AshaMan3000 Blog

Greater Than...

2013-05-15T04:55:00Z

I'm a pretty big fan of Bethesda's work. Yeah, they're known for their game-breaking glitches, but the Fallout and Elder Scrolls series continue to impress me as new titles are released. Counting the number of hours I've put into Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, FO3, and New Vegas would be an exercise in frustration and any answer I could possibly come up with would be an estimate at best. They create compelling worlds with an absurd amount of content and I find myself continuing to come back to their titles when nothing current catches my interest. That said, not all things are created equal and even in the case of venerated series like these people will have their favorites.

In regards to the Fallout games I have a clear favorite between the two current-generation releases. Fallout 3 is a vastly superior game to New Vegas. Given the amount of 'improvements' made to the formula with the release of New Vegas on paper you would think that it would trump Bethesda's efforts with 3 with ease but this isn't the case.

Entering the Capitol Wasteland after emerging from the vault in Fallout 3 is a profound moment. Between the near blinding light, your first level up, and the expanse opened up before you, few games have managed to stoke my inner nerd's fire like the world of Fallout 3. With varied locations and a near constant influx of new quests to tackle, the content is almost overwhelming at first. Trailing after your father in his efforts to 'save the world' created a realistic reason for your customized character to roam the waste and some of the set-piece moments were handled exceptionally well. I've played through the main quest of Fallout 3 three times to get all of the endings and got nearly all of the trophies (although my new account doesn't reflect them) collecting bobbleheads and exploring nearly every inch of the DC area. It still gets played on occasion although I've got little reason to go back even with the added content it's gotten over the years.

New Vegas should have bettered Fallout 3 in nearly every aspect. Between changing up the leveling and combat in small ways and improving both the story and the variety-less world of the first one they should have added up to a much better game. While attempts were made to make the story more compelling, I found the delivery boy theme boring and disliked that the world was set up as a much more linear affair than in the original. While styled as an open-world adventure, the way the enemies are leveled in New Vegas makes only one path actually viable when playing the game. Follow these guys south, then east, and then north to the strip or you'll be ripped to shreds by deathclaws or wildly overpowered ghouls.

Some of the the big, set-piece moments in New Vegas were pretty awesome (the above pic in particular), but most felt thrown in just for content's sake. The narrative itself never really clicked for me and the 'additions' made to the combat and gameplay failed to improve the series in any genuine way. Hand-to-hand combat felt forced and was relatively useless as keeping the enemies at bay with a ranged weapon is clearly the way to go. The addition of more characters to follow you around should have made for more compelling combat but all it really did was ruin my efforts at stealth every time Ed-E or Boone started shooting people up from 300+ yards away. Even the leveling felt silly when compared to Fallout 3 and I couldn't help but hate the way skill-based conversations were handled. Being one skill point shy of success should mean less than perfect odds of victory, not a complete inability to handle something.

I never finished New Vegas despite starting it at least four times. Somewhere after the first couple of missions for Yes Man I always get bored with the title and just move on to something else. I can't quite put my finger on what it is about the game that ends up boring me but for my money Fallout 3 is a much better game and my favorite Bethesda game so far. They've got a lot to live up to when designing the inevitable Fallout 4 for next-generation systems and I hope they look to Fallout 3 while avoiding the missteps of New Vegas when designing the world and systems for what will probably be their first PS4/Nextbox game.

At least until the next generation 3's gonna have to be my favorite.

What other semi-(or not at all) announced games are you looking forward to?

Anyone out there like New Vegas more than 3?

Why, what's wrong with you? It was terrible! ;)

Thanks for reading everyone!

Identity Crisis?

2013-05-06T04:58:00Z

Along with a large number of you I've been following the development of Grand Theft Auto 5 with an eagerness for more and more information. Lately we've been given quite a bit of information about the combat, large-scale heists, areas of interest, and most importantly, the three main characters.

Everything about GTA5 looks to be shaping up to be at or better than expectations (which are quite high) but I worry that they may be biting off a bit more than they can chew in regards to the tale. Lets face it, the exploration is going to turn out awesome as Rockstar knows it's business when it comes to filling large open-worlds with sweet, sweet content. The combat will also likely turn out well with the added lessons they learned from their experiences with Red Dead Redemption and Max Payne 3. They only place it seems that the title may stumble is the story.

While the ability to switch between characters pretty much at will unless on an active mission may mitigate some of the concerns I have, the idea of three-games-in-one keeps popping into my head as I follow the previews and reveals. I like the idea of Michael's character. The semi-retired gangster story-arc, full of Sopranos-style references, seems likely to turn out being my favorite of the three interweaving tales they appear to be penning.

And that is my core issue with Rockstar's approach to GTA5's story. I don't want to play a game where one of the characters becomes my favorite. Or worse, two are good and one is dramatically less so (I won't say bad as I've got faith in them). If I find myself liking one or two more than the other(s), I'll soon be blurring through certain parts to get to the 'better' content with a different protagonist. That's been an issue with games I've played in the past. Rarely does a game pull off having multiple playable characters in a single-player story without one being better than the other. I've been disappointed before by titles I've anticipated and I'd hate for one part to pull down the experience of the others.

Trailers featuring Franklin also look interesting to me although parts of it almost look like a different game from Michael's. The idea of bringing back the Ballas and the in your face brutality of the combat, not to mention the wildly different backdrop, promise for a grittier side to the mafioso style adventure of Michael. I'll likely enjoy this one as well as the rags to riches and gangland war themes they seem to be going for are interesting topics to me. Unless it gets overboard stereotypical it'll likely turn out to be a fine time and while I'm sure they'll push some boundaries with the content, I hope they avoid anything that would bring undue absurd criticism of the industry from those who don't understand it.

It shouldn't be a problem but it'll probably come up in at least a few newscasts after release for ruining America's children or some such nonsense. It IS a GTA title after all, so the odds of someone coming after them seems a pretty easy conclusion. It likely won't actually affect the industry in the long-term, but in the criticism heavy world we live in I'd like to see them bring a compelling tale to the table rather than some cliche ridden 'gangsa' bit. hopefully they succeed.

Trevor's tale of peddling meth and going all-out crazy in the badlands areas of the game look like yet another scene change for the game. While the sequences we've seen look to be full of action I find myself disliking him for the bits of personality shown. I imagine my parts playing as him being wildly fun, but ultimately less enjoyable as I worry I won't be able to get into his back-story or motivations. For reasons due to personal taste I lean towards the first two characters more than our balding arsonist friend. At that leads back to my biggest (and only) concern about how GTA5 turns out.

Can characters in a multi-part tales be more enjoyable than the others without hurting the overall experience of the game?

Odds favor me enjoying the entire play-through of Grand Theft Auto 5. I know the game-play and setting are going to turn out amazing. There's almost no chance I'll be let down by either of them. The idea of interlocking storylines for three characters who you can switch between practically on the fly sounds pretty cool on paper. Will they be able to pull off a game that makes for a great action experience that has compelling tales for all three of the guys you control is the real question. They've done it before as Jolt mentioned to me earlier with all of the dlc for GTA4 but I still worry that at the end of it all I'll be looking back on one or two awesome parts with one that I raced through just to get back to the guys I ended up liking better.

Anyone else have a character that looks like an early favorite contender?

Can games not suffer if one part ends up less enjoyable (or at least compelling) than the others?

For what it's worth, Trevor doesn't look terrible, just less fun than Michael and Franklin according to my taste in themes.

Any of you dislike Michael or Franklin for reasons I failed to mention?

Thanks for reading ladies and gentlemen!

A Call for Common Sense...

2013-04-17T19:08:00Z

In the past decade, but more frequently lately, gaming has been posited as a catalyst, or reason for some of the terrible real-world violence that has been going on. Not that long ago during the tragedy at the Sandy Hook elementary school, guns, and specifically gun-related video games, entered once again into the national debate. Not long ago a government official said something to the effect of 'game developers need to voluntarily remove guns from their games before congress steps in'. *More a summation than a quote as I wasn't feeling very research inclined today.*

Now we're all used to that sort of talk in the game community, but I've got to admit that it's gotten old.

I won't lie. That cop with her gun drawn is hot!

Just a few days back tragedy struck again near the finish line of this years Boston marathon. Along with most of you I find myself feeling for the victims of the multiple bombs set off while at the same time trying to figure out what exactly, could have been going through the head of the person or people who committed this act. It was a horrific occurrence and until answers are out there people are going to speculate as people do. When three are killed and over one hundred and eighty wounded in a bomb blast at a public event people are going to need something or someone to blame. It's human nature and not something we can get around so I say address it straight on.

While clearly an act of terror, we've yet to get a firm answer as to who was behind this bombing. As of this writing they've got a 'suspect' either in custody or under watch but not having all of the details I'll have to speculate a bit. (<EDIT> From what I understand they don't have someone in custody, bad reporting.) If it turns out that the suspect is some sort of foreign national then the debate will be quickly ended. Fingers will get pointed at some sort of anti-American sentiment and our law-makers will be deciding whether we'll be bombing a nation with drones or doing it the old-fashioned way with troops and planes. If however, this turns out to be a lone wolf scenario, particularly if orchestrated by an American under the age of forty, we'll have an entirely new (or not so new depending on how you look at it) series of arguments made by law- makers and the media.

Oh lord! A popular game from not long ago included bomb-making!

People do some outrageously disgusting things to get attention for themselves or a cause they believe in. I'm not actually speculating on whether or not bomb-making mechanics in video games will be used as part of the blame game by our media and politicians when the dust starts to settle in the coming days. I have however, seen news footage showing bomb-making websites and even the cover of The Anarchist's Cookbook, of which I actually own a copy as some sort of warning about how 'easy' it has become to get knowledge of this type. This sort of reporting makes me shiver. Before a suspect is even identified we've starting trying to figure out what motivated him or her and seeking out possible ways he or she could have gotten their hands on the goods needed to pull it off.

I can just see it now. Some Congressman, probably a woman or democrat, will be up at the podium decrying the Assassin's Creed franchise for 'willfully creating a bomb simulator'!

What the world, America in particular, needs to do is grow up a bit. Yes, we all want someone to blame when things go wrong. It's literally in our DNA to find fault in the things we dislike or don't understand when things spiral out of control. There's a psychological term for it but as I explained earlier I'm not in the mood for research today. While gaming in general and it's audience in particular has grown up, the arguments against it have stayed the same age. No amount of finger-pointing will make something more true but events like these prompt people to try the same argument over and over. It's important to remember though that sometimes people are just crazy.

Best Cid incarnation by far! And possesed to boot!

No amount of video gaming is going to 'force' someone to go out and commit a violent act. The industry has become the public whipping boy in much the same way that guns have. And like D&D did in the early 80's. And like rock and roll in the sixties, jazz before that. Elvis, movies, and television have all faced their share of the blame game. Look at South Park for a great example. By refusing to bend and arguing that by making nothing sacred they can effectively make fun of everything, they've consistently pushed the boundaries of what's allowed on television. Now that's not to say that game developers should push against what's acceptable just for the sake of it, but rather that they shouldn't bow down once because it leads down a nasty path. By removing or limiting guns in games we would essentially open the door for further regulation to occur. What would be next? Cars that don't realistically portray damage to the vehicle and trauma to the driver because youngsters could get confused about the safety of high-speed driving? Perhaps the bomb-making I mentioned earlier would make a good example.

This just in folks. Apparantly the suspect has been practicing his bomb-buying since the early 90's!

Could the blame game effect the game industry more than it already has? Absolutely. Whether or not it's likely, the entire argument that man isn't capable of making his own decisions, right, wrong, or tragic, turns the entire event in to something that isn't beneficial to anyone. When we finally learn as a society to only point blame directly at the person responsible for something terrible like what happened in Boston we'll finally start to see an end to these sorts of occurrences. Whoever committed this crime is sitting at home or on a flight smiling like the madman he is as the 24 hour news channels show endless loops of footage of the crime-scene and event itself. That could even be the motive in and of itself although we may never know. What we do know is that the media has already started finger-pointing and I have to wonder at what point gaming is going to get it's share.

Mikey's little brother only had this to say. 'He could swim real good in Far Cry 3! How would we know he couldn't do it in real life?'

An absolutely absurd argument I know, but I wanted to show how far things could go if pushed to the furthest extreme. Focusing the blame back onto the person who committed the act and not his influences will do exactly what all of this finger pointing hasn't. Namely stop giving the person their moment in the spotlight while unrelated forms of entertainment are vilified by those who just can't quite figure out who to blame. Hopefully the people of Boston are starting the long process of healing today and that the Sandy Hook folks are on their way to recovery as well. You wouldn't wish this sort of thing on your worst enemy and that fact, and that alone, is why we need to stop it with the blame game and punish those who deserve it. The people of these events deserve justice not speculation. Compassion instead of voyeurism into their lives. And most importantly, the knowledge that we're improving as a people as opposed to hearing sound bites from legislators who have used tragedy to increase the volume of their voice. Games aren't the problem here folks, and neither are guns or bombs. They can be scary for sure, but they're just objects like any others. It's crazy or evil people with evil or crazy intentions that are the problem. And sadly, no amount of legislature or finger pointing is ever going to change the fact that those sorts of people do in fact exist.

Prepare for the worst and hope for the best I always say!

My heart goes out to all the families, friends, and victims of either of the attacks mentioned.

Is there a way any of you have come up with to defend our hobby better?

How many times have you had the opportunity to defend the hobby in the last three months?

Thanks for reading fellas!

A Mixed Bag for Max

2013-04-15T02:28:00Z

After finishing God of War: Ascension, Tomb Raider, and Bioshock Infinite I decided it was time to tackle some of my ever increasing backlog. After soliciting advice on Twitter I decided that Max Payne 3 would be the first of several games that I'd finally give a chance. You see, I buy games that I know I'll eventually get around to playing even knowing that I've got other priorities at the time. Which may explain why I was trying to choose between it and Dishonored having owned but never played either.

I'm nine chapters in to Max Payne 3 and it's been both a mixed bag and a phenomenal experience at the same time. So far there are three things I'm enjoying quite a bit and one that I can't help but not like. Firstly, the story is pretty damn good so far. Without giving too much away (although it is over a year old at this point I believe), it involves some mafioso types, the slums of Brazil, double and triple crosses, and lots of people who deserve it and not getting killed.

The flashback sequences in particular are very well done!

Another aspect of the game that I'm really enjoying is the overall audio-visual presentation. I'd say graphics and sound but the first sentence sounds so much smarter. From the big moments to the smallest details, Rockstar hit the ball out of the park with the looks and sounds of the game. Whether it's a bar scene with some guido punks, a dance club in the slums (complete with appropriate music), or just the clutter of Brazil's favela, I feel like most of the scenes in the game are places that could actually exist.

Rockstar has shown they've mastered bullet-time for sure!

The combat is also handled very well. While I've never cared for the Rockstar method of targeting and firing with the L and R2 buttons I've acclimated to it with years of experience playing their games. The gun options are nice and they feel pretty different from each other which encourages experimentation. I had a particularly good time with the sniper scenario as well as the boat chase with unlimited ammo. Watching for overheating while blowing up your pursuers has surely been done before but let's not knock it just for not being original. Especially when It's this much fun.

At this point you may be wondering what problem I may have as I've been praising the game for pretty much the entirety of the blog.

Great, another corridor with breakable glass...

The level design (so far), while sparkling with detail, is pretty bland. I certainly enjoy the look and feel of the early parts of the game but most environments feel designed to funnel cannon-fodder your way rather than an area worth exploring. Sure, not all of Rockstar's games can be open-world, but would it be too much to ask for a slightly less linear part in the first third or so of the game? I've killed something like 600 enemies already and in most instances they appeared after I crossed an invisible line and alternated between charging me guns blazing and ducking behind cover only to pop out directly in my cross-hairs.

Level design is a big factor in how much fun a game turns out to be. While I'm enjoying most of the aspects of the game I can't help but feel like Max is on a ride and I'm just pulling the trigger as I go along. It's not a deal-breaker and it could end up changing in the coming hours as I dig a bit deeper into the tale, but without the story, graphics, and gunplay, this practically on rails shoot 'em up probably wouldn't be nearly as good as it is.

Next up on the backlog is Dishonored.

Anyone else really like a title even though part of it just pisses you off?

Even with the gripe I owe Stranger, Jolt, and Mray thanks for voting that I play this one first. It's really good even with the bizarre level design choices!

And of course, I'm even more pumped for GTA 5 now having played portions of this!

Thanks for reading fellas and gals!

The Worst of the Best

2013-04-07T22:10:00Z

Even the best games of each generation often have a few flaws. While we may argue passionately about our viewpoint on these flaws it's near-impossible to avoid admitting that they exist unless you want to be labeled as a fan-boy, troll, or some other such by-word that I'm unaware of. These past two generations of hardware have released many of the greatest games I've yet to see. I'd be surprised if there aren't at least a few of you reading this who've ONLY experienced games for the past two generations.

I've played more games combined on the PS2 and 3 than on probably all of the previous Nintendo, Atari, and sega systems I've owned combined. And they weren't all great, or even good in some cases. Several of those that were great however are going to be brought up in today's post. Not for the reasons that they've become and stayed legends in my eyes, but for the small mis-steps they took along the way.

Red Dead Redemption: Mexico

OK, Red Dead Redemption was an amazing game. It had great action, tons of side-content, and a story worth paying attention to. Things are going well as you've mastered some of the game techniques and met a few memorable characters and then you're dumped into the even drier and hotter portion of the southwest known as Mexico. After that it's four or many, many more hours (depending on how serious you are about optional stuff) before you're back on track towards completing the game. Boring and forgettable isn't something most are used to hearing in regards to RDR but the entire section in Mexico felt like one giant con to make the game longer.

Uncharted 2: The Ice Cave

Uncharted 2 is one of my most-played games. I've seriously beaten it at least a dozen times and count it as one of few titles I re-play on a sort of rotation when nothing new interests me. One part in particular really grinds my gears though. The ice cave is the longest and most boring part of what is overall an absolutely amazing experience. The puzzles are easy as well as being overly long and also suffer from Naughty Dog's reliance on using the same few pages of Drakes' diary to explain. Aside from the laugh I got out of Nate's disbelief after Tenzen gets the grapple on his first try I shudder every time I get to this area.

Final Fantasy 12: The Sandsea

Final Fantasy 12 does not get off to a quick start. You're easily six or more hours into the game before the main party is filled out and are limited to which characters you can choose for a majority of those hours. Then the game opens up a little bit after the (also terrible) mini-game of sorts you play in Buhjerba. Having access to all of your characters and having a new, large area to explore should sound good on paper but the sandsea hits all of the wrong notes. Using the same two enemies for the most part, even though they make good opportunities for leveling/looting, makes the re-used art assets and bland brown main color stand out even more as boring. Then you find the map and realize just how big this endless battle of the catwalks is. It's big and boring, but once you finish the tomb at the end it never has to be returned to (unless you're a completionist)!

Fallout 3: The Ruins of DC

I knew I was going to be in for a lot of greys, browns, and greens when I started playing Fallout 3, but the DC ruins take the color palate to a level my eyes just weren't quite expecting. Everything looks the same! Seriously, everything. I got more turned around trying to navigate the inter-connected tunnels and building I could have sworn I had just passed to make me feel like I was living an old episode of The Twilight Zone. After meeting Three-Dog I didn't come back. Even the lure of old-school power-ups or new-school trophies wasn't enough to make me revisit this terrible portion of one of the best new age RPGs I've come across.

Tomb Raider: Shantytown

Tomb Raider is one seriously awesome game. One thing that I hate about modern games however is when I approach a new area with a birds-eye view and immediately think, "Oh great, this area's a multi-player map". Something about the shantytown is dull and it's not just the rust colored theme they went with. It's convoluted, full of difficult to find areas with nothing in them, and has more spawning points than anywhere else in the game. It may have made for a good deathmatch map (were the online portions good at all), but all it served in single-player was an area to funnel more and more enemies at the player and the hiding place for one of the optional tombs.

There you have it Game Informer online community. The worst qualities of five of my favorite games. Not a top-five exactly as mine always rotates, but five great games none-the-less. I'm sure some of you may disagree or even find other parts of the titles that enraged you more than the ones cited by me but these five parts always make me question my devotion to re-play and I'd be surprised if I were the only one. Even the greatest games can have moments that fall flat but that doesn't mean we can't love them for what they are as well as endlessly debate over who's right and who's wrong.

Anyone out there love one of the parts I just described hating?

How about parts of other games that make you cringe I may have missed?

Have a good evening everyone and thanks for reading!

An Issue I May Have With the Next Generation

2013-04-04T04:38:00Z

I've been a pretty big proponant of next generation gaming lately and finishing Bioshock Infinite yesterday sort of cemented the idea that I'm ready for it to arrive. Having recently finished both God of War Ascension and Tomb Raider made me realize The Last of Us and GTA5 were the only current generation titles I was interested in playing. It's a relative given that I'll be on-board with the next Playstation system and will be giving the WiiU a shot if or when Nintendo gets around to making games I'm interested in. The new Xbox will have to wow me with some major features or exclusives but that's neither here nor there. What worries me most about the next generation of consoles (and pcs but I'll get there) is that I may not be able to find the time to play.

When was the last time I updated this thing?

A few nights back I decided to pop in Uncharted 3 for the first time in several months. I had vague notions of trying to get some of the group here to play and wanted to re-aquaint myself with the controls and what-have-you. Having not played in some time there was an update that I had to deal with. Then 6 more in less than rapid order. All told I waited fortey minutes to update a game I hadn't played in forever it seems onl to have not actually played it as of this accounting.

Oh good! A system update AND an multi-part day-one patch? Fantastic! I can catch up on my blogging!

About an hour ago I decided that I would play some Civilization on my laptop for a while (went with 4 this time around as it's still my favorite of the series) and of course, Steam had to update first. Then extract the package. Then install the update. Then initialize. Then I decided to write this so I'm uncertain what point it's at in it's process.

Ok, it's done so I guess I'll try and make a coherent point soon.

It's not so much that I'm concerned about how much games update as it is how much waiting for the updates eats out of time that could be spent gaming. In the combined time spent waiting for PSN to update and Steam to update I could've immediately popped my PS2 copy of FF12 into the system and leveled my characters two or three times. With the always-on rumors and the very nature of systems that track your purchases and allow for video streaming and live chat in-game is that there are going to be massive amounts of regular updates. There are just too many working web-related parts to gaming anymore to avoid them. And I'm one of the guys with a pretty speedy connection who doesn't really have to wait in the greater scheme of things. Those of you with slow, or worse, no internet access will be further disconnected from time spent gaming. Slow internet will drag even more time out of your gaming life and having none would disable many of the features on display so far.

The one time I decided I really needed to download something. Figures...

My last little fear is the dreaded 'service is down' message when trying to play one of our favorite games that most of us have seen at least once or twice. With all the focus on co-op and the myriad social options available now or down the line it's almost inevitable that at some point any one of these moving parts could go down, affecting the experience. Imaging trying out Sony's new 'let a friend take over' feature this fall and the network drops out. How much information will be lost? More importantly to me is how often I'll have to sit through an update screen before being able to access the features in the first place...

Maybe they'll figure it all out and this won't matter a bit!

What this-gen games are you all still excited about?

Has anyone else killed a rediculous amount of time waiting for an update only to not play at all?

Thanks for reading fellas and gals!

I Had A Dream...

2013-03-29T21:37:00Z

So today marks the one-year anniversery of me being a regular blogger here at GIO. This post will be my one hundred and sixteenth in that time-frame with twenty-five herds and six newsletter appearances to my credit. Over the past year I've met quite a few awesome people and have finished more than my fair share of excellent and not-so-much games.

Blah, blah, blah, none of you are reading this post to listen to me congratulate myself!

I've debated for the last couple of weeks how I wanted to mark this occasion and luckily the answer sort of fell into my lap last night. I didn't want to do some epic shout-out blog featuring all the people I've come to know and love in the past year. You're all aware of who you are (hint: if you think you're awesome then odds are I do to!) and I've done one or two of those already. It also seemed silly to do a 'how-to' pointers style post as someone does one of those every few weeks and I hardly think I'm the person to be giving advice no matter how successful my posts have been.

Then I had an epic, game-related dream last night. I've always been a note taker in regards to my dreams as memory fades quickly after waking. Last night I woke up twice, took notes, and promptly fell back asleep only to have the same dream continue on in slightly changed form. It featured games, celebrities, members of GIO, sweet, sweet tunes, and of course me, Asha. So without further ado I'd like to tell you a tale that's a little bit weird, another bit amusing, and wholly appropriate for my one-year mark post.

It started out with me in the shoes of Booker from the recently released Bioshock Infinite. I was escorting Elizabeth as one would expect and a host of Vox Populi troops were advancing on our position. Oddly enough Elizabeth was being played in my dream by none other than GIO member Ace13 and since we've never met in real life my mind had her appearing as Natalie Portman. (No worries, while rated M for violence it wasn't THAT sort of dream!) So I was using my trusty carbine rifle to mow down wave after wave of the Vox while Ace/Elizabeth/Natalie (we'll just say Ace from now on) was scrounging for ammunition and summoning turrets to help me when I realized things just weren't working out. There were too many of them so I yelled for her to open a tear so that we could escape. She did and as we entered what seemed to be some sort of burlesque theatre I woke for the first time.

After a bit of note-taking and a quick smoke (yes, I really need to quit), I was back in the dream only this time we were unable to re-open the tear to get back. The answer to why quickly dawned on us as a disembodied voice came over the loudspeakers demanding that Ace choreograph a dance routine for two ladies in order to earn the right to use her power again. This is where the dream goes a little off the rails ladies and gentlemen. The curtain rises and out walk 10 women. Only it's actually five copies each of two women. Melissa McCarthy of Mike and Molly fame and Hayden Panettiere formerly of the cast of Heroes. Aces job was to get them to dance beautifully to Walk Like an Egyptian while I watched and sipped Dr. Pepper. After some moon-walking, a little bit of the worm, and cartwheels on the part of both (or all ten I suppose) women we apparently met our objective and were allowed to open a tear back to Columbia. Unfortunately we ended up in the GTA5 version of Los Santos instead and were quickly forced (or did I just do it instinctively?) to steal a car.

After waking again and taking down a few more notes the dream continued against all odds.

The car we happened to jack was none other than a Bugatti Veyron (convertible although I'm unsure if they actually make them) and the driver happened to be Jolt the Cynic, in the body of CJ from San Andreas as he and I have also never met. He promptly scooted over to the passenger seat and began fiddling with the radio while Ace jumped in back. As we were cruising down a highway that reminded me of the roads on the Florida coast where the ocean is on both sides a helicopter started chasing us. It was populated by Vox troops and they were using one of the weird loudspeaker robot enemies that I've yet to encounter in my play-through of Infinite. While they blared socialist propaganda at us Ace set up a turret on the back of the Veyron and started firing away at the chopper doing little damage from what I could tell. For the entirety of the chase sequence the theme song to Miami Vice was playing at levels nearly loud enough to drown out the propaganda coming from the Vox. It was so loud in fact that Jolt was too busy trying to adjust the volume of the radio while at the same time complaining that the Wu Tang Clan CD he put in wouldn't play to contribute at all to the gun-fight. Just as things were getting interesting with CJ (Jolt) griping about music while Natalie (Ace) fired away with a turret, we came over a rise in the road and I realized it was turning into a tunnel that went under the ocean. Knowing from years of video game experience that this was our ticket out of the helicopter gun-fight I stepped on the gas (It felt like we were doing about 140mph) and headed towards the opening. As the tunnel approached I told everyone to hold on but at the last second realized it was no tunnel but just a mirage in the ocean we were much too quickly approaching. I woke with a start as we hit the wall of water and moments later as my heart still raced my alarm went off alerting me to the start of a new day.

It's pretty rare that I have video game themed dreams. It's even more rare that a dream I'm having continues after waking up the first time, let alone several. Regardless, the timing couldn't have been better as it made for a great one-year celebratory post!

I think the picture says it all!

I wouldn't still be doing this without the support of all of you!

Thanks and here's to another great year on GIO!

A Few Infinite Oddities

2013-03-27T15:49:00Z

*Spoiler-free*

I didn't really enjoy the first Bioshock. Aside from the story the game itself failed somehow to pull me in. That's not to say I didn't slog my way through it to see the eventual conclusion, just that it's definitely not very high up on my re-play list. Having never played the second in the series I was a bit hesitant towards picking up Infinite, but the hype leading up to it's release was enough to sway me.

Now that's one wicked robot/bird/demigod/whatever!

I'm about four and a half hours in to my play-through of this title and am immensely enjoying it so far. All of the issues I had with the original seem to have been addressed and exploring this well-light, brightly colored world is rewarding in and of itself. While the game tackles some crazy, rarely seen in games themes such as racism and religion, it (so far) does so in a tasteful way and I'm enjoying speculating where the story may end up going.

Of course, being an Irrational game, Infinite does come with more than it's fair share of odd moments along with those that are profound. I'm going to lean a bit more towards the ridiculous than usual for this blog and if any of you were hoping for a serious discussion of all things Bioshock you may be in for some disappointment. I remember when playing the original thinking at one point to myself "man, somebody got paid a fair amount of money to render these toilets in such detail...". Infinite is no exception to the weirdness of the guys over at Irrational and I'd like to point out some of the more silly things I've noticed so far.

It wouldn't be Bioshock without tons of restrooms to explore!

One of the first things I noticed about the world of Columbia is that there are just as many restrooms (if not more) as found in Rapture. Complete with flush-able toilets and usable sinks. While I enjoy interacting with the digital worlds I explore as much as the next guy I'm uncertain why such effort was made on the part of the developer. Unless there's a hidden trophy for 'Flooding Columbia', turning the sinks off and on seems like a useless endeavor (although I'd be lying if I said I didn't turn every single one on and leave it running).

Another strange occurance I've run accross is finding things in the most unlikely of places.

Shops utilizing the honor system are a recipe for theft in my play-throughs!

It's not just the shopkeepers who store things in strange places. Find some cotton candy in the grass next to a park bench? Go ahead and eat it, it'll restore your health so a bit of filth probably won't hurt you! Feel like searching that cash register for a bit of extra dough? Go ahead, but don't be surprised (like I was) by finding a pineapple or two in the drawer next to the bills. Silver dollars in trash cans or laying all over the street? You bet, money's not important enough to hang onto in the world of Columbia apparently!

Finding a bit of humor in the serious games I play is always a favorite pasttime of mine. Take for example the RPG-Lite accessory menu in the game. Equipable clothing comes in the form of hats, shirts, pants, and boots. Any and all of these add certain abilities or upgrades to various powers Booker gets over the course of the game. Want your melee attacks to set enemies on fire? There's a hat for that! Find yourself exiting the sky-lines only to realize you forgot to re-load your weapons before embarking? Don't worry, a pair of pants allows for automatic re-loads! It seems strange that mundane articles of clothing give such super-powers, but it IS a game after all so I'll take it with a grain of salt!

Can't say I expected to be 'digitally baptised' in the opening moments!

A few other quirks have kept me smiling from ear to ear while playing the opening areas of Bioshock Infinite. Hearing a women tell her husband to shut up because she doen't want to be in the next episode of 'so I married a Vox' had me laughing out loud. Seeing the headline for a barbershop quartet dubbed 'the gayest' was amusing as well (keep in mind that meant happy in 1912). Seeing a statue of John Wilkes Booth idolized for killing Lincoln was pretty awesome as well given that racial inequality is something the story-tellers seem to be focusing on so far.

Really??? You can open rifts in the space-time continuum and you're attacking me with a book?

I guess the biggest take-away from all of the serious and absurd things I've brought up is that Ken Levine and I must have pretty similar senses of humor. In responding to someone on Twitter the other day asking for advice on what to do given that he was in college with term papers due on release week Levine responded with 'toga party?' Well played sir!

Thanks for reading everyone but I've got some more Columbia to explore!

Anyone else notice some absurd stuff I may have missed?

Have a good one and let me know what you think of the game!

Justifying My Favorite Final Fantasy Choice

2013-03-25T00:45:00Z

With the combination of three inter-related pieces of news in the past few months I've started waxing nostalgic about my favorite role-playing series. First it was the highly expected announcement of Final Fantasy 13-3 that got me thinking. I really liked (aside from the story) the original 13 and even though I haven't played 13-2 I welcomed the news for fans who had.

The next little bit of news that set my mind on the Final Fantasy series was the announcement at Sony's big press event a while back of another title in the works for the new Playstation 4. While I'm still uncertain whether it's a new entry or yet another re-hash my excitement for the future of the series continues to grow. The last thing in recent months to focus my attention back onto the series was the official announcement (I'm aware rumors have been flying for some time) of the HD remakes of X and X-2. Ten is one of true gems of the series and while I didn't enjoy playing dress-up with Yuna, Ricku, and newcomer Payne, the addition of trophy support will probably convince me to give it another try.

None of any of this has much to do with what I consider my absolute favorite in this long-running series. Tactics is a close second with it's near-endless campaigning and crazy-cool exploits to over-power the characters used. It doesn't hurt that those characters are largely customized by you, the player, but it still doesn't quite make my number one spot. Third would be the aforementioned X with its swap-in, swap-out battle system and the always awesome sphere grid which gives you a ridiculous amount of options in regards to tricking out your party. It's also not one of the obvious picks like VII, IV, or VI, which are all awesome titles in their own respective rights.

Nope, my tastes run a bit contrary to the average Final Fantasy fan as the twelfth entry in the series is far and above my favorite. Three things about Final Fantasy 12 make it stand out head and shoulders above the rest of its brethren in my opinion. The first (as evidenced by the picture above), is the cast of characters. While leading man Vaan (and buddy Penelo) are as lame as any of the other plucky lads who grace the series, the rest of the crew is stand-out amazing. Whether it's the ever stoic Basch, the wise-cracking duo Fran and Balthier, or the somewhat hostile Princess Ashe, the party used by the player is one of the most memorable of the series.

It doesn't hurt that the villains are as bad-ass a group as could be imagined. While I can't remember all of their names off the top of my head, the story pulls these believable FF versions of Sith Lords in both expected and not so much directions. With quiet understanding, a bit (or more) back-stabbing, and some of the inevitable true evil evidenced by this group they couldn't possibly be more awesome unless the mighty Sephiroth himself were leading them. And that's not to mention the mad scientist Cid in what may be his most epic FF appearance ever!

The second of three reasons Final Fantasy 12 is my favorite in the series is all of the systems the game has in place, two in particular. The first is a combination of the gambit and leveling systems. I put them together because the work together in so many ways.

While upgrading your characters with combination of equipment, experience, and license points you eventually unearth new tactics to use for the active characters of your party. Without getting too deep into the details, you need both the piece of equipment or skill (purchased at stores or found in the environment), and the appropriate license to use them before your guys and gals can use them in battle. The gambits are also found on the license board, which is somewhat similar to the sphere grid from X, and profoundly affect how non-leader members behave in battle.

In combat you only control one character at a time although you can switch which member that is with the press of a button. The rest of the party behaves based on how you've set up each members particular gambits. Want one to prioritize healing while having secondary attacks specializing in flying or undead enemies? No problem. Would you rather the group pick out the weakest enemies to finish off first or focus on whichever creature you train the leaders sights on? Either is viable and with a quick step into the menu you can create and customize as many options as you'd like. I always preferred to set at least one person up as the buffer/de-buffer with the main character stealing while others attacked the enemies weakest to strongest. Yes, if you want you can customize and automate the entire party leaving you as a spectator until things get hairy and direct control is needed.

The third and final reason for Final Fantasy 12 topping my list is the world itself. While Ivalice has been used before in the Tactics games, Twelve was the first time gamers were really able to explore the world outside of the map. Using large, inter-connected areas to give the impression of an open-world, the land of Ivalice is both large and varied. Each new territory opens up new game-play possibilities as well as the obligatory ever-harder groups of enemies. While some back-tracking is necessary to gain the most powerful items and skills, it's never done in a ham-fisted way and new and optional areas open up as the story unfolds.

Part of what makes the world so interesting are the optional enemies and bosses available to fight for those willing to do some extra exploring. While Belias, the boss shown above, isn't one of them (Google failed in finding me a good optional pic), he's pretty cool and makes a good showing for the many that are available. Whether it's tracking down rare hunts (similar to 13's hunt system), or searching for optional summons called espers in this title, the sheer amount of tough to beat enemies is staggering.

So there you have it GIO. My favorite Final Fantasy title is the twelfth in the series. I'm sure some of you will agree while others cringe at my choice, but it's the only answer I have. At least until the next one comes out to wow me yet again!

Anyone out there agree for different reasons?

How about disagree for the same?

What's your favorite and why?

I've got spare time!

Thanks for reading ladies and gents!

It's All Lara's Fault

2013-03-17T23:20:00Z

I've had the great pleasure of playing several fantastic games so far this spring. My play-through of Ni No Kuni is nearing completion, I'm tackling Tomb Raider for the second time with more trophies in mind, and I've recently started burning through God of War: Ascension. All of them can easily be described as good games that have very little in common with each other.

If ever there was a CGI woman to have a crush on Lara is the one!

I've spoken at length about Ni No Kuni already and as an RPG it fits in poorly to the argument I plan on making this evening so that will be the last you hear of it tonight. The other two titles however, have me conflicted over what it is that makes a good game great. On the surface of things I'd like to call Ascension a great game. It has all of the staples expected out of the God of Warfranchise and, while not as phenomenal an experience as it's predecessors, is still a fun game.

Brooding while on a journey? Check.

At about four hours in (I've just beaten the boss in the Temple of Delphi), something about the game just isn't quite clicking for me. So far it isn't the serviceable story that's letting me down. It's also not the slightly less polished combat. Neither is it the exploration which I think is done better than in previous installments. So what could it be? Let's look to the other title I mentioned in the first paragraph for some insight.

Ok, Tomb Raider can get a bit... Creepy.

While many of you know that I'm a bit older than the average site user I figure I should add a small disclaimer for those of you who don't. I'm 35 and have been gaming since the pre-NES days. If a system was made odds are I'm at least familiar with it. Most iconic franchises have at been checked out if not played to death. That said, this was my first experience playing as the revered (in certain circles) Lara Croft. *I'm going to wait for a moment while some of you scroll to the bottom to rage-respond with (relatively) good reason.* Now that we're past all of that I'd like to say this was the greatest game I've played since the fall of 2011.

Hard to compete with a statement like that eh Kratos?

I'm not hedging at all when I say this. I enjoyed the hell out of two games in particular last year but both XCOM: Enemy Unknown and Far Cry 3 pale in comparison to how much sheer fun I got out of guiding the young Lara Croft through what was her first adventure. I was literally wandering the wilderness of Skyrim and out-thinking that calculating lady-villain in Uncharted 3 the last time I enjoyed a game this much. In fact, for the first time in recent memory I played for six and a half hours straight after initially starting the game, which NEVER happens with me. I game in smaller, one to three hour bouts, not for hours and hours on end. So what does this have to say about my slightly less than stellar thoughts about Kratos' newest title you may be asking?

Both the effects and realistic spread of the fire are mesmerizing.

Only this. Tomb Raider may have been a little bit too good. For what it's worth I'm extraordinarily happy that it turned out as amazing as it did. For a gamer who wasn't even looking forward to it's release I was more than pleasantly surprised by how much fun I had with it. On the flip side of this knowledge is the fact that other games are seeming somehow 'less so' because of it's awesomeness.

Also very cool, but how can it compete with such an epic survival story?

Perhaps if I was a die-hard Tomb Raider fan and just another occasional God of War enthusiast these comparisons wouldn't even be made. The fact of the matter is that I've been anticipating Ascension for well over a year however. Getting one-upped by a game that I've never paid attention to in the past has had lingering effects on my ability to enjoy it. That's not to say it isn't a good game. It's just not as great as I had hoped and my memory of Lara's adventure keeps over-shadowing the fun I'm having as Kratos.

Maybe I should just shelf it until I'm done with my second play!

While I'm sure it's happened before in the 30-odd years I've been a gamer, it certainly hasn't in the one year that I've been blogging. A virtually unknown factor (to me anyway) has come out of nowhere to overshadow one of the games I expected to be a year-long favorite! That my friends is something Crystal Dynamics can be proud of and is one of the deciding factors of why I think God of War: Ascension is a good game while Tomb Raider is something great. I want to like Kratos better than I do but all I can come up with when deciding why not is that it's all Lara's fault.

Has anyone else ever experienced something similar to this?

When was the last time a game 'came out of nowhere' to wow you?

Thanks for reading ladies and gents!

Making the Inevitable Comparisons

2013-03-12T16:05:00Z

It's pretty rare that a modern game releases without some nods to similar past titles. Gaming has grown up over the years in ways not unlike the movie and music industries. When was the last time a new band or movie came out where it wasn't compared to others that came before? I can't remember one and I'd be willing to bet many of you can't either.

I like the granny smith's better but who's to say really?

Many would argue that the inevitable comparisons to past titles shows a lack of originality or creativity on the part of the developers but I would like to argue that new titles can still stand on their own two feet while showing a shared heritage at the same time. Since the beginning of the year I've had the pleasure of playing two highly regarded new releases. I'm 30 hours in to my play-through of Ni No Kuni (I'm known for taking my time with JRPGs) and just recently finished the first of what will be many plays of the new Tomb Raider. Both games are fantastic entries to their particular genres that bring new ideas to the table while at the same time sharing characteristics of games from the past.

Myself and many others have referred to Ni No Kuni as a 'love letter' to JRPGs. I've described it on Twitter and elsewhere as a blend of Pokemon and Dragon Quest 8 with just enough personal flair to set it apart from the others. While I've never played a Pokemon title (I was just old enough when it released to think it was for kids and my spare time thanks me for it!) I know enough of the series to understand the comparisons.

Gotta catch them all I suppose!

While I'm uncertain how many familiars exist in Ni No Kuni as I refuse to use guides anymore (a subject for another blog in the future) I would assume the herd is of similar size to the amount of Pokemon found in one of Nintendo's titles. Another common theme between the two is upgrading your creatures into newer, more powerful versions of themselves. Does the fact that one title borrows a theme from another cheapen the experience for gamers? I don't think so as most games find a way to distinguish themselves from entries that came before. The real-time battle system is what sets Ni No Kuni apart from it's Pokemon brethren and that is enough of a difference for me to overlook the oft-criticized similarities between the two.

Dragon quest, (in particular 8 as Level-5 developed it as well) is another title that Ni No Kuni is often compared to. The similarities are definitely there as both feature common RPG tropes as well as a well-designed world map and a heavy reliance on grinding for levels to prepare your characters for the regular boss encounters. What sets Level-5's newest title from those from the past is again it's active battle system. No longer are we just watching animations while waiting to input another command from a list. Moving around the battlefield and making split-second decisions gives Ni No Kuni's fight sequences a sense of immediacy that Dragon Quest titles never managed.

The newest Tomb Raider title is another excellent example of how comparisons can't quite adequately describe the experience. I've read reviews that call it Gears of War meets Uncharted and have even described it myself on Twitter as part Uncharted, part Far Cry 3, and part... Tomb Raider I suppose. None of these comparisons do justice to the masterpiece that Crystal Dynamics has created for us though.

What kind of awesome cross-over would Nate and Lara make?

Using Uncharted as the first example is a pretty easy one. Both games feature cover-based third person shooting, huge amounts of exploration, gorgeous graphics, and nail that 'adventure' vibe. It's also not entirely fair as Drake's exploits have often been called Gears of War meets Indiana Jones so the comparison gets even more convoluted than before. While sharing several similar themes, Tomb Raider sets itself apart from Naughty Dog's creation with a tale of survival and a massive amount of character customization via upgradable weapons and a changing skill-set based on experience.

The other title I often compare Lara's newest (and first) quest to is Far Cry 3. Both have an island setting, a young main character who's forced to make difficult decisions, a huge upgrade system, and tons of little secrets to unearth over the course of the game. Aside from the first versus third person perspective differences the two games seem pretty similar on paper. Comparing them really does neither justice though as Far Cry 3 has been simplified down to 'Skyrim with guns' and other comparisons are easy to make as well. What Tomb Raider manages to do to differentiate itself from other survival tales is actually make me care about the protagonist. Jason Brody never felt real to me. His story was merely a vehicle to get you from one part of the island to another while Lara became someone I actually wanted to care about. Getting to the next story-related point of the game became so important to me that I skipped nearly all of the optional side-content the first time around just to find out how the tale would end.

It's possible that part of the reason I cared so much about the story in Tomb Raider is just my male ego reacting to a female in distress but I don't think the answer is that simple. The trials and tribulations she encounters are done in a way that seem realistic rather than fanciful, borderline when they could have been exploitative. Brody's journey to become the 'king of the island' and Lara's personal tale of becoming a survivor couldn't have been more different and that's where Tomb Raider sets itself above the comparison made.

It's extremely easy to describe a game as the sum of the parts of titles from the past. I've found however, that these comparisons don't do the titles the justice they deserve as there's always some detail left out. Calling Ni No Kuni a 'love letter' to JRPGs brings images to mind of weird characters, endless grinding, and static, boring battles. While some of those ideas are in place it's a disservice to the little details Level-5 added to make the game stand out on it's own. Similarly, calling Tomb Raider 'Gears meets Uncharted' misses the entire story which is what sets that game apart from it's adventure game siblings.

Does anyone else find themselves describing through comparison?

What other recent titles can be called 'part this' and 'part that'?

Why is it that we can't describe a game on it's own merits rather than use previous titles as the bar?

Thanks for reading everyone!

Bringing Something New to the Table

2013-03-04T23:45:00Z

Only three days remain for you to contribute to a project that has the potential to revolutionize strategy gaming as we know it. Jon Shafer's At the Gates has more than doubled its modest Kickstarter goal and all but one of the team's stretch goals have been met! Along with releasing on PC, they've recently announced that it'll be available on the same day for Linux and Mac users and shortly thereafter an Ios version will be released as well. The more the merrier I say, but let's see if we can help them get to their final goal before the window for funding ends!

I wrote a blog a few weeks back giving a decent overview of how the game works that was featured in last weeks blog herding so I won't bore you with repeated details. If you happened to miss it the link can be found here. Suffice it to say the team over at Conifer Studios is hard at work trying to find new ways to keep us entertained while building armies to crush our enemies! I'll be going into some of the more nitty-gritty details about the game-play for the purposes of today's blog and, with a little luck (and maybe some social media help!) they'll get over that last funding hurdle before the buzzer sounds on Wednesday!

The Units

Not all of the art assets are in place as of this writing but some of the details regarding unit types have started to emerge. Jon stated in one of the project updates that there will be a smaller amount of units as compared to something like the Civilization series as he's always had issues with the fact that things like spear-men and pike-men are functionally the same with minor health differences being the only changed aspect in regards to them. So we won't be seeing newer units as often as we would in similar titles.

Keep in mind the 2-D art will be fully animated for release!

So what we'll be starting with are troops like scouts which do exactly what you'd expect them to do, basic infantry (shown above) who are the standard early-game soldiers with low movement and decent attack and defense values, and two types of cavalry. Light cavalry will excel at protecting supply lines (a concept I'll get to in a bit) and cutting off the supply of your enemy, while heavy cavalry will be 'rapid-response' units capable of getting to the action quickly and decisively doing damage to the enemy. While still early in development I hope this sheds some light on what to expect troop-wise.

The Combat

Combat in At the Gates will offer similarities to other nation-building games in that units have health and can defeat or be defeated by enemies they attack. Two things in particular are going to make battles in this game stand out from the rest of the crowd. Those concepts are supply and morale. Every unit will have a supply meter based on surrounding terrain (you can live off the land if it's fertile enough) and lines of supply from your nearest settlement. If this reaches low amounts it can affect morale and if it gets depleted entirely the health of the unit will suffer.

After taking a Roman city you can choose a 'perk' such as seafaring and earn new units for your barbarian horde such as this galley.

Morale in At the Gates offers a similar function to health although slightly more complicated. A unit attacking another will take a small hit to their morale and a larger hit to health. Defenders are dealt opposite types of damage and if beaten in the initial attack will have to fall back. Unlike health, morale is always replenishing itself so the crux is whether or not to press on with your attack knowing that your health is low. An enemy unit who is defeated after having fallen back will be destroyed but sometimes it will benefit the aggressor to wait a few turns to build morale back up to acceptable levels before pressing their advantage. Just don't let the enemy retreat to a fortified position while you're healing up!

The Pen is Mightier than the Sword

Diplomacy in 4X titles is another area that Jon has had issues with in the past. It never seems to make sense that AI nations can be your friend through the ages only to suddenly declare violent war on the player near the end-game. That's why At the Gates has a seemingly simple solution to how rulers of the various barbarian tribes interact. A friendship meter if you will.

The details are hard to make out but I'll try my best to explain...

Over the course of a game of At the Gates, many of the barbarian tribes you're competing with will offer various requests for you to fulfill. These could range from aiding them in a mutual struggle against another tribe to taking a specific Roman city for the perks given, to good old fashioned food requests. Each one will increase your standing with the particular tribe and unless you screw things up in the future they will remain your friend. That's not to say some degree of backstabbing won't occur (this is a strategy title after all!) but the team's hope is that the decisions of AI leaders will make sense to the player regardless of how they choose to interact with them.

There are always more details I could get into but I'm going to leave it at those three for now. Well, maybe one more little reveal! The perks mentioned earlier that you gain from taking Roman cities function as technology research does in similar titles. It didn't make sense to the team to have barbarian tribes researching new ideas but they still wanted to include some measure of progress to the game. By only allowing one perk to be taken from each city (meaning you can't lose a Roman site and regain it to get another perk or get one by taking over a city already beaten by a different tribe) there's a level of urgency in regards to how you deal with your decadent neighbors to the south. Leave them alone for too long and enemy tribes will be technologically ahead of you. Stretch yourself too thin trying to gain more however, and you'll leave your supply lines open to attack from less advanced foes. It's going to be a balancing act of building up your tribe and taking what you can without leaving yourself open to attack from others.

I'll have more details to share later in the Spring when the closed alpha starts!

Anyone wanting to get in on the fun can check here for their Kickstarter page!

A DLC pack allowing for playable Romans is the final stretch goal the team is after...

Thanks for reading and have a fantastic night GIO!

Ascension Demo: Should You Care?

2013-02-28T15:24:00Z

It's no secret that I've been eagerly awaiting the March release of God of War Ascension. The tale of Kratos and his anger-issues has been a favorite of mine for some years now and the prequel story has the chance to humanize his character in ways that the previous two failed to do. While the combat, graphics, and upgrade systems have continued to improve as the multiple iterations came out of the gates, something about his character just didn't quite hit the mark in parts two and three.

Enter the God of War Ascension demo. Kratos starts out chained and being tortured by one of the Furies, a group described as powers neither man nor god. It's their duty to punish oath-breakers and (presumably) Kratos is the newest to fall into their clutches. Right off the bat I couldn't help but notice Kratos looks a bit leaner than in God of War 3. He's also not wearing any of the accoutrements of godhood gained in the previous titles. This is a prequel after all. The torture sequence goes a long way towards showing his relative lack of power at this stage in his life and even though escape is only a quick-time-event away, the sense of helplessness is a pretty powerful change of pace from the usual 'gotta kill em all' ruthlessness seen before.

Along with the slight change of tone from the original trilogy, combat and exploration have seen some tweaks as well. Nothing major, fans of the series will be quite familiar with the controls but everything feels a bit faster and Kratos' moves have a rawness that didn't exist in parts two and three. First, his chain blades move faster than ever. Lashing out to destroy the minions of the furies is faster paced and seemingly more enjoyable (keep in mind the demo is a work in progress) than the last several titles in the series. The dash button represented by R1 has been replaced with a long-range grapple which allows you to pull smaller enemies in for some up-close combat or, in the case of larger foes, fling Kratos to them to exploit weaknesses or deliver that final blow.

Other details differ as well. The wall climbing has been streamlined making climbing and jumping to new areas of the map feel both easier and more organic. Pushing the analog stick in the direction you want to go is all you need to do to get to your destination. Chests containing health (magic was absent from the demo) still require the pulling animation, but red chests just get smashed open quickly allowing you to move on to the enemies present without worrying that they'll interrupt your looting. Another addition to the formula is the wall-sliding mechanic shown in the picture above. By stabbing the wall with one of his blades you take control of your downward decent similar to the well-done flying segments of three.

At only about twenty minutes long the demo doesn't give you much of a grasp of the entire game. I can't speak for the level design of it's entirety but the sense of scale in the prison sequence shown is impressive. In what is becoming a staple to the series the entire environment moves around or with you as enemies pour in from all directions. The boss shown at the end of the demo is both multi-part as you would expect, and larger than life requiring multiple beat-downs and the obligatory QTE to finish off each section.

The furies make excellent foes for Kratos. The one featured in the demo is always one step ahead, slingling new batches of enemies for you to slay while uttering insults and altering the environment to keep things from seeming as linear as they are. She's also heartless and completley disgusting with a missing arm and several crustatcion style limbs protruding from her back.

I only had two small issues with the demo. It added enough polish to the formula to not feel entirely like a re-skin of old ideas while maintaining the core elements of the series. The first is easily fixable. Certain parts of the level still need some polish as I noticed Kratos move through certain objects in the environment and a few of my attacks failed to connect even though the animation clearly showed that they did. These sorts of little details are something that the team will continue to work out in the next month. I'm not worried about that one. The other is a bit more major. The team at Sony Santa Monica has done a really good job showing the sense of scale to this title in the series. Environments are large, many enemies show up on screen at once, and a giant boss looms in the background changing the landscape of the level with his movements. In order to foster this sense of scale the camera has been pulled back to an almost birds-eye view for some of the fight scenes. So far back in fact that I've lost track of where Kratos was on-screen more than once. I play on a 52' Bravia and If I can't tell which character's the one I'm controlling at times I fear that people playing on smaller screens will have an even more difficult time. Possibly the final release will remedy this (admittedly small) issue, but I doubt it as it seems integral to the set-up they've made.

In short, fans of the series should definatley be lining up for the newest installment. Kratos is more likeable which was a common complaint about three and all of the systems in use have been tweaked and modified, mostly for the better. It's not going to convince those who don't care for the titles already, but it appears to be improving upon most of the aspects present in the original trilogy.

It looks a bit better than three...

It plays a bit better than two...

And Kratos comes across as a character worth liking this time around!

Anyone else pre-order this one already?

We may not be slaying gods but the tale has potential to be greater than the rest!

Thanks for reading everyone!

Innovation, Originality, and Fun

2013-02-26T16:46:00Z

With a new generation of consoles rapidly approaching there has been a lot of talk about innovation and originality on this website and others catering to the core crowd of gamers. Many are asking questions about why the industry seems to be content with recycled ideas and a reliance on older, proven formulas in regards to announced titles and hardware features. We, as a group (I'm aware that I'll be generalizing quite a bit for the purposes of this blog), have got our panties in a bind wondering why we're not seeing fresh new ideas from the IP's we've been shown thus far. While there were exceptions to the rule in this current generation in games such as Journey, The Binding of Isaac, Valkyria Chronicles, and others that I may have not gotten a chance to play, the common theme for the big two (I'll get to Nintendo, I promise) was 'more of the same'.

The question isn't whether or not we need it but rather do we really want it?

The idea that, as gamers we want something new and fresh from the titles we purchase isn't a new one. As companies have settled into the annualization of titles we've gotten more and more of the same experiences, especially from AAA titles. While the core audience that resides here and at other sites around the web argue endlessly about wanting something new the general public, and to an extent us, continue to provide huge lumps of cash to the studios that we're griping about. Smaller companies that take chances are regularly closing while at the same time, corporate behemoths are raking in record profits year-over-year. It seems that we've missed something in regards to our demands for originality and innovation. Most people just don't seem to want it.

In what will surely become a hotly contested article on GIO, David Cage quoted Henry Ford in response to the question of why game developers have such a difficult time innovating. "If I asked my customers what they wanted they would say a faster horse." This (possibly paraphrased) quote fits perfectly into the landscape of gaming. The unfamiliar just doesn't sell. Whether you like his titles or not, it's hard to argue that David and Quantic Dream aren't bringing something new to the table with their games. The same holds true for Nintendo and it's use of motion, stylus, and tablet controls. I don't personally care for the new systems Nintendo has brought to the market but it's impossible to argue the significance of what their ideas have added to the industry. As MS and Sony emulate their ideas with Move and Kinect, the question of brand loyalty has slowly moved to the idea that, except for exclusive titles, all three companies are largely the same. You could argue that MS and Sony have added these ideas as a way to cash in on Nintendo's success or that they're just giving gamers what they want. Unfortunately based on sales and adoption it appears that we don't want them. I've yet to see more than a handful of positive remarks about either feature and the tablet controls Nintendo brought to the WiiU have failed to capture the interest of those outside the core market as evidenced by it's poor sales after launch.

Can I please just sit on my couch with a controller to play games guys?

Gamers are a particularly finicky bunch of people. For example the last Zelda game I played to completion was Ocarina of Time. I messed around with Twilight Princess prior to my Gamecube getting a beer spilled on it at a party, but it never captured my imagination like the others. I only owned a Wii for about a month before I 'loaned' it to my nephew never to ask for it back. The sad truth is that innovation doesn't sell. Or it does but then is quickly relegated to the back of the minds of many in the case of the Wii. How many people do you know who bought one during the craze several years back who rarely if ever play it? More than a few I'd hazard to guess. The same holds true for Kinect and Move adopters. I've got multiple friends who don't use their Kinect for anything more than menu-navigation and that seems a huge waste of the technology behind the device.

Games with new ideas generally suffer the same fate. For every best-seller like Journey there are dozens if not more failures who's only fault was that they tried to bring new ideas to the industry and failed. Quantic Dream comes to mind again for this example. While Heavy Rain was lauded as an amazing experience by most critics and many gamers, the change-up to the control settings and mature if not always well-done themes turned off many core gamers. It sold well, especially considering the PS3's slow start, but you could hardly call it a blockbuster.

I'm as guilty as anyone else when it comes to wanting new things from my industry while at the same time going with the tried and true when making new purchases.

A rare exception to the rule.

It took me nearly a year to finally get around to buying Journey and that was only after reading multiple blogs here at GIO that convinced me of it's awesomeness. I'm glad that I did as it was a serene (if short) experience that re-kindled some of the joy that gaming used to bring me as a child. At the same time I was working my way through Far Cry 3 (yet another open-world shooter) and anticipating games such as The Last of Us (a mash-up of Uncharted and Resident Evil) and God of War Ascension (which seems unlikely to bring anything new to the table). What can I say? I, like many others, enjoy the familiar and putting a new skin on an old formula is often enough to convince me to open my wallet. Innovative and fun don't always mean the same thing. Or rather, don't have to.

So who's to blame for the stagnation of ideas in the gaming industry? It can't be the developers as it's been proven time and time again that the 'same ole same ole' sells. It can't be casual gamers because they just buy what looks fun and don't delve into the details beyond whether or not they can kill some time while on break at work or during a subway commute. It can't be us because we're the ones constantly demanding change. Or can it? Demanding one thing and then proving over and over with our wallets the opposite does in fact make us liable.

Every time we purchase a Kinect only to not use it we reinforce what we're trying to argue. Every time we buy a Call of Duty to occasionally play online with friends while complaining on forums that we hate the series we add to Activision's coffers so that another sequel can be rushed out of the gate. Every time we pick up the newest Nintendo system only to let it gather dust waiting for one of the three IP's a majority of us are interested in playing it adds to the companies thought process that what they are doing is right (and I'm not saying it isn't, just that it isn't to my taste). And every time we buy a masterpiece like Journey only to 'not get it' or think it was too short to be a 'real' game we set the industry back just a little bit. I'm including myself when I say this but looking in the mirror is the only way to see who's responsible for what many see as the decline of the video game industry. Innovation, originality, and fun are not mutually exclusive. Innovative doesn't always mean original and neither definitely means fun. You don't have to have one or more to get the other and the sooner we realize that games, like all forms of media, are just a matter of taste (with no real right or wrong) the sooner we'll see meaningful change to the industry.

To all those who disagree I salute your opinions!

We're a motley crew but should be able to agree that gaming is awesome in all it's forms.

What more important to you? Innovation, originality, or fun?

For me fun is, and always will be the answer.

Thanks for reading everyone and good day!

What Wasn't Shown and Why it Doesn't Matter

2013-02-22T17:11:00Z

Like a half million-odd other site users I tuned in to the two+ hour long news conference Sony put on for it's PS4 reveal the other night. The odds of me being an early adopter were already strong as I've purchased all of their previous systems at or near launch, but I was still interested in seeing what they would put on the table for gamers less similarly minded. While I came away impressed by what they had to say (and show) there were a few gaps in the presentation I'd like to address.

Like any new hardware reveal, Sony had to walk the fine line of giving gamers what they want while at the same time leaving room for later reveals to continue to build anticipation for it's fall release. If they played their entire hand this early in the game there would be far too much time for Microsoft and, to a degree Nintendo, to steal some of their thunder in the coming months. That's why we saw such a general mix of system specifications, 1rst and 3rd party games, and additions/tweaks to the user-experience on display. Some details however were notably absent from the presentation.

But, but, but, what does the PS4 look like???

I've heard this question repeated over and over in the past few days on this site and others. My question to those posing it is why does it matter? Apparently for many gamers whether or not it'll fit into the overall aesthetic of their living room is more important than how powerful it is or what games it'll be offering at or near launch. This seems extraordinarily silly to me. Spoiler alert guys and gals. It'll be a rough geometric shape with a black or grey plastic housing, a power cord, and will offer the ability to play new games. Seems simple enough, but with all of the complainers out there you would think the color and shape of the box was the most important reveal they were waiting for out of the event.

Why were so few exclusive titles shown?

The short answer to this one is that they didn't have to. This was a hardware reveal, not a launch party. Several reasons stand out as to why Sony chose to only show off four actual exclusive titles. While the trailers for the new Killzone and Infamous titles looked very promising to someone who's been following Sony-made games for some time, and Knack came across as interesting and unique, they had to leave room for major announcements at all of the coming industry shows this spring and early summer. If for example Naughty Dog, Polyphony, and the Santa Monica studios all came out with huge reveals for the games we all know they're working on it would've left Sony in a precarious position when MS and Nintendo were revealing their hardware and fall line-ups respectively at E3 and other shows. Big reveals at these events will allow Sony to continue to drum up enthusiasm for their own release while dampening the effects of the other two of the 'big three'. Another factor is that the unannounced games are probably still in the alpha phase of the development process which would've left the doubters with a sour taste in their mouths as the titles would have come across as lazy or something that we've all already seen before. That's not to say that Driveclub and the others seen are huge steps forward for the industry, but too much iteration at an event like this one would've seemed like Sony was resting on their laurels rather than bringing something new to the table. Be patient. In the coming months we're all going to have more information than we know what to do with in regards to the games we may or may not be playing this coming holiday season.

Why didn't they tell us how much it will cost and what bundles will be available?

We all know the PS4 won't be cheap. At the same time Sony isn't going with untested technology this time around either. The fact that they've listened to developers, (as evidenced by the many micro-interviews shown), for this iteration of the Playstation brand shows that they learned their lesson last time around. By using existing PC hardware for the PS4 two of the biggest complaints about their previous system have been addressed. First, it won't be nearly as difficult to develop for than the PS3. This means early adopters won't be dealing with the near-disastrous effects of terrible ports and glitchy titles that we had to endure last time around. They other factor regarding the company learning it's lesson is that they KNOW the PS3 was priced too high for the average gamer to adopt it early on last generation. By not allowing MS to under-price them (at least by much) this time around the playing field will be much more even which will allow Sony to shine in the department they excel in-bringing experiences to the gamers that can't be found elsewhere. I predict the system will come out of the gates swinging at $400 and while MS may be able to go a bit cheaper or offer some sort of subscription based service, this number appears to be the sweet spot for gamers entering into a new generation of gaming. Heck, it'll probably force a price cut to the WiiU as it's already looking more and more technologically behind the others than it's predecessor.

I'm aware that the Internet isn't known for it's patience but in the coming months we'll have the answers we're looking for in regards to what was left out of the big event. Unless Sony decides to house it's system in a pink sphere with a mini-nuclear reactor to power it my predictions for the look of the system will come true. The likelihood of some major game reveals from their strongest developers in the coming months to steal away some of the limelight from the competitors also seems extremely likely. And don't forget, they won't be asking us to sell any kidneys this time around to afford the price of entry. After all, I've only got one left! :)

The coming months just got exciting indeed!

What titles are you most interested in hearing about?

I'll hear Microsoft out but so far am impressed with what Sony's offered.

Thanks for reading guys and gals!

Have a spectacular day!