Monday, December 28, 2009

Intermezzo

By the lack of new posts it seems as if have been avoiding this blog. I almost have, because it would mean having to look at the date of my last post. A new post was always being conceptualized and then postponed. Not being one to feel guilty, I would rather look the other way and focus on the realities that are more rewarding in the short term. And so, I've been gaming in my spare hours. Like a rat in a Skinner box, I've pressed buttons in arcane sequences to get my sweet reward. And these lasts few months I've been a glutton. The need for relaxation has been in direct relation to the amount of work I've been doing. Where one would grow, so would the other. In short, it's been a very productive period. Both in the professional world as in the Skinner box. To the outside world it seems as if all I do is press buttons, wearing out keyboards, mice and Wacom pens. The same world that sees me effortlessly produce artwork and get satisfaction out of pressing buttons in order to make a game play itself, is starting to think that it actually takes no effort at all.
On both accounts, it is wrong.
My tasks are Crucial as to deserve capitalization and the games I play are as brilliant as any great Belgian novel. Or so I keep telling myself. In the eyes of some one in the know, I must seem like an intellectual of the modern age. Yet to some one in the real world, it must seem like a lazy office jockey who earns a living by letting the computer do all the hard work for him and is addicted to pressing buttons at night. I must have been the nightmare of the previous age. An overqualified hippy with nonsensical morals based on a fantasy world of dreams and drugs. Someone who doesn't know how to take life serious and doesn't know what it is to do actual work. My parents used to threaten me with this actual work by saying: "If you don't do good at school, you'll spend the rest of your life carrying a lunchbox to a factory".

And so, after completing not one but two higher diplomas, one of which is on par with a university degree, I got a creative job that pays reasonably well. However, irony has it that now my parents wag their finger at me for not knowing what actual work is, and that I should probably do more of it, instead of letting the computer work late and playing those silly little games on it when it's done. So on to my blog where I talk about games and only hint at the work I pretend to do!
The next part is about a few games I played, and it's there because I told the blog posting algorithm to mention the names I input before leaning back and sipping my tea. I also mentioned it to write in a manner to attract lustful females and to garner world fame. I'm not expecting it to be flawless, two out of three objectives met is still an acceptable result.

I've played and enjoyed Need For Speed: Shift. The demo convinced me of its quality, and I bought it shortly after. I've always appreciated racing games. Mostly for their obsessive compulsion gameplay of driving a car efficiently. My last serious racing effort was Xpand Rally some years ago and more recently Mario Kart Wii, so I'm hardly an authority on the subject. NFSS has a sense of speed of a roller-coaster, and that's what makes it rather special. Racing a car on one of its tracks feels like controlling a rocket powered skateboard on the downwards slope of an active vulcano. The game has a leg up on other racing games in its style and it's truly phenomenal cockpit view. I've also been known to call it "Top Gear: the game". There isn't much to talk about with this game - there's no higher understanding of life because of it. On my parents scale of approval it would propably score to be "very silly indeed". What they don't know is that I'm using these racing games as a simulator in order to easily acquire a real driver's license. This is, of course, using my parent's mindset that, if games like call of duty are ruthless murder training devices, racing games must be ideal in order to be a driver.

To make matters even worse, I've been dabbling in satanism and demonology! It's no wonder that my feeble Atheist mind would one day succumb to the seduction of the beast itself. Because what could be worse then playing Dungeons and Dragons? Why a computer game that is the tier3 evolution of D&D! And why is this evil ruleset so evil? Because it's a ruleset that's been streamlined in such a way that the computer does all the calculating! Truly this is a magnitude of wickedness not seen in any game all year! (HINT)
Because of it's inherent didactic nature the game teaches among other things: magic, lesbianism, homosexualism, alcoholism, unholy and generally shady dealing, pick-pocketing, cursing, cursing, smuggling, drug trafficking, genocide and worst of all, blasphemy. The name of this unthinkable yet unbelievably seductive abomination is Dragon Age:Origins. On the caring parent's scale this game has fallen of the "silly" and into the "dead serious". It'd probably only be remedied, and I saved, by sacrificing one's eldest son, namely: me.
Or perhaps it's only a phase.
Either way. The game has left me a powerless thrall unable to appreciate any other game.

Self-prescribed medication has been ordered in the form of Modern Warfare 2: murder simulator and Torchlight:Even more devils and demons.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

World War 2: The movie: Inglourious Basterds

A little word up front to my readership that might not be interested in the usual game rambling that is the norm around here. This post deals mostly with popular culture AND LOTS OF SPOILERS.

It's impossible to ignore the impact the second world war had on the world we know today. It was also quite a long time ago. And indeed our first hand source of information is slowly drying up. Even so, Hitler and his Nazis are still very popular. Popular boogeymen that is. Given the time that has past since that gruesome event, the world has had time to acclimate to the hard, cold facts, and has learned to live with it. What humans are capable of. This new-found freedom has allowed us to get a little more creative with the whole notion of a world at war. Break up the protagonists of the war into cartoonish achetypes. And Nazis have become a literary archetype. Comparable to the undead or vampires. In which case Adolf Hitler becomes a modern day Count Dracula. Now, these archetypes are coming from their dark sub-cultural recesses, such as games and comics, into the mainstream.

I recently saw the new Tarantino Movie Inglourious Basterds. This movie is a stylish expression. If you'd compare this movie to the likes of Saving Private Ryan or Band of Brothers. The difference is immediately clear. This is a creative interpretation. And presents an interesting point of view.

Adolf Hitler, who looks nothing like his real life counterpart for good reason, in this movie has been portrayed as a deranged German Bonaparte wannabe, simple minded, psychotic and bent on the destruction of every Jew on the globe. He bursts in saliva spitting laughter when watching the movie National pride. The film (in a film) is basically about the typical rambo-esque spraying of bullets (from a bolt action rifle no less) and people hitting the floor. It's the heroic tale of a sniper sitting in a bell tower killing a cohort of allied soldiers in Italy. The allied stupidity shown through a brief conversation between an allied soldier and his commanding officer: "Commander, we must destroy that tower!" upon which the commander replies in stoic fashion "Not a chance.". Followed by the camera cutting to more allies getting shot or falling from windows. With his combat knife, our hero sniper carves a swastika with impressive shading into the floorboard of his bell tower as a reprise from the killing. This is, of course, hailed with loud cheering and applause from the Nazi Brass in the theater. It's a boneheaded piece of propaganda. A power trip. It's what we could call gun porn. Hitler exclaims to Goebbels "This is your best movie yet!". Goebbels is moved to tears by the complement. A condemnation perhaps on the director's behalf. Tarantino is comparing people who enjoy the gun porn movies to this caricature of Hitler. And I guess this would also count towards people who play first person shooter games as well. If they are played for the simple reason of shooting people and marvel at the carnage in sadistic enjoyment. It might also be a wake-up call to every person in the audience who was laughing at the fact that Nazis were getting brutally murdered or mutilated on screen. These said Nazis were in many cases presented as normal people with morals, principles and dreams. Like the sergeant that meets his demise at the hands of the so-called Jew Bear. The latter points at the Sergeant's Iron Cross and asks him "Did you get that for killing Jews?" at which he gets an honest reply "For courage". Implying that he did not fight this war to kill Jews, but rather to protect his homeland. And of course, it's rather absurd to believe that all German soldiers were psychopaths. The reply falls on deaf ears, it is not the version of reality a determined person on a quest for revenge wants to hear.

But for as many incompetent German officers the movie has, there are competent Nazis, you could call them villains if not for the fact the movie portraits them simply as officers on duty. These characters radiate an air of tension, their friendly face the impenetrable facade for the calculating detective inside. Such is the Gestapo Officer in the cellar meeting. And such is Hans Landa, played by Christoph Waltz, who is arguably the most enjoyable character in this story. And arguably the most impressive villain since Heath Ledger's Joker. The very opening part of the movie is as tense as the it gets. And is one among a series of unbearable, deafening, tense and discomforting moments. All of these come to a loud, abrupt and somewhat violent end. At first glance a likable character, bearing a big bright smile, speaking kind words in a multitude of languages. He is shrewd however, seems to know just about everything and acts with deadly precision. The war seems to be a game to him, played by rules and a mutual respect between prey and predator. This almost childlike trust in these rules are eventually his folly. His professional mercenary logic is quite sound however. Unfortunantly for him though, some characters carry a grudge that is rather unprofessional.

You might have noticed I'm glossing over the story and possible meaning of the Inglourious Basterds squad. But then, what's to say? These characters are rather simple and honest in many possible ways. They're out for revenge, and get it. Aldo Raine, the squad sergeant played by Brad Pitt is an uncomplicated ruffian. And it's amazing how many times the Basterds serve as comic relief. Most noticeably when they present themselves to be Italians. Perhaps the most interesting fact about the Basterds is that they are Jews killing Nazis, in it self this isn't anything special, but in the context of the film, and add to that the characters of Shosanna and Marcel, it leads to a remarkable reversal, namely that, from a Nazi's point of view, the übermensch is undone by the hands of the undermensch.

I did not feel good as I walked out of the movie theater. This piece of cinema is rough, like the screeching of a fork on a blackboard. And contradictionary as it might sound, I enjoyed it thoroughly. That's because I had a lot to think about. And because I could, this blog post exists.

Sunday, September 20, 2009

The Lesser Evil, Overlord the Second

In my ranting about all the technological and gameplay features of the Overlord games, I almost completely forgot to mention one of the most important pillars in gaming. The Overlord games have what one might call a story. And even Story Arc.

I gave a synopsis of these stories in my previous post. But I'll dig somewhat deeper into them here. Spoilers are ahead so go out and buy the game, finish it and get back to this post. Because you don't want to miss all that is about to be written down. You could also skip ahead to the last paragraph for a final thought. And just to make sure: BEWARE SPOILERS AHEAD.

Overlord the first has, in my opinion, the most interesting story.
However, initially there's hardly any story to speak of! You're thrown into the role of Overlord by Gnarl, the old and... gnarly spokesman of the minions. He's your advisor for the duration of the game. Teaching you how to act in your newfound role. Trying to rebuild the dark tower and reunite the brown, red, green and blue minions. You do this by raiding the surrounding villages, towns and castles. But the scavage hunt quickly becomes an unholy crusade against the "heroes" who inhabite the surrounding lands. Each of these heroes represent an earthly sin. Seven in total. Each is crushed beneath your Steel boots. Though the reasons beyond "because they are bad men" are somewhat unclear.
Melvin Underbelly is a bloated and obese halfling. Gluttony.
Oberon is an elven prince, asleep and on guard against a dwarven invasion. His nightmares become reality and haunt the Elven forests. Sloth.
Sir William the Black, a former paladin and presumable victim of abstenence, has an unhealthy craving for a mistriss succubus. Lust.
Goldo Golderson is a dwarven King, and as his name might suggest, concerned only by the amount of gold he possesses. Greed.
Jewel is a thief bent on stealing everything of value someone else might have. Envy.
Khan is a giant warrior and lover of Jewel, he's insanely protective and comes down with fiery anger to whomever threatens her. Unfortunatly, as the Overlord, you have. Wrath.
All these characters speak of a mysterious wizard. Delivering all they desired, and become corrupt in the procedings. The wizard is the main, if somewhat hidden mastermind behind the plot of the game. During your encounter with him he keeps mentioning his accomplishments and his genious. Possibly born a Leo, his sin is most definitly pride.
The wizard is introduced as he sits in your throne, your minions gasping in awe at the return of "the real overlord". As it turns out, this Wizard is possessed by a vanguished Evil. An evil slain by your hand, aided by the heroes you just ground into a fine paste.
The unawareness of the player is the memory loss of the Overlord. It becomes clear that the story from OVerlord is an aftermath of the typical "band of heroes" fantasy story you find in other fiction. One could say that Lord Of The Rings was an influence. In which case the question could have been who was Sauron before he became the evil Overlord he is today? Was he once a virtuous man? Is he only one in a long line of Overlords? What would Tolkien have written if there ever was to be a sequel to The Lord of the Rings? Overlord is the somewhat cheeky answer.
In the end, you're able to convince your minions to fight for you through means of bashing them over the head a few times. And use them to overcome the Wizard. Making you the rightfull Overlord.

Overlord II has a less interesting story, despite its potential. "Sociological commentary" almost came on the box as a feature. But this basically boils down to "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely". The embodiment of this is the Emperor. Ruling an empire so successful and prosperous that the citizens have become fat, lazy and somewhat stupid.

To elaborate. There is scene where a group of fat, middle-aged women accuse Juno (the Aphrodite archetype) of witchcraft because her beauty has enthralled their men. For this she is democratically voted off to the arena. Quite a humorous scene, because it's kind of true, but never quite surpassed later in the game.
Even though the game is able to mislead the player from guessing the twist of the story. Unfortunatly, it is quite a let down and you get the feeling you'd be able to come up with something better. Here's why. At first I thought the overly speechy and brainy right hand man of the "evil Emperor" would be the real mastermind, the Emperor being the figurehead of the regime. Certain signs could have been telling. The Emperor never speaks, never shows his face from under his mask, never does anything apart from waving at crowds and is dependant on "consuming" magical beings to sustain him. Leading me to believe he might have been an animated character or a golem. Not so.
The real twist to the story is when you find out who's behind the mask. The transformation from one guise to the next is far more then just an unmasking, it's an almost hulkian transformation. Since the Emperor's physique is more impressive then that of his true identity.
The only real personal motivation for this character is "becoming a magical being", lust for power. And that's about it. He's not the only character to undergo a transformation, the seemingly intellectual henchman becomes a sniveling zealot in the end, able only to paise his master.
It seems this game that was inspired by the domination of the Roman Empire and Roman mythology, but in the end fails to do anything useful with it. Beyond the comparison that you are Hades claiming Artemis, Aphrodite and Persephone. And forgive me for using their Greek names. It seems that even here the age rating of the game is keeping the player from having some actual fun with your mistresses.

Evil in these games should be read as "mischievous", the minions are naughty. The Overlord is a big bully. When will we get an truly Evil version of an Overlord game?
In the first game there is an option to turn a spare room into a torture dungeon. I had a flashback to the old Dungeon Keeper games but unfortunately it's just there to look at. In the same game a village will offer you 10 "maidens". And again, these are just there to stand around your throne, spewing the same line of dialog over and over. Why weren't they put at random places in the tower to perform menial tasks. Like scrubbing the floor or something. I'd make the whole thing so much more believable.
The games offer an option to be "an unlikable person" or "a very bad person". The gradient goes from broken white to halfway grey. As a comparison we could say Fable goes from pure white to somewhat dark grey. But games have yet to go to pitchblack. You could say Manhunt or something is rather dark, but that's not the kind of Evil I'd like to see in the Overlord series. Manhunt is just plain violent. Brilliant Evil would be more of a thriller, working the imagination. Suggesting bad things instead of showing stuff intended for gore hounds.
Again I must plead for a dark and gritty Overlord PC game, intended for mature gamers instead of the giggling tomfoolery intended for the console tween audience. And perhaps go over a few ethical problems the human race has to deal with.

Monday, August 31, 2009

The Greater Evil, Overlord

In a long standing tradition of me playing Third Person Strategy Action RPGs, it's time to turn a very Evil Eye towards the Overlord Series. With the buzz the sequel was getting. I picked up the first game out of a "why the hell did I never get to play this?" reason. Afterwards, I bought Overlord 2 without thinking twice about it. Written by Rihanna Pratchett, the game has sterling pedigree at first glance. Even though she's obviously a different writer from her world famous father: Terry Pratchett and working in a different medium, my expectations were quite high.

The synopsis to Overlord 1 could be: the story about a young and ambitious Sauron in Albion, commanding an army of mischievous demonic imps. Fixing the world's chaotic evils with his own lawful evil. The game has a good and evil route. The former picturing you as an iron-fisted monarch, the latter portraying you as a ruthless tyrant with a appreciation for black lace and pale flesh. Overlord 2 casts the player as Hades, God of the Underworld. Here to exact revenge on "the Empire" which has usurped your father (Sauron) from his rightful dark throne. You set out to reunite the minion army and claim your rightful place in the evil hierarchy and while you're at it claim Artemis, Aphrodite and Persephone as your mistresses.

The Overlord games are structured a bit like a Zelda game. You explore maps and dungeons sprinkled with enemies and puzzles. In almost all cases your minions with their unique abilities are key in overcoming these obstacles. The level design is quite well done, especially in the first game, where every area literally comes full circle. Design reminiscent of games like Pikmin, Metroid and Zelda, but more directed and not at all dependant on backtracking. Overlord did come as somewhat of a surprise. Coming close to being quite like a Nintendo game, you'd half expect it to become an instant classic. But maybe, like many other games, only a classic in few minds.

There's one flaw that's not very hard to overcome, but it's still there. Harrowing to think what this game might have been, had it been made as a PC game first and foremost. Unfortunately that's not where the market is. Overlord is a console game and it shows. A blessing because it has filled the coffers of Triumph studios and codemasters, opening the door for more Overlord games. A curse because control becomes the game's biggest flaw. The standard PC control scheme in both Overlord 1 and 2 drove me to use my PC gamepad (a Saitek P880) in favor of the mouse and keyboard. Because it simply worked a whole lot better. In fact, the controls work fine. They're functional most of the time. However, it is still baffling to see the game twist and squirm to fit onto a console controller. Evidence of this is that there are functions in which you have to press and hold a button, and then press another button. And that's just to select one type of minion. Which generally leads to the "select all, attack all" reflex, abandoning all strategy. Mostly out of necessity because the chaotic nature of combat generally calls for quick action. In order to fit those controls onto a mouse and keyboard, the scheme twists and squirms some more. It is now twice removed from the ideal mouse and keyboard controls.

Allow me to elaborate even further. From a design standpoint. Overlord must have had the looks of a hardcore PC title reminiscent of Sacrifice. That is to say, if your reflex for troop management is "point the mouse and click". Which in short works like this: select your unit group, like your brown minions. Use a mouse pointer on a target, like an enemy. The mouse cursor changes to an attack pointer. Click the mouse to engage, or hold the mouse button to assign more minions to the target in Overlords case. Clicking the scenery would move the minions about. Instead the game controls a bit more like you would when playing a Necromancer Minion Master in Guild Wars, send direct orders to your minions to attack a specific target. Do note that the Wii title Overlord: Dark Legend, does exactly that. And is claimed to have the superior control scheme.

Quote from Scott Sharkey, 1UP:
"The Wii Remote is just plain perfect for directing your horde of minions around the screen. The mouse or analog stick did the job well enough in other versions, but after experiencing the ease of simply pointing where you want the evil little buggers to go break things, it's actually going to be hard to go back to less precise methods. Hell, my never-played-a-videogame-in-her-life girlfriend had no trouble picking the thing up and just going with it, which is something that just couldn't have happened with any other installment of the series. It really is remarkably intuitive, given how complicated keeping track of both your Overlord and a swarm of gremlins can become." We'll have to forgive Overlord 1 for being a pure console game. Because that's where it had to prove itself. Indeed the game is very easily forgiven since puzzles and pace of the general gameplay feels simpler and more manageable. I can't remember being frustrated with it.

But Overlord 2 was developed simultaneously with Overlord Dark Legend. So the point and click (P&C) controls were no secret. Yet, a similar control scheme was left out of the PC version of Overlord 2. The main reason P&C controls were a no-go, next to higher development costs, was that it would break the difficulty of a few control based puzzles. Puzzles that are so frustrating because of the controls that I outright quit the game a couple of times. Loudly cursing with incomprehension why Triumph would abandon the simple (consoles, remember?) elegance of the first game. I'm pretty sure the "green minion spider elevator maze" will go down in history as one of the biggest game design faux-pas. The concept of the puzzle is that the player must navigate a maze on the wall using the sweep command on the green minions. Controlling the group as one entity with the right analog stick. This whole time, the camera is behind the Overlord and pointing towards the group of minions. Within this field of view the group is controlled. If one minion, or several, is stuck behind an obstacle, it will stop moving. With it the camera, as it can't move ahead with the group. This would be alright if it weren't for the fact that this is a timed puzzle. Get stuck for a second and you loose a great portion of your experience rich green minions. They simply fall of the wall and die, or get squashed between the elevator and die. Start over. What makes the puzzle so unnerving is not the fact that it's pretty obnoxious to begin with, it's in the controls by which you have to solve it. The sweep command is pretty wooly as it is. In theory it's a "charge there" command. Like moving by suggestion, it's pretty imprecise. Now imagine just pointing and clicking your way through the maze. It'd be like setting way points in an RTS game: pixel perfect. It would have made this "after boss" mechanic-tutorial (the hard part was supposed to be done with!) a breeze in stead of a wrist cutting. Another dubious decision was the ship chase. Cool in concept, but rather poorly executed. Another still was a rather lengthy stealth level using possessed Green Minions. Some trail and error sections could have been a little less frustrating. This fallback to "twitch gameplay" in stead of sticking to "logic puzzles" may be a sign of Triumph running out of inspiration and then willingly overstepping the line between challenging and frustrating in these few instances. Overlord 2 is a more complex game than its predecessor, with more gameplay elements, a more "advanced" camera and more elaborate control over the Overlord. Unfortunately, and though slightly, to its detriment.

However, that's about all the bad there is to say about the Overlord games so far. So it's mostly all good. Managing your armour, weapons, spells, minions and dark tower are fun RPG additions I would like to see in a Zelda game someday. It's also great to hear all the different lines of banter and dialog in the game as well. Audio in Overlord is well done all-round. The score from the first game was quite good but becomes fantastic in the sequel. Paired with an improved game engine and more detailled art assets, the second game is an impressive showpiece. So far it one of the best games, or should i say franchise, the Netherlands has ever produced. Not that there's a lot of games coming from there anyway, but it's another glimmer of hope that these regions can produce games that actually matter. Now I'd love to see a hardcore Overlord PC game. Preferably with a strong multiplayer component, and an open endgame scenario. With P&C controls. It'd fill the void Sacrifice left behind and Brütal legend will probably fail to fill, currently not even coming to PC. But one may hope.

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

So Japanese! featuring Final Fantasy V

Final Fantasy 5

The Dragon Quest V remake had removed a stigma for me. It had made me see the appeal of Japanese RPGs. And so my eyes turned to that other Japanese Juggernaut: Final Fantasy. I never played the old classics from the NES and SNES era, but the PlayStation Games (FF VII and up) turned me off to the series. Whenever I hear an otaku bemoan the loss of Aeris I look the other way and pretend it doesn't exist. It doesn't stop there though. Metro-sexual underage protagonists? Melodrama and teen angst? Huge swords, gunblades, keyblades, beyblades, all wielded by children on a quest to save the world? I'll stick with Dungeons And Dragons, thank you very much. Let me make my own characters and choices. But then I heard the original Final Fantasy was actually based on Dungeons And Dragons. Aw shucks! Japan often adopts a concept and evolves it in it's own unique way. That, to my mind, is a positive thing. So I picked up the Final Fantasy V remake, at an outrageous price I might add, the original dates back to 1992, for Gameboy Advance and had a go at it.

The game is none to shy about its system. And in fact that's about all there is to it. It's atypical to JRPGs in that sense. There's almost no story to speak of. Of course there is one, but it's mainly there to nudge you along the areas, open up new classes and progress you towards the ending (though I'm not actually sure there is one). Even the Dialogues have been kept to a minimum even though the script knows a few funny lines. It's almost as if the game isn't taking itself very serious. This game is all about its class based combat system. Kind of a big deal. In short: There's a huge variety of classes. You gain job levels through combat. Job levels earn you job skills. You can change classes at any time and you can equip one (two in one case) learned job skill at any time. You get four Characters to play with. Mix and match as you please. Reminiscent to D&D and Guild Wars' ability to dual class, this system introduces a level of strategy and depth that is lacking in games like Dragon Quest V. It also gives the player a lot more incentive to grind away as new job skills are never far off. The game will throw a boss at you from time to time, and I always have a lot of fun figuring out what combinations of skills and classes will work against it. The downside to all this is the grind I mentioned before takes some time. With different motivations it's different from Dragon Quest's grind though; progressing your characters and gaining a strategic advantage in stead of progressing a story. But overall I think that in the current day and age these type of games would do well to speed up the leveling process.

In all though, FFV replaced DQV as my handheld game of the moment. A moment that's been lasting for a couple of months now. In between, I regularly bemoan the loss of Galuf on various message boards. In fact. I'm typing up a touching poem right now.

From the moment I met you there,
Oh Galuf, sage old man, yet proud and free,
alone and forgetting 'why' you were,
I spend so long for you to get XP,
hammered you into something fierce I do decree,
despite old age yet still you died,
and were replaced with Krile,
with a sprite so top heavy I could barely cope,
why a woman! a blonde cliche and why so dope,
now here I am, on message boards,
where all I do is type and mope.

Friday, July 10, 2009

So Japanese! featuring Dragon Quest V



While the world gets shuffled like a worn pack of cards I am trying to keep track of the card I picked. A fixation that has kept me busy for quite a while.

But in between chaos and pandemonium I have been playing quite a bit of games.
So let's start with the beginning. Otherwise we risk upsetting the delicate balance between time and space. I had been playing a fair amount of western RPGs lately, and I have been for a great part of my life. All the while pretty much ignoring the existence of Eastern RPGs. Which is odd, since that must make it the only eastern thing I have not had the joy to experience.
No more.

I knew Dragon Quest has been kind of a big deal. So that's what I got. "Dragon Quest V: Hand Of The Heavenly Bride" for DS to be precise. Few words could describe what happiness was in store for me. So there's finally a chance this could be a short blogpost.

It's a charming game. Objectives are laid out as if they were lighthouses on a clear summernight. There's humour that strikes me as being "So Japanese!". DQ5, however, does have its emotional moments. Soppy as it sounds, the game is actually quite humble (but do keep in mind the DS is humble technology as well) about this. It misses all the pretentious melodrama that is so typically associated with Japanese RPGs, wich makes it all the more absorbing.

My biggest gripe though is perhapse not with DQ, but with Eastern RPGs in general. And that is that the game is padded with grinding. And without a combat system that isn't engaging or a class system that supports it, the experience can get old rather fast. I understand that later DQ games have mended this ailment. And to be fair, there are games with more grinding. Furthermore, DQ mixes up the grind with the ability to go out and try to pursuade monsters to join your side. After which they become party members. Yet, while bringing more complexity, it Unfortinatly creates more grinding and more tedious inventory management.
And there really isn't that much incentive to grind exept to get your character level up. Which brings about another questionable gameplay mechanic. As you level up, so do the enemies. Meaning the game's relative difficulty remains about the same from start to finish. Each area having you playing catch-up on character levels. Thus encouraging the grind rather then make you think about how to get trough an area by combining skills, spells or party members. But that's just the way these games are made.

For a game that was originally released in 1992, DQ5 remade for DS holds up. I don't know if I'd spend the time to play it in my spare time, maybe in small chunks, but it's been a great companion on the daily commute.

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Consider Battlefield Heroes

I recently got my beta code for Battlefield Heroes, DICE's free to play cartoon shooter. Being intrigued by this game from the get-go, I was finally able to take it for a spin. On first looks, DICE succeeds in creating a whimsical "casual" third person shooting game. But looks can be deceiving.

First of all, this is a beta I'm talking about so the game is still a work in progress. However. There's already a store in place for you to go spend real money on battlefield bucks, called Battlefunds. These are used to buy in-game items, such as fancy uniforms. I knew character customization would be on a to-buy basis, but it was sobering to see that just about everything in the virtual wardrobe is on sale. Of course there's some freebies in there which you can buy with valor points. These are the points you get from just playing the game. Logic would tell you that enough accumulated valor points (which boil down to "time played") would beget you some better customization options, or at least some form of visible markings of veterancy. But no dice. Because of this I think the game is lacking a basic form of feedback, namely that of character growth. The one constant is your hero and his Hero Points, In MMO-speak, this would be your character's level and skill bar. But there's no way of reading either.

To add insult to injury, the items you get in the game disappear after a week or a month, depending on how much you are willing to spend. The problem here is that DICE can slack off in making new items, since you'll never accumulate a lot of them anyway. Adding a time limit also adds pressure of "having to play the game, or I have paid for nothing". I can understand why you would apply this to weapons and power-ups because they give you an advantage in the game. Even if those weapons are considered balanced. If you play better with them, there's still an advantage. But I don't quite get why you would have clothing an accessories disappear. This goes against some MMO conventions, where you "win" gear, and once you do it's yours forever, or until you sell or replace it. People might find it disheartening if they have to rebuy their outfits time and time again. But the special gear is more of a hook rather than a gameplay defining element.

I'm unsure as to how well it will score with the casual audience. Maybe the concept of a shooter isn't that well suited to casual play either - even if it is from a third person perspective. We can make the case that casual players play games for killing time and having some easy fun. It's hard to match this with a shooter, which operates in a competitive, hostile environment. Sure, the game is easy enough to dive into, but from there you need to really work your way up the roster. The game is said to find matches according to your skill level so maybe this won't be as much of an issue as I think. Still, the people I played against were often on voice comms, really organized and put up a very good fight.

This game feels like a reskinned, hardcore battlefield game. Where all the character models are replaced by cartoons and some of the sound effects were swapped with the ones you hear on a Sunday morning. To some ears this might sound like a bad idea. But for me, this game looks and feels better then the older battlefield games. Of course, "realistic" shooters are a dime a dozen nowadays, which makes Heroes stand out as being quite unique. The closest comparison I could make are to Batallion Wars and Team Fortress 2. With Heroes sitting somewhere in between those extreme ends of the spectrum. It's not an imitation of either, mind. To add some contrast, Batallion Wars is a third person shooter RTS and Team Fortress 2 is Quake to Battlefield heroes' Battlefield.

So will it all work? I think so. But not with the casual audience, because I don't think this is a casual game. If this is marketed right, and (content) updates keep coming, DICE may be sitting on a goldmine. But they will get competition from other shooters. Many are aiming for the same audience. It's easy to see how someone might become invested in this game however. Spending real money on digital items. I bet some people on Ventrillo will agree with me, given the fact they have already spent some of their earnings on peg legs and sailor uniforms.

Friday, March 6, 2009

commutement




One of the unique properties of being a working man is the daily commute to work. I go by bike, train and foot. And nothing is more enjoyable then playing railway roulette.
The one bullet in the gun is the pretty girl that sits in front front of you and smiles back. Or that casts the one, not so innocent glimpse when she is about to turn her head.


On my ride home today I sat down in a two by two compartment. While unshouldering my rainstained black leather bag, I turn and look up into the pink face of prudence. She must have been about 72 years old, scrubbed and wrinkled. Very dignified. I could imagine she has her milk and coffee in see-through porcelain cups with her pinky doing the Heil Hitler salute.
The word that surfaced out of the murky depths of my brain was "chicken", brooding right in front of me. And for someone reading a recreational magazine, she didn't seem much entertained.
Her mouth so downturned there isn't enough skin below the chin for a smile. It looked very much like she had a ventriloquist dummy mouth installed.
How did this come to be, I asked myself as I have time and time again. It must be all the prudence, I replied.
The gun clicked.

On the next stop, I had another shot. The mass of bodies moved off and on the train. Fresh air gushed into the cabine. And with it unanswered questions.
Like "Why is there a monkey next to me, shoving bananas into it's mouth?" I could see it out of the corners of my left eye. I saw a shape swinging a big hand in the air, the trajectory ending at an open maw, which closed on something sloppy and oker. The hand returned to it's lap, while the maw was winking it's delicious content at me.
After I unfroze, I risked a quick glance at this percieved reality. It wasn't quite as imaginative as I had imagined, but still rather shocking.
A button-nosed girl was fisting one waffle after another into her chubby face. Unapologetically and openly mauling the dough in her mouth as if she was mixing concrete in it. The guy opposite to her could propably smell the taste of the sweet salive-waffle paste.
The gun clicked.

We can't win them all. But it just goes to show that life's little frustrations can add much to one's creativity.

Monday, February 23, 2009

Comparing real time strategy games of the same genre.

I could start off by saying you how unabashedly Blizzard ripped of the Warhammer 40k franchise by making Starcraft. Indeed going on looks alone, both of these have Humans (Space Marines and Terrans), "the old advanced race" (Eldar and Protoss) and the insectoid aliens (Tyrannids and Zerg). The similarities are striking and not coincidental, yet they are only skin deep. But makes it tempting to compare them none the less. RTS players know it has happened before, and will happen again with the sequels. I could also say that Starcraft has been the dominant (video game) franchise. The offering of Warhammer titles had been quite meager up until Relic made Dawn of War. But with that, a more superior title was released in the RTS genre. With added mechanics and concepts, which led to radically different gameplay from what had been the standard in titles such as Command and Conquer, Age Of Empires and Starcraft.

All the latter have a arcade-like "spend and win" mechanic. Which boils down to massing an army together. Be it of one unit type or a mix of units. Eventually a battle is fought between huge armies and usually the biggest, or most expensive, comes out on top. Massing comes natural when you have to tech up one way or the other. Spending time and resources on buildings to build a specific unit type is risky. So a consequence of saving on the one building is the funding the one building you did build, and produce the specific unit type it produces.

I had to point this out because Starcraft has this gameplay down, almost to perfection. And with Starcraft 2, we'll see a further evolution of this kind of play. Expendable units, used to (hard) counter the others. With Buildings as technology investments. Starcraft 2 will even go as far as one unit per building. It's quite clear that reality has taken a back seat in this scenario. Which has led me to say that Starcraft is an Arcade RTS.
As a side note: It has become to such a degree that supply depots, which I take it were used to "store stuff in" (i.e. to expand your population cap), have taken the role of walls. This of course was because Starcraft players would wall off their base with supply depots. In Starcraft 2, Blizzard has added a "gate" functionality to the supply depot by making it possible to sink them into the ground. Or, how meta-gameplay feeds into the perceived reality of the Starcraft universe.
Disclamer: I am aware that the cream of the crop Korean Starcraft players don't actually mass all that much. They win matches with a handfull of units and godly micromanagement skills (which still strikes me as arcade play). And seldom make it into the endgame scenario. It is not how the majority (including you) plays the game however.

The opposite could be said for the Dawn of War series. Base building and resource management has been minimized and put in the battlefield to focus more on the actual tactics. DoW1 still had a case of teching with buidings. But the evolution in DoW2 has been an even bigger move into the battlefield. Bases consist out of one portal-like building that produces all units. Not all units are available at start but are unlocked by, essentially, buying the next tier. Resources are found on the battlefield as inexhaustable strategic points. These also form the goals of most battles. I should also mention that the influence of that other Relic juggernaut Company of Heroes was instrumental to the DoW evolution. In terms of gameplay CoH was based on DoW1. And in turn DoW2 was based on both of these. CoH cut back on base building and unit count, expanded on strategic points and added the retreat function. Coh is more complex in nature than DoW. This can both be a good or bad thing depending on what you want in an RTS. CoH has more complex strategy and longer games. DoW is more straight forward, has smaller maps and has shorter matches. But I digress. The biggest contrast between Starcraft and DoW is that in DoW units are a big investment, and letting one unit die can seal your fate. All these units are rather expensive and can be customized in various ways. Mainly modified weaponry lets you deal with different threats. Hero units can equip armor and weapons mid game to make them stronger. Much like you would in, say, Diablo. To help your units service there's a "retreat" command which orders your units to leg it back to base where they can be reinforced for a fraction of the unit cost. This also saves any special weapons they might be carrying and preserves their level, as these units gain experience.

The observation is this. Starcraft is heading along the way of fast paced arcade gameplay using expendable units. Dawn of War is going the way of an RPG with limited yet highly customisable "party members" and added realism with unit AI, physics and a cover mechanic.
And as such, they also become much harder to compare. Both being at their own end of the RTS spectrum.

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Fallout 3: Good Karma

I forced myself to write a glowing post about Fallout 3 only a few weeks ago. Just to level out my cosmic balance. But since the game got praised into high heaven by just about every other body on the planet, I'll try and keep it short.

When you look past all the flaws in Fallout, there is still a good many reasons to play this game.
And in fact, I have loved my time in the wasteland.
Maybe we can chalk this up to escapism and a hunger for exploration.

Maybe most interesting of all is the greater story found in Fallout 3. And i'm not talking about the main story line, because that, in fact, is rather bland in comparison.
Once you set out to explore this blasted world you're free to explore deserted and destroyed ruins of buildings, each of which could be considered a chapter in the big book of fallout 3. Each of which is a bite-sized short story. Told in the form of audiotapes or through the environment. In some cases you'll even meet the short story protagonists in the flesh. Or, what's left of it anyway.
Not only are these stories stand-alone, they each and all have their own level design. A beginning and an end. Some of the better ones are actually quite linear. Some have a very nice reward at the end. Like the bobbleheads you can collect.
On a side note: the bobblehead that came with the collectors edition is awesome. And I must have been one of the happy few that actually got the Outcast statue with it aswel.
Of course, some stories are told through side quests. But with these my imagination wasn't as actively involved, and it generally has more impressively written dialog.
Yes, the dialogues in Fallout 3 are quite bad. Have I mentioned this before? I don't know, even I don't read my blog. But rest assured it's not all bad.
some of the dialog is quite good. And well acted. If you know anything about the voice talent in Fallout 3 you're probably thinking of Liam Neeson right away. He's a good actor and his voice sounds comfortably familiar but the actual performance is a bit monotone.
No, the best actor in the game is Malcolm McDowell as President Eden. He's the most likable, life-like and sympathetic person around. Wink wink, nudge nudge. If you've played the game you'll understand the irony.
The runner up is the guy who voiced Harold, one of the most memorable characters. To bad he's not even listed on imdb.com, which implies he's not even a registered actor. Wink wink, nudge nudge. sigh.
Maybe we should list the likes of Bob Crosby, Roy Brown and Cole Porter. Since they add so much atmosphere and character to the world of Fallout.
On a special note: this game has one of my personal favorites, Paul Eiding in it. Unfortunately Bethesda had him only do his old man voice. Which is such a waste.

What else is a major appeal in playing an RPG? For me, Building a character is a big part of the fun.
The type of character you play influences gameplay quite a bit. And as with all RPGs, you take out of it what you put in.
Pre-building a character in your mind does kind of kill the spontaneity, but it helps to define how you will play the game, and what the experience will be like.
On my first play-through I was a good character, a saint with a gun dealing judgement on the lawless. The character was build to be the infiltrator I played in Mass Effect, and so relied heavily on stealth and long range combat. Using sniper rifles and energy weapons.
My second character was made into a medium to close range combat powerhouse using heavy armour, explosives, heavy weapons and melee combat. He's also an evil slave trading computer hacking bastard with a short temper and. I enjoyed playing him the most. But I think a lot has to do with the fact I understood the RPG mechanics behind the game better, and so was more effective at making this character work. Short of abusing the game.
The second time through I played almost entirely without VATS, playing it as a shooter (I do like aiming manually). Which I recon was more fun. If not for fallout's clunky combat mechanics. Luckily, burning ghouls to a crisp at close range doesn't require a lot of aiming and is great fun regardless.
If you want to explore the entire game without getting bored of it all, you'll have to set your own goals a bit though. So what I did was set out to reach specific goals for each play session. Like, explore the Nuka Cola Factory, go get the Luck Bobblehead. Go get this piece of armor. Collect this unique weapon. In many cases couldn't have done it without the Wiki (looking up locations of some of the gear) though. So again, the spontaneity is kind of lost. But I recon it's okay since I don't have 200 hours to spend on one character. And there's other games I would like to play. Like Dawn Of War 2. Which is another game where you shoot up green hulking monstrosities under the rule of a fascist leader.

As a close I would say that once a character is built, all loot has been hoarded, all quests are completed and the map has been fully explored, the game is done.
And as it stands, I'm done with Fallout 3. Unless future downloadable content provides a big enough draw, I might be done for a while.
If not, there seems to be a healthy mod community out there, and so far I've been seeing some interesting mods. Maybe all my wishes will be granted in the end (or I should make my own). But thus far I haven't bothered. Maybe for a future play-through in a world where days run 48 hours long, transportation is eliminated due to new portal technology, and every week there's spaghetti-Friday.
I already know what I'd want to play. A neutral unarmed combat stealth lady-killer ninja cyborg.
Yeah, that sounds great...

Saturday, February 7, 2009

Fallout 3: Bad Karma

Disclaimer: I do apologize for the length of my posts. The fact of the matter is that these will become standalone chapters in Bonesnack: Now a book.

I wanted to talk to you about Fallout 3. A game that had me up to a point where I almost forgot I had a blog. After playing Mass Effect I jumped right into the Fallout universe. A shooter RPG after a shooter RPG. Yet, the difference was still quite dramatic. I'll start off with the bad. Fallout 3 has the looks of a shooter. Yet it is a Role Playing Game through and through. Maybe it is too much of an RPG for it's own good. Making it hard to give it a pass as the first person shooter it pretends to be.

I was quite shocked when I first got to feel the controls of this game, expecting it to control somewhat like COD4 or Crysis or even Bioshock. In Short, it doesn't at all. All of this might be a minor thing but it does take some getting used to. For instance, I was quite horrified to see the game "complete" my steps. Which feels like when you scale a flight of steps, stepping up only with your right foot, one flight at a time. It's hard to describe because it's so unusual. Like the game has a "right foot forward policy". When you crouch down and move about, the game will "add a step" in order put your right foot forward when you have manually put your left foot forward. I'm pretty sure there's a reason for this. And if so, I'm pretty sure it's an RPG thing. And if so, I'm pretty sure it's rooted in outmoded design. To clarify, this is a bad thing. It's obnoxious and clunky and it has no place in entertainment. Are we to count our steps to prevent the sky falling down? Do not condition us to have an obsessive-compulsive disorder!

At first I thought this quirk might be there to make the third person view work. But then as I entered said viewpoint, I was met with disbelief yet again. My stomach turned. Apparently I was air-skating across the environment. My body was making a running animation completely out of sync with the environment, and in 4 directions only. This game has horrible, horrible animation! Bethesda needs contact a motion capture studio and hire some animators. It needs to film some people talking to each other. Study the motions and take note. However, I need to nuance my statements a bit, I might come off as thinking too straight. For the most part, animations are fine. That is to say, when your running around in first person, having a firefight, using VATS (hey, ragdolls don't need any animation). It works, even though it's mediocre at best.
The third person view is there just to look at your character. It's unplayable otherwise. Further pushing the game into the FPS corner where bigger, better shooters lurk.

When you engage in a conversation, or you're being talked to, the game will zoom in on the speaker. Like in real life. You have quite a powerful zoom built into your eyes. That way you get a good view of all the bad. These characters are animatronics. There faces are as bland as cereal that's been left soaking in the bowl for too long. There are facial expressions but they are so subtle and stiff that you probably won't even notice. There are no gestures, no body language. And when there is, they wave their hand about a bit, and even that animation is looped. In cases they will stand there like complete idiots and in perfect silence with a hand that makes the same "I'm weighing a bull's nutsack"-motion every 10 seconds. It wasn't that easy coming to terms with all this. But since the game is not about talking to people it's possible to look the other way, or at the dialog text and continue with the game.

But my biggest gripe with the game is the blending of RPG and FPS elements. Animation is superficial. Gun play and combat gameplay are essential. I can hear the crowd gathering on my front door, protesting in one voice 'Fallout 3 is not a shooter!'. And they are wrong. Fallout 3 is made to play like a shooter, and so should it be judged. At first glance, the game plays rather clumsy. Your gun isn't particularly accurate nor powerful and your movement isn't very fluid. You're hoping it's a level 1 thing only, that things will get better over time. Well, they do. To a degree that you'll you gain auto-aim when you're really proficient with a type of weapons. It's another RPG rule I guess. Your weapons magically become more accurate when they are put in more capable hands. It feels so goddamn feeble to be shooting an assault rifle with bullets spraying in a 30 degree cone of fire. And for no good reason. This rifle has near mint condition and it shoots as if it has no barrel. The way to fix this "effectiveness with this weapon"-conundrum is, in my opinion, to have the hands sway a bit. Like when you're using a sniper rifle. It will sway in your untrained hands. Of course, when you squeeze the trigger at the right moment the bullet should still hit the mark, or at lease have a more believable trajectory. With this it becomes that much harder to compensate for the sway while aiming. But with the current game mechanic Fallout 3 has, even this isn't possible. Being an RPG, dice are governing hits and misses. Which means, when the dice roll indicates a miss, you miss. Even when you were seemingly dead on target. The opposite happens as well. When your aim is off but the dice are right, you'll hit. The effect is basically auto-aim and it's insulting to any self-respecting shooter fan. For wanting to be an RPG so badly it sacrifices consistency. Personally I'd ditch the entire system. It's boneheaded to try and shove dice rolls into a shooter. So don't. Make a shooter with RPG elements and be done with it.
But sure. Bethesda set out to make Oblivion with guns, mission accomplished.
By the way, why is the weight limit still around? It doesn't make the game more fun or challenging. It makes you shuttle from one container to another. Because of realism? In what reality does a coffee mug weigh half a kilogram? So many elements of this game shout, at the top of its lungs, "This is not a realistic game.", that a lot of these "set in stone" RPG conventions become superfluous.

The idea behind combat in an RPG is that it's strategic on a party based level. Or on a turn based level. Fallout 3 has no party management, no (visible) turns and no strategy.
The strategy in combat is that of a shooter. It deals with positioning your character, prioritizing targets, lining up shots, leading a target. Managing reloads. getting into cover at the right moments, picking the right weapons for every encounter. Such is the ways of shooters. If you want to borrow stuff, go look at the best of their class. Go look at COD4 and Gears Of War. Don't go looking at MOH: Pacific Assault. Elements that are missing are a scaling cross-hair to indicate the bullet spread or accuracy (although giving the system Fallout uses, the cross-hair would take up half the screen), weapon sets, lean mechanics, iron sights. I could even add weapon mods to that, but I guess no one ever had a second thought about the innovation Crysis brought to the table, which is a damn shame. Combat in Fallout 3 isn't very engaging. The AI simply isn't up to par with other shooters out there. What happens most of the time is that characters will charge up to close range and stab you with whatever weapon or limb they have.Or they will get out of cover and charge up to close range and empty their clip on you. They're also amazingly accurate compared to your own gun-spray. Sometimes though, they will flee when it's clear they're outmatched.
The only time I had a challenging fight was when a group of Tesla Soldiers pressed me with long range plasma fire while one of them charged at me.
So what else is there to harp on. There are no weapon sets. So you need to bring up the pipboy every time you want to switch weapons. Which hampers the action quite a bit. A few weapon slots would have been great. But alas, Fallout•3 was made with consoles (drag and drop what?) in mind and the PC platform suffers for it. But we're getting used to this.
I think I'll postpone my comments on the voice acting in the game until I write a dedicated post on that subject. Now, I know I might sound really down on the game. But truth be told, it has taken hours a day of my time for more than a month. And it's been occupying my gaming thoughts for just as long. So next time, I'll write a glowing post about it. I just wish Bethesda had made something that could stand next to the greatest of shooters, as well as the greatest of RPGs. But maybe 1 out of 2 still isn't so bad.

To be continued...

SPOILER WARNING

As bonus content and just as an example of how the RPG system of this game is holding it back. The end sequence with liberty prime could have been a lot more intense and interesting if the system could "calculate" more enemies at any given time. There's always little opposition, 5 troopers tops, and more spawn in when you dispatch the former. Imagine if the game didn't have to calculate dice rolls for any of those. A lot more calculations could be put to use on AI for more troopers.
And let's take it to the extreme, there could have been an Enclave Megatron to oppose Liberty Prime. Megatron kills off Prime, since enclave tech is always better, but does so at the cost of some of his health. You are left to mop up Megatron in a bossfight not unlike that of Crysis (Warhead).
That would have been an epic close to this epic game. Unlike the luke-warm ending it has now. Hear that, Bethesda? Stop being afraid.