world upside-down.
Score: 6/10
Story:
There is none.
Score: N/A
Replay:
This sorta seems like an unfair category for Monster Hunter Tri. The game doesn't have perfect replay, it really has infinite replay. Lets say you spend the hundreds of hours to get all armor and weapon sets tweaked to perfection, you beat all the missions with all weapon classes, and you fully completed all side quests (like repairing the damaged farm). There's *still* totally free online play! You could, theoretically, play this game every single day until the next game comes out and people stop playing Tri. And even then, you could play single player and explore every nook and cranny in the game world.
I'm giving Tri a 10/10, but know that the score should probably be infinity/10.
Score:10/10
Bottom line:
This game is good. Very good, even. But it isn't for everyone. If you're a graphics-whore (and I'll admit it, I'm one), the visuals are off-putting. The gameplay is great, but demanding and precise. Ultimately, if you love MMOs, but want something more action oriented and without level grinding, Monster Hunter Tri is a perfect fit. But if you want a somewhat more forgiving or more attractive game, you'll want to look elsewhere.
Score: 8/10
Monster Hunter doesn't really fit into a genre, and has no analogue experience against which it can be compared. If forced, I guess I would call it an offline/4 player online MMO/action/adventure/RPG(?)
Premise:
There's no plot. You can't "beat the game," because the game has no true end-point, or story for that matter. Instead, its all based on a premise, which is that you are the village monster hunter. Your sole task is taking on jobs (some involving killing X number of monsters, some involving killing some huge, odious beast, and some involving gathering resources for someone in the village while being beaten on by monsters). The jobs are organized by "ranks;" you must clear certain 1 star missions before you open the next rank of missions, etc.
There's no leveling in the game, but in its place is equipment upgrades--you will quickly reach the end of your ability to take on the next level of monster if you don't get the latest-and-greatest in gear. But you can't just buy it, you have to have the blacksmith craft it from items you collect. This means gathering the skins, scales, and bones of the most deadly monsters you can take down--because after all, if the monster is hard to kill, his hide will surely make a fine breastplate!
Speaking of crafting, the game also has a system for crafting virtually all consumables in the game. In fact, it is so rich that IMO, it puts most MMOs to shame. Need potions? Combine blue mushrooms and herbs. Need mega-potions? Combine potions and honey. Traps, poisons, antidotes, paintballs (for tracking your quarry when they try and run), you name it, you can make it.
Gameplay:
This is where Monster Hunter Tri has to prove its mettle. Previous games have been very enjoyable and addictive (just one more hunt!), but the controls have, er, sucked. Does Tri make things better?
Well, you can play with the nunchuck/wiimote. And, frankly, the game functions very competently with these controls (although I accidentally swung my sword a few times when scratching my nose). But honestly, when you start fighting monsters that can kill you in two hits, you realize that this is a series about perfectly timed, perfectly placed swings. Motion controls just don't work.
The classic controller pro is definately the way to go, and compared to previous games, is amazing. Its like comparing a NES pad to a Dualshock 3--you didn't realize you could play the game without your hands hurting before!
The game also offers several different weapon types you can use. This falls under gameplay because each weapon has its own system of functioning. Sword and shield is fast, and you have the ability to block with the shield. Greatsword does massive damage with each swing, but you move slower and the combos are totally different than sword and shield. Bowgun is a ranged weapon, and has its own unique set of moves and combos. This gives the game enormous depth, as mastery of one weapon means you've only bested a fraction of the game--there are still other weapons to master.
All in all, I can't help but give the gameplay a perfect score. This game is a joy from the moment you start. Just don't even bother with the nunchuck/ wiimote setup--save that for a game where it fits, like RE4.
Score: 10/10
Graphics and Level Design:
The game is pretty. Overall. Kinda.
But, well, it has this kind of graininess that you can't overlook. Its hard to describe. Maybe its because the wii isn't HD. Maybe its because they don't use anisotropic filtering or anti-aliasing. Maybe its because the models and textures are too low res. I can't really place it. But there's just . . . something that takes this otherwise pretty game and adds a certain uglification to it.
Oh, and while I'm complaining, the game uses this tiny font that is damn near impossible to read! I don't know why you would do that on a game system made for SDTVs, but there it is. Maybe there is a setting to change this--if there is, I didn't see it--but its definitely a "con" graphically.
There are other factors that do look really nice. For instance, the "torch" mechanic, which lights up darkened caves, has a nice light source effect. And the water areas, both above and below, look pretty cool.
Another "pro" in the graphics column is the variety in the areas of the game. Dark jungles, scalding volcanos, arctic tundras, and searing deserts are just a few of the places you will do battle. The game uses a broad pallette of colors, which makes me happy--I hate it when games try to look realistic by replacing virtually all colors with grey-tones *cough!* *Gears of War!* *cough!* The real world is colorful, and Monster Hunter Tri captures that beautifully.
So overall, eh, the game gets a 6 visually from me. Games like Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, and Super Smash Bros Brawl prove to me that the Wii can do better. As far as level design goes, this game is a big ol' 10. Good design, crappy engine.
Graphics score: 6/10
Level design score: 10/10
Audio:
Monster hunter games are kinda like silent movies--there's music, but all talking is done with text. You'd think that at this point they'd realize that a dvd-9 is plenty big enough to fit compressed audio voice-overs, but here we are.
The music and sound effects are . . . eh. They get the job done, but they won't turn your world upside-down.
Score: 6/10
Story:
There is none.
Score: N/A
Replay:
This sorta seems like an unfair category for Monster Hunter Tri. The game doesn't have perfect replay, it really has infinite replay. Lets say you spend the hundreds of hours to get all armor and weapon sets tweaked to perfection, you beat all the missions with all weapon classes, and you fully completed all side quests (like repairing the damaged farm). There's *still* totally free online play! You could, theoretically, play this game every single day until the next game comes out and people stop playing Tri. And even then, you could play single player and explore every nook and cranny in the game world.
I'm giving Tri a 10/10, but know that the score should probably be infinity/10.
Score:10/10
Bottom line:
This game is good. Very good, even. But it isn't for everyone. If you're a graphics-whore (and I'll admit it, I'm one), the visuals are off-putting. The gameplay is great, but demanding and precise. Ultimately, if you love MMOs, but want something more action oriented and without level grinding, Monster Hunter Tri is a perfect fit. But if you want a somewhat more forgiving or more attractive game, you'll want to look elsewhere.
Score: 8/10
Saturday, April 03, 2010
Review: Dead Space
Yeah, I know, this has been out forever, but I only just recently have been playing it. So sue me!
Dead Space will go down in history along with Okami and Odin Sphere as one of the most under appreciated games. In fact, the game was rented/resold as often as it was sold new. That's not saying it didn't sell modestly well; in fact, EA claim they sold 1.5 million copies of the game--that should be profitable. But when compared with GTA IV, which sold 6 million copies in its first week of retail, well . . . Dead Space was under appreciated.
Premise:
If Resident Evil 4 and System Shock 2 had a baby, Dead Space would be it.
The comparisons to RE4 are painfully obvious. The game is played from an over-the-shoulder perspective, you have to go into aiming mode to fire, you can melee monsters if/when you run out of ammo . . . yeah. It's very RE4.
The comparisons to SS2 are also pretty obvious. The entire game is real-time, including all menu navigation (except saving the game). You use items in the game world to solve puzzles, check your map, and manage your inventory all in real time, risking monster attacks at every turn. You have certain telekinetic powers (like a stasis/freeze beam and telekinesis). Furthermore, the game takes place on a derelict space ship (sound familiar?), and you are guided from objective to objective by an ally over a radio (conveniently, he's always doing something that keeps him from having to go into the monster infested med labs and engineering levels). Oh, and ammo is very limited. Very. Almost too limited; just like SS2.
These comparisons are not bad. In fact, they're great. SS2 and RE4 were both 10/10 games in my opinion, and combining the best of the two is a great idea. Slap current gen graphics and various well-placed mini games onto that framework, and you have a winner of a game.
Gameplay:
The game plays just like RE4 + SS2. That means "quality." There isn't much here to say that I didn't already say in the premise. Perfect gameplay.
Score: 10/10
Graphics and Level Design:
The game is beautiful, and the developers were brilliant in their use of the technology.
Dead Space is all about the use of shadows. The game is dark--you are on a derelict space ship, after all--and the broad use of shadows turns the game from a run-and-gun into a real survival-horror title. The weapons (most of which are converted mining tools, since the ship was a mining vessel) all project a beam of light when aimed (think the flashlight in Doom 3, but duct-taped to a gun). The result is you spinning around like mad, looking for the danger lurking in the shadows, and jumping when you find it.
The monsters, character outfits, and ship design are all gorgeous. It's hard not to love this game for the eye candy.
Graphics score: 10/10
Level design score: 10/10
Audio:
This is one of the only places where the game falls flat. There isn't enough "moody music" to really scare ya, and when you're fighting monsters, the audio may as well just be someone crumbling up a sheet of aluminum foil behind a bull horn. Its just "noise," and that doesn't work for me.
The audio partially redeems itself when you enter the vacuum outside the ship. Sounds are severely muted, and the sound of your breathing is greatly increased. Technically, there should be /no/ sounds from outside in the vacuum of space, of course, but the muted sounds give the game a better ambiance.
Score: 8/10
Story:
I haven't finished the game yet, so take my score with a grain of salt. But that said, the story seems kinda hackneyed--space ship goes silent, you're on a rescue team, you find the ship crawling with zombies, you discover something-or-other caused everyone to be zombified. Ho-hum.
Score: 7/10
Replay:
Replay for Dead Space is like the replay for RE4--on second (and third and fourth) playthroughs, the goal is to get all collectibles and unlock all unlockables. It has no online mode (that I know of), but there's still alot here to keep you coming back for more.
Score: 8/10
Bottom line:
This game rocks the house. Don't come to the table expecting to be blown away by the story. Instead, expect this to follow your standard zombie-movie formula: get trapped by zombies, kill and/ or escape from zombies, destroy source of zombies. But the game still stands on its own as a great experience because of its gameplay mechanics.
Score: 9/10
Dead Space will go down in history along with Okami and Odin Sphere as one of the most under appreciated games. In fact, the game was rented/resold as often as it was sold new. That's not saying it didn't sell modestly well; in fact, EA claim they sold 1.5 million copies of the game--that should be profitable. But when compared with GTA IV, which sold 6 million copies in its first week of retail, well . . . Dead Space was under appreciated.
Premise:
If Resident Evil 4 and System Shock 2 had a baby, Dead Space would be it.
The comparisons to RE4 are painfully obvious. The game is played from an over-the-shoulder perspective, you have to go into aiming mode to fire, you can melee monsters if/when you run out of ammo . . . yeah. It's very RE4.
The comparisons to SS2 are also pretty obvious. The entire game is real-time, including all menu navigation (except saving the game). You use items in the game world to solve puzzles, check your map, and manage your inventory all in real time, risking monster attacks at every turn. You have certain telekinetic powers (like a stasis/freeze beam and telekinesis). Furthermore, the game takes place on a derelict space ship (sound familiar?), and you are guided from objective to objective by an ally over a radio (conveniently, he's always doing something that keeps him from having to go into the monster infested med labs and engineering levels). Oh, and ammo is very limited. Very. Almost too limited; just like SS2.
These comparisons are not bad. In fact, they're great. SS2 and RE4 were both 10/10 games in my opinion, and combining the best of the two is a great idea. Slap current gen graphics and various well-placed mini games onto that framework, and you have a winner of a game.
Gameplay:
The game plays just like RE4 + SS2. That means "quality." There isn't much here to say that I didn't already say in the premise. Perfect gameplay.
Score: 10/10
Graphics and Level Design:
The game is beautiful, and the developers were brilliant in their use of the technology.
Dead Space is all about the use of shadows. The game is dark--you are on a derelict space ship, after all--and the broad use of shadows turns the game from a run-and-gun into a real survival-horror title. The weapons (most of which are converted mining tools, since the ship was a mining vessel) all project a beam of light when aimed (think the flashlight in Doom 3, but duct-taped to a gun). The result is you spinning around like mad, looking for the danger lurking in the shadows, and jumping when you find it.
The monsters, character outfits, and ship design are all gorgeous. It's hard not to love this game for the eye candy.
Graphics score: 10/10
Level design score: 10/10
Audio:
This is one of the only places where the game falls flat. There isn't enough "moody music" to really scare ya, and when you're fighting monsters, the audio may as well just be someone crumbling up a sheet of aluminum foil behind a bull horn. Its just "noise," and that doesn't work for me.
The audio partially redeems itself when you enter the vacuum outside the ship. Sounds are severely muted, and the sound of your breathing is greatly increased. Technically, there should be /no/ sounds from outside in the vacuum of space, of course, but the muted sounds give the game a better ambiance.
Score: 8/10
Story:
I haven't finished the game yet, so take my score with a grain of salt. But that said, the story seems kinda hackneyed--space ship goes silent, you're on a rescue team, you find the ship crawling with zombies, you discover something-or-other caused everyone to be zombified. Ho-hum.
Score: 7/10
Replay:
Replay for Dead Space is like the replay for RE4--on second (and third and fourth) playthroughs, the goal is to get all collectibles and unlock all unlockables. It has no online mode (that I know of), but there's still alot here to keep you coming back for more.
Score: 8/10
Bottom line:
This game rocks the house. Don't come to the table expecting to be blown away by the story. Instead, expect this to follow your standard zombie-movie formula: get trapped by zombies, kill and/ or escape from zombies, destroy source of zombies. But the game still stands on its own as a great experience because of its gameplay mechanics.
Score: 9/10
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Useless merchandise for the day!
Ever been out and about using your iphone and thought "huh, this thing is too small and convenient. I sure wish it weighed more and was less convenient!"
Well behold, the wooden iphone case! Features include:- No protection against drops (in fact, the case will likely split, as wood is wont to do)!
- 17% increased (improved?!?!) weight!
- Increased dimensions (7% taller, 17% wider, and 46% deeper)!
- Unimportant functions (like the volume buttons and the "silent mode" button) "covered up" for simplicity!
- Best of all, the non-routed top edge gives it an awkward, "cigarette pack" aesthetic that all of your friends are sure to hate!
Friday, March 12, 2010
Bioshock 2: Review
If there's one thing the net needs more of, its video game reviews!!
Well, anyhow, I enjoy video games, and I hate getting grifted into buying sucky games, so I figured hey, why not contribute to the collective hive mind of the net and share what I think about games? Speaking of the collective, its somewhat appropriate that my first review is Bioshock 2.
Premise:
Bioshock 2 is about a utopian society, the city of Rapture, which was built deep under the sea and which has failed and collapsed. You play as a survivor in this world trying to escape to the surface and to get away from the insane machinations of the antagonist, Dr. Sofia Lamb.
The world of Rapture was originally created as a lassaiz faire free-market utopia by Andrew Ryan, who is (spoiler alert!) defeated in the first game. In Ryan's wake, Dr. Sofia Lamb, a socialist through and through, takes over the city and attempts to create the perfect citizen out of her daughter, Eleanor Lamb. Your character is her former "Big Daddy," and sort of body guard for children who were in the "Little Sister" program. The kick is, you've been biologically altered to become comatose and die if your "Little Sister" (Eleanor) either wanders too far from you or dies. So all hope of escape rests in your ability to rescue Eleanor from her mother.
Gameplay:
The game plays very similar to the first Bioshock. At its heart, Bioshock 2 is an FPS. This FPS is much deeper than your average "Halo" fare, however, and has qualities that have earned it the moniker of being an "FPS/RPG."
First, you obtain new weapons as you progress through the game. Theoretically, the game can be completed entirely with the use of your starter weapons (the rivet gun and the drill arm), but through some clever game design, you will find that you enjoy your experience best if you "mix and match" as you go. For example, the rivet gun gets "trap rivets" that you can use to bunker a location if you know you are going to be on the defensive, and the machine gun has access to "armor piercing" rounds that are more effective on armored enemies (like machines or other, heavily armored "Big Daddies"). Furthermore, ammunition is limited in this game. It is not as bad as System Shock 2 (for those who remember playing this way back when), but you will want to be "conservative" with your ammo, and you will want to develop proficiency with your entire arsenal, just in case you run out of ammo for your favorite weapon.
Second, like the first Bioshock title, Bioshock 2 has "plasmids" and "tonics." These are ways for your character to alter himself genetically. Plasmids give you active abilities, like the ability to shoot lightning from your fingertips or the ability to grab things telekinetically. Tonics give you passive abilities, like the ability to run faster or carry more health kits and "eve" (eve is the "ammo" for plasmids). You can only equip so many plasmids and tonics at a given time, so there is a TON of customization to be enjoyed here. And if you don't like your loadout, you may go to a gene station at any time and change to a different set.
Third, again like the first Bioshock, Bioshock 2 has the ability to upgrade your weapons. Unlike the first game, however, you cannot purchase ALL of the upgrades--there are not enough upgrade stations. This is a good thing in my opinion, as it allows you to further "customize" your character.
There are a few differences between Bioshock and Bioshock 2 in terms of gameplay. Some are bad, some are good, and some are . . . well, you'll have to decide for yourself.
First, Bioshock 2 eschews the "inventing" mechanic of the first title. Without going into detail, through inventing, you could collect various invention "components," and then use them to make special ammo, plasmids, tonics, etc. I can't really see a good reason for Bioshock 2 to omit something that makes the game more interesting, and that's a shame. Granted, the lack of inventing isn't really earth shattering, but it was a way to "customize" yourself, and I for one miss it.
Second, Bioshock 2 adds the ability to actually walk completely submerged, literally along the bottom of the sea. Its a really cool feature, and is put to good use in several places. It just adds that certain something to the game, an air of "realism" if you will. I mean, I must not be the only person who wondered why, with all of the violence going on inside Rapture, windows NEVER broke. Well in Bioshock 2, they do break (along very scripted lines, of course). In fact, my only gripe about the water areas is that they are too small and linear. I'm walking around the ocean floor, for goodness sake--let me experience at least a little sense of exploration!
Finally, Bioshock 2 changes the "hacking" mechanic. In Bioshock, you "hacked" security cameras, security turrets, etc. by completing a sliding tile game. It was simple, but hey, I liked it. The new system involves a needle bouncing back and forth on a gauge and pressing a button when it is "in the green" zone. The new system has pros and cons. Pro: its real-time, which means if you flub up and security drones are headed your way, you have to try again while being shot at. Con: the mini game is alot less interesting. Do I like the change? I don't know . . . let's just say its a change, ok?
All of this said, the overall gameplay is terrific. I wish they'd made the game a little more RPG like the first title, but the differences aren't big enough to lose sleep over.
Score: 9/10
Graphics and Level design:
The world of Rapture is beautiful. There, I've said it. I was afraid that Bioshock 2 would just be more of the same, but I am pleased to say that it is not. The game features all new "areas" of the city, including an area resembling the French Quarter of New Orleans, an amusement park and wax museum, and a prison. Each area was a joy to explore and experience, and was complete and utter candy to my eyes. Plus, the designers were very clever in the way they "aged" Rapture from the earlier game to the sequel. Run down has become trashed, glitchy has become broken, and leaks have become geysers. The first title was Rapture as it existed shortly after its glory days. Bioshock 2 is Rapture as it exists after years of neglect and disrepair.
Unfortunately, there were some decisions made with the level design that I just don't understand. My biggest complaint: the game is just too linear! Part of the magic of Bioshock was that you weren't just surviving in Rapture, you were "discovering" Rapture. You could go from the very end of the game to an area at the beginning and try and go through "that door" that you skipped over before. In Bioshock 2, however, you cannot "backtrack" through the levels. Once you leave one area for another, you've left it behind forever. Missed a Little Sister or weapon powerup? Too bad.
Graphically, the game is about the best you're going to see on a current gen system. Seriously, this game squeezes every last ounce of power possible from the 360/ps3. As far as pc goes, while it does support DX10, its obvious that the assets were designed with the console versions in mind--the textures are a bit "low" for my taste, the bump maps are low res, and the water effects, although as good as can be expected from systems based on DX9 technology, are decidedly dated. The game devs deserve major props for maxing out what the UE3 engine can do, but honestly, if you aren't going to give pc gamers a little extra lovin' for the price of their gaming rigs, you plain shouldn't release the game on pc.
Graphics Score: 9/10
Level Design Score: 8/10
Audio:
What can I say? The soundtrack of Bioshock 2 is perfect perfection in all of its glorious perfectness. The "old timey" music is a perfect fit for the setting, the orchestral music set the right mood (sometimes pensive, sometimes dark, sometimes heart racing), and the rest of the audio is, well, perfect. The voice acting is great, the number of audio diaries is huge, the sound effects are great . . .
I could gush on and on, but why bother? The sound is perfect. 'Nuff said.
Score: 10/10
Story:
Ok, so the story is a bit of a let down. Actually, it kinda sucks. Bioshock had all sorts of sub-plots and twists and turns. Bioshock 2 is about finding Eleanor Lamb and leaving Rapture. That's how it starts, that's the middle, and that's how it ends.
The side story of "there's something in the sea" is moderately interesting, and entirely optional (which is kinda cool). But there just wasn't enough there to capture me . . .
Anyhow, yeah. The story is the weak spot of this title. Which is a shame, because it was the best part of the first title.
Score: 7/10
Replay:
Bioshock had no online. This was a good thing, if you ask me--if a developer is split between designing an offline experience and an online experience, either one or the other will suffer. With Bioshock, the goal was to make the best single player FPS/RPG hybrid possible. And it showed. But unfortunately, this didn't give the game much in terms of replay. Sure, you could play a second time through on hard, but that was all there was.
With Bioshock 2, the gamer gets a great online experience AND a great offline experience. How? 2K brought in a second developer for the online game. That way the single player game was not compromised, but we still got a multiplayer game.
And how is multiplayer, you may ask? Very enjoyable, as it should be. You get access to a full array of plasmids and weapons, allowing for huge amounts of customization. The game has a "leveling" system, where you gain access to new plasmids, weapons, and other perks the more you play (this also discourages people from "pulling the plug" if they are losing a match). Perhaps best of all, the game has special goals that you gain extra experience for completeing. For example, if you kill a player with the rocket launcher while you are in mid air, you get an extra 150 experience points.
The result is that people experiment, rather than all sticking to one or two "tried and true" techniques (sniper rifle or energy sword in halo 2 anyone?). And people don't drop connection just because they're losing. It's refreshing, its fun, you come out with a truly unique character all of your own design, and it isn't plagued (yet anyhow) by trash talking, llamaing and camping 13 year olds.
Score: 10/10
Conclusion:
Overall, this is a great game. Is it as good as the original? No, but there isn't much that is. If you liked Bioshock, then get ready to shell out another $60, because this is right up your alley.
Overall: 9/10
Well, anyhow, I enjoy video games, and I hate getting grifted into buying sucky games, so I figured hey, why not contribute to the collective hive mind of the net and share what I think about games? Speaking of the collective, its somewhat appropriate that my first review is Bioshock 2.
Premise:
Bioshock 2 is about a utopian society, the city of Rapture, which was built deep under the sea and which has failed and collapsed. You play as a survivor in this world trying to escape to the surface and to get away from the insane machinations of the antagonist, Dr. Sofia Lamb.
The world of Rapture was originally created as a lassaiz faire free-market utopia by Andrew Ryan, who is (spoiler alert!) defeated in the first game. In Ryan's wake, Dr. Sofia Lamb, a socialist through and through, takes over the city and attempts to create the perfect citizen out of her daughter, Eleanor Lamb. Your character is her former "Big Daddy," and sort of body guard for children who were in the "Little Sister" program. The kick is, you've been biologically altered to become comatose and die if your "Little Sister" (Eleanor) either wanders too far from you or dies. So all hope of escape rests in your ability to rescue Eleanor from her mother.
Gameplay:
The game plays very similar to the first Bioshock. At its heart, Bioshock 2 is an FPS. This FPS is much deeper than your average "Halo" fare, however, and has qualities that have earned it the moniker of being an "FPS/RPG."
First, you obtain new weapons as you progress through the game. Theoretically, the game can be completed entirely with the use of your starter weapons (the rivet gun and the drill arm), but through some clever game design, you will find that you enjoy your experience best if you "mix and match" as you go. For example, the rivet gun gets "trap rivets" that you can use to bunker a location if you know you are going to be on the defensive, and the machine gun has access to "armor piercing" rounds that are more effective on armored enemies (like machines or other, heavily armored "Big Daddies"). Furthermore, ammunition is limited in this game. It is not as bad as System Shock 2 (for those who remember playing this way back when), but you will want to be "conservative" with your ammo, and you will want to develop proficiency with your entire arsenal, just in case you run out of ammo for your favorite weapon.
Second, like the first Bioshock title, Bioshock 2 has "plasmids" and "tonics." These are ways for your character to alter himself genetically. Plasmids give you active abilities, like the ability to shoot lightning from your fingertips or the ability to grab things telekinetically. Tonics give you passive abilities, like the ability to run faster or carry more health kits and "eve" (eve is the "ammo" for plasmids). You can only equip so many plasmids and tonics at a given time, so there is a TON of customization to be enjoyed here. And if you don't like your loadout, you may go to a gene station at any time and change to a different set.
Third, again like the first Bioshock, Bioshock 2 has the ability to upgrade your weapons. Unlike the first game, however, you cannot purchase ALL of the upgrades--there are not enough upgrade stations. This is a good thing in my opinion, as it allows you to further "customize" your character.
There are a few differences between Bioshock and Bioshock 2 in terms of gameplay. Some are bad, some are good, and some are . . . well, you'll have to decide for yourself.
First, Bioshock 2 eschews the "inventing" mechanic of the first title. Without going into detail, through inventing, you could collect various invention "components," and then use them to make special ammo, plasmids, tonics, etc. I can't really see a good reason for Bioshock 2 to omit something that makes the game more interesting, and that's a shame. Granted, the lack of inventing isn't really earth shattering, but it was a way to "customize" yourself, and I for one miss it.
Second, Bioshock 2 adds the ability to actually walk completely submerged, literally along the bottom of the sea. Its a really cool feature, and is put to good use in several places. It just adds that certain something to the game, an air of "realism" if you will. I mean, I must not be the only person who wondered why, with all of the violence going on inside Rapture, windows NEVER broke. Well in Bioshock 2, they do break (along very scripted lines, of course). In fact, my only gripe about the water areas is that they are too small and linear. I'm walking around the ocean floor, for goodness sake--let me experience at least a little sense of exploration!
Finally, Bioshock 2 changes the "hacking" mechanic. In Bioshock, you "hacked" security cameras, security turrets, etc. by completing a sliding tile game. It was simple, but hey, I liked it. The new system involves a needle bouncing back and forth on a gauge and pressing a button when it is "in the green" zone. The new system has pros and cons. Pro: its real-time, which means if you flub up and security drones are headed your way, you have to try again while being shot at. Con: the mini game is alot less interesting. Do I like the change? I don't know . . . let's just say its a change, ok?
All of this said, the overall gameplay is terrific. I wish they'd made the game a little more RPG like the first title, but the differences aren't big enough to lose sleep over.
Score: 9/10
Graphics and Level design:
The world of Rapture is beautiful. There, I've said it. I was afraid that Bioshock 2 would just be more of the same, but I am pleased to say that it is not. The game features all new "areas" of the city, including an area resembling the French Quarter of New Orleans, an amusement park and wax museum, and a prison. Each area was a joy to explore and experience, and was complete and utter candy to my eyes. Plus, the designers were very clever in the way they "aged" Rapture from the earlier game to the sequel. Run down has become trashed, glitchy has become broken, and leaks have become geysers. The first title was Rapture as it existed shortly after its glory days. Bioshock 2 is Rapture as it exists after years of neglect and disrepair.
Unfortunately, there were some decisions made with the level design that I just don't understand. My biggest complaint: the game is just too linear! Part of the magic of Bioshock was that you weren't just surviving in Rapture, you were "discovering" Rapture. You could go from the very end of the game to an area at the beginning and try and go through "that door" that you skipped over before. In Bioshock 2, however, you cannot "backtrack" through the levels. Once you leave one area for another, you've left it behind forever. Missed a Little Sister or weapon powerup? Too bad.
Graphically, the game is about the best you're going to see on a current gen system. Seriously, this game squeezes every last ounce of power possible from the 360/ps3. As far as pc goes, while it does support DX10, its obvious that the assets were designed with the console versions in mind--the textures are a bit "low" for my taste, the bump maps are low res, and the water effects, although as good as can be expected from systems based on DX9 technology, are decidedly dated. The game devs deserve major props for maxing out what the UE3 engine can do, but honestly, if you aren't going to give pc gamers a little extra lovin' for the price of their gaming rigs, you plain shouldn't release the game on pc.
Graphics Score: 9/10
Level Design Score: 8/10
Audio:
What can I say? The soundtrack of Bioshock 2 is perfect perfection in all of its glorious perfectness. The "old timey" music is a perfect fit for the setting, the orchestral music set the right mood (sometimes pensive, sometimes dark, sometimes heart racing), and the rest of the audio is, well, perfect. The voice acting is great, the number of audio diaries is huge, the sound effects are great . . .
I could gush on and on, but why bother? The sound is perfect. 'Nuff said.
Score: 10/10
Story:
Ok, so the story is a bit of a let down. Actually, it kinda sucks. Bioshock had all sorts of sub-plots and twists and turns. Bioshock 2 is about finding Eleanor Lamb and leaving Rapture. That's how it starts, that's the middle, and that's how it ends.
The side story of "there's something in the sea" is moderately interesting, and entirely optional (which is kinda cool). But there just wasn't enough there to capture me . . .
Anyhow, yeah. The story is the weak spot of this title. Which is a shame, because it was the best part of the first title.
Score: 7/10
Replay:
Bioshock had no online. This was a good thing, if you ask me--if a developer is split between designing an offline experience and an online experience, either one or the other will suffer. With Bioshock, the goal was to make the best single player FPS/RPG hybrid possible. And it showed. But unfortunately, this didn't give the game much in terms of replay. Sure, you could play a second time through on hard, but that was all there was.
With Bioshock 2, the gamer gets a great online experience AND a great offline experience. How? 2K brought in a second developer for the online game. That way the single player game was not compromised, but we still got a multiplayer game.
And how is multiplayer, you may ask? Very enjoyable, as it should be. You get access to a full array of plasmids and weapons, allowing for huge amounts of customization. The game has a "leveling" system, where you gain access to new plasmids, weapons, and other perks the more you play (this also discourages people from "pulling the plug" if they are losing a match). Perhaps best of all, the game has special goals that you gain extra experience for completeing. For example, if you kill a player with the rocket launcher while you are in mid air, you get an extra 150 experience points.
The result is that people experiment, rather than all sticking to one or two "tried and true" techniques (sniper rifle or energy sword in halo 2 anyone?). And people don't drop connection just because they're losing. It's refreshing, its fun, you come out with a truly unique character all of your own design, and it isn't plagued (yet anyhow) by trash talking, llamaing and camping 13 year olds.
Score: 10/10
Conclusion:
Overall, this is a great game. Is it as good as the original? No, but there isn't much that is. If you liked Bioshock, then get ready to shell out another $60, because this is right up your alley.
Overall: 9/10
Saturday, March 06, 2010
Decided to bring back the Doejo blog . . .
I'm a nerd. Its true, don't try and deny it to make me feel better about myself. I like orcs, goblins and dragons. 20 sided dice give me the warm fuzzies. I look inside the computer that I built myself entirely from off the shelf components, and I'm proud of how I ran the power cabling under the motherboard to give the system a more streamlined look inside. I like video games, classical music, art, and literature. I've written a thesis. I am, in short, the last guy you would want to chill with and enjoy a beer while watching the game (don't bother quoting stats at me, I'm lucky I understand the basics of the game).
So I'm gonna blog. For awhile I was blogging about my political ideology, and how I feel that neither of the major American political parties truly meets the needs and ideological worldview of Biblical Christianity, but then I decided "eh, that's too divisive. People are gonna get mad about that." So instead I'm gonna blog about crap that no one cares about. Nerd stuffs!
So for my triumphant return to the internet 2.0 (ZOMG HTML.COM?!?), I decided to gripe about the state of Sony's flagship handheld gaming system, the PSP (and its more portable cousin, the PSP Go!).
First, the good. As old as the thing is (5 years for North America, longer for Japan), it still can put out some purty polygons. Its d-pad, although not as good as the DS, is functional (which is more than I can say for the 360's crappy rocker d-pad . . .). It is the only handheld with an analog thumb "stick" (more accurately called a "nub" because it isn't very big), and it works perfectly. It also has a beautiful wide screen. The screen on the current iteration of the system, the PSP-3000, glows like the freakin sun. In fact, the only complaints anyone has been able to level at it is that the screen is so clear, and the response times so fast, that you can actually see interlacing in some games.
The PSP also uses UMD disks (ok, that last "disk" was redundant, but whatever). While they are a draw on battery power, they also allow the handheld to run off very cheaply manufactured optical disks, storing as much as 1.2 gigs of data. When you consider that the largest DS title is 256 MB, you can see how much more the PSP has to work with for textures, models, etc.
Ok, now its gripe time.
1) There is no "official" homebrew platform (like the 360s XNA or the ps3's linux). So, people hacked the firmware of the psp to allow unsigned code to run on the system. The good? Now the psp has homebrew out the wazoo--possibly some of the best console homebrew ever made, in fact. The bad? Well, allowing unsigned code allows piracy. And that's always bad for the platform. But also, the firmware hacking was being done by one man, who quit the scene. Because he quit, homebrew enthusiasts who buy games legitimately are now stuck between a rock and a hard place. Do I upgrade to an official firmware to play this game legit? Or do I stay where I am for my homebrew, and download a cracked copy of the game? In the fight against piracy, true homebrew enthusiasts always get screwed, pirates always get their games for free, and the game devs don't get the money they deserve.
2) The PSP just isn't very ergonomic. When playing for extended periods, my hands go to sleep. Surely it isn't impossible to make a handheld that doesn't kill your hands!
3) One analog nub was a great idea . . . back when nintendo made the N64, and games weren't using 2 analog sticks. Guess what? Times have changed, and everyone uses 2 analog sticks now. It just makes sense: one is for moving, the other for aiming. Different schemes have been used to try and compensate for this deficiency, like Katamari using the triangle/square/circle/x buttons as the "second nub," but this just isn't the same.
4) No touch screen is a bad idea. Now before anyone gets all preachy and says "well, they didn't know it would be popular back then!," lets try and remember that the DS wasn't the first thing to ever have a touch screen. Before the DS, smartphones had touch screens. Before smartphones, palm pilots had touch screens. Before palm pilots, the freakin' apple newton had a touch screen. Now I'm not saying that touch screen controls aren't gimmicky sometimes--they're gimmicky most of the time in fact! But for the cost (very little), the potential for innovation is worth the price of admission.
5) My biggest gripe of them all: the PSP Go! The Go was the first "true" ground-up redesign (the slim is exactly the same as the phat, except it's, er, slim). And that design is really slick, actually. The Go is actually portable, has a great screen, great button layout, and even has built in flash memory. The problems are twofold: first, they STILL refused to give it an analog nub (why do you hate us Sony?!), and second, the Go doesn't have a UMD drive. That means that if you have a library of games and want to upgrade, too bad, because you have to buy them all again via digital distribution. Second, they don't even offer the entire PSP library via digital distribution! Want X-Men Legends 2? Too bad! The phat and skinny boys get it, but you don't!
The thing that really pisses me off is that the Go really could have "fixed" the psp. No one has cracked it yet, so there's no piracy on the machine (yet . . .). The form factor is perfect. The screen is great, and the button placement is sharp. And the built in flash is just pure gravy. But no second analog nub and no way to get your existing library onto the thing = epic fail.
So I'm gonna blog. For awhile I was blogging about my political ideology, and how I feel that neither of the major American political parties truly meets the needs and ideological worldview of Biblical Christianity, but then I decided "eh, that's too divisive. People are gonna get mad about that." So instead I'm gonna blog about crap that no one cares about. Nerd stuffs!
So for my triumphant return to the internet 2.0 (ZOMG HTML.COM?!?), I decided to gripe about the state of Sony's flagship handheld gaming system, the PSP (and its more portable cousin, the PSP Go!).
First, the good. As old as the thing is (5 years for North America, longer for Japan), it still can put out some purty polygons. Its d-pad, although not as good as the DS, is functional (which is more than I can say for the 360's crappy rocker d-pad . . .). It is the only handheld with an analog thumb "stick" (more accurately called a "nub" because it isn't very big), and it works perfectly. It also has a beautiful wide screen. The screen on the current iteration of the system, the PSP-3000, glows like the freakin sun. In fact, the only complaints anyone has been able to level at it is that the screen is so clear, and the response times so fast, that you can actually see interlacing in some games.
The PSP also uses UMD disks (ok, that last "disk" was redundant, but whatever). While they are a draw on battery power, they also allow the handheld to run off very cheaply manufactured optical disks, storing as much as 1.2 gigs of data. When you consider that the largest DS title is 256 MB, you can see how much more the PSP has to work with for textures, models, etc.
Ok, now its gripe time.
1) There is no "official" homebrew platform (like the 360s XNA or the ps3's linux). So, people hacked the firmware of the psp to allow unsigned code to run on the system. The good? Now the psp has homebrew out the wazoo--possibly some of the best console homebrew ever made, in fact. The bad? Well, allowing unsigned code allows piracy. And that's always bad for the platform. But also, the firmware hacking was being done by one man, who quit the scene. Because he quit, homebrew enthusiasts who buy games legitimately are now stuck between a rock and a hard place. Do I upgrade to an official firmware to play this game legit? Or do I stay where I am for my homebrew, and download a cracked copy of the game? In the fight against piracy, true homebrew enthusiasts always get screwed, pirates always get their games for free, and the game devs don't get the money they deserve.
2) The PSP just isn't very ergonomic. When playing for extended periods, my hands go to sleep. Surely it isn't impossible to make a handheld that doesn't kill your hands!
3) One analog nub was a great idea . . . back when nintendo made the N64, and games weren't using 2 analog sticks. Guess what? Times have changed, and everyone uses 2 analog sticks now. It just makes sense: one is for moving, the other for aiming. Different schemes have been used to try and compensate for this deficiency, like Katamari using the triangle/square/circle/x buttons as the "second nub," but this just isn't the same.
4) No touch screen is a bad idea. Now before anyone gets all preachy and says "well, they didn't know it would be popular back then!," lets try and remember that the DS wasn't the first thing to ever have a touch screen. Before the DS, smartphones had touch screens. Before smartphones, palm pilots had touch screens. Before palm pilots, the freakin' apple newton had a touch screen. Now I'm not saying that touch screen controls aren't gimmicky sometimes--they're gimmicky most of the time in fact! But for the cost (very little), the potential for innovation is worth the price of admission.
5) My biggest gripe of them all: the PSP Go! The Go was the first "true" ground-up redesign (the slim is exactly the same as the phat, except it's, er, slim). And that design is really slick, actually. The Go is actually portable, has a great screen, great button layout, and even has built in flash memory. The problems are twofold: first, they STILL refused to give it an analog nub (why do you hate us Sony?!), and second, the Go doesn't have a UMD drive. That means that if you have a library of games and want to upgrade, too bad, because you have to buy them all again via digital distribution. Second, they don't even offer the entire PSP library via digital distribution! Want X-Men Legends 2? Too bad! The phat and skinny boys get it, but you don't!
The thing that really pisses me off is that the Go really could have "fixed" the psp. No one has cracked it yet, so there's no piracy on the machine (yet . . .). The form factor is perfect. The screen is great, and the button placement is sharp. And the built in flash is just pure gravy. But no second analog nub and no way to get your existing library onto the thing = epic fail.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)