Mass Effect 2 Just Blew My Mind

/hype
/hEdAsplode

Is Conan Immortal?

One of our first posts was entitled R.I.P Age of Conan and it detailed my sadness at the passing of what I felt was a great game. This sadness notwithstanding, I was unable to remain a subscriber to the game; I gave into the same issues that had driven away so many. Like them I moved on, chalking up the experience to a fond memory of an opportunity lost. I assumed that Funcom wasn't up to the task of fixing the game's myriad of problems or reproducing content that was of the same quality as the areas that had originally memorized me. But, MMOs are unique in that they get more than one press cycle.


The first of these cycles was a mixed bag for Age of Conan. Sure the game got positive reviews, netting a game ranking score of 81.0%, but the word of mouth was atrocious. I was unfortunate enough to experience this negative reaction first hand, when close friends of mine who I bullied into trying the game, would return with nothing more than a list of game breaking bugs, hard reboots, and visually disturbing graphic glitches. Some of these graphic glitches were actually fairly humorous, I find myself recalling one in particular that caused the breasts of female NPCs to dance up and down much like the lemurs in the film Madagascar. But, on the other hand some were infuriating, causing the world to be drawn in only low res muddy textures, or having your avatar’s hair either change color for entire log ins, or completely disappear. Although one was only able to enjoy these visual bugs when you were able to actually play the game, which the crushing memory leaks, and the hardest of hard locks made more difficult than necessary. But, just as the positive reviews disappeared under a mountain of negative press, so did the game’s problems disappear in my absence.

I really didn’t expect it on my return. I figured I would play it for 15 minutes and then uninstall it, as I am known to do with old PC games. Slowly however, I noticed that the bugs that were once mocking in their persistence were gone. As that realization sunk in I began looking for other bugs I remembered, to prove to myself that I hadn’t counted Funcom out too early. But, in my search I realized that almost every bug of any significance was gone. Not only that, but the game had improved from a reasonably objective standard as well.

The horses that were originally punitive in their pricing were now absolutely attainable by the lonely solo player. The graphics in A.O.C. are the stuff of legend, but required a computer of an equally mythic proportion. But, upon my return they seemed to be much better optimized. Frame rates were up by about 10 in every zone, textures that had previously popped in like a Gears of War 2/Halo 3 cut scene now appeared immediately after loading. The quests which before seemed to peter out after about level 27, now seemed to ooze from every zone I could make it to. These improvement though impressive aren’t what has me the most doubtful of my previously prognosticated demise of A.O.C.

It’s the content that lies just around the corner. Funcom earlier in the games life announced it was cutting employees due specifically to the falling subscriber numbers. But, these cuts were apparently not aimed at the content design team, since a quick search of what they are working on is impressive in its quantity. A new zone Y’mir’s Pass was just recently released along with a sweeping pvp update. This pvp update is being followed up by a second expansion in the next patch, which is scheduled to come out in the third week of February. In the near future Funcom has announced a new zone called Tarantia Commons District where the game play is said to mimic Assassin’s Creed with on-roof fighting and movement. As someone who knows the game’s engine well, this is really exciting. Additionally they will be adding, more items through the three new raid dungeons they are introducing, the pvp ranking system they will continue to flesh out, and their commitment to completely redesign all of the dungeons in the game made for 6 man groups. This redesign will include more engaging boss encounters that are said to be inspired by World of Warcraft and traps inspired by action movies (one includes I gigantic rolling border careening down a narrow stair case once it is sprung). So was my previous lamenting premature?

I don’t think anyone, even Funcom, knows that yet. The game has two chances at a “re-launch”: One when the new Conan Movie comes out in 2010 and the other when the Xbox 360 version of A.O.C. arrives. Either of these events will give a large shot in the arm to a game that is really ready to present itself to the world. And, until this “resurrection” takes place, or the world comes crashing down around my avatar’s head, I will be enjoying Hyboria.

"Bully" Should Be Beaten Up

Show of hands: who here wasn't tortured by bullies in high school, and desperately wanted to strike back (I'm talking to you, Charles Weninger, you neo-Nazi shithead)? I know I felt that way (I'm like the lone radical liberal in the middle of Conservative County Kansas, so don't be shocked) and when I heard about the concept of "Bully," an Xbox 360 game which allows a pushed-around kid to strike back without blowing his school sky-high, I was immediately attracted to the concept and picked it up.

However, in terms of gaming, I'd have to assign "Bully" an F. There is not a single video game class that "Bully" passes to keep me from expelling out of my gaming collection.

But I'll back up and compliment the graphics. "Bully" attempts to create an image of modern, pulpy comics with the latest cartoon animation. The best comparison I can think of is "007 GoldenEye" from the Nintendo 64, which depicted similarly large-headed avatars running around during trigger play. The graphics during the cinematic movies are quite a bit better, and should be complimented accordingly.

However, it's difficult to be overly excited about the graphics when the angles will, during absolutely critical moments in the game, gyrate like the screen has been possessed by an epileptic seizure. This is unfortunate, because as bully-busting rebel Joe, you occasionally need to be able to flee from incompetent school authorities, who can't seem to realize when you're striking out, you're really just fighting back, yet possess the sense of Sabretooth when it comes to tracking you down and dragging your squalling hide back into the principal's office.

More to the point, it's almost as if the creators were so focused on making the graphics aesthetically pleasing, they completely forgot to double-check that the game play itself is interesting. Suffice it to say, it isn't. Each game feels like it's straining to be interesting and playable. The concepts are fabulous, but the delivery doesn't follow through. The most interesting mini-game involves dissecting a frog, but the task is so tedious as to be completely unengaging.

The mini-games also randomly shake like they're hanging over the Golden Gate Bridge 1989. As a result of the misguided angle seizing, it makes it almost impossible to complete quests, which are dolled out one by one. The interface of the game refuses to allow you to take on multiple quests (wait, let's us gamespeak; "errands") at a time. This not only makes gameplay a time-consuming process, it feels more like prepping for an Algebra test than a dose of entertainment.

Adding insult to injury, there appears to be a video interlude on average of once every three minutes. This approach makes it nearly impossible to really enjoy the game from a first-person experience because just was you become comfortable in the character's skin, you're again treated to a third-party perspective, and many of the videos last longer than the individual trigger play.

I generally try to minimize my scorn in reviews, but sitting here I am wondering what in the hell makes anyone like this game. Joe is a decent enough anti-hero and that's cool, and obviously the animation is pretty sweet too. I'll even give it extra credit for the implied affair between the principal and his administrative assistant. Yet this game is an absolute failure and frankly I want my $20 back. More than that, I want the last three hours that I wasted playing this colossal disappointment. I think the makers should be shot--no, wait, just put into detention for a long, long time.

In the interim, I think I'm going to take my copy of "Bully" outside and teach it a lesson.

Gamer Response: Women are Posers

Everyone, pretend to be shocked: Kansas readers (and at least one woman) hated my video game column.

I took my last post and pared it down for my current employer. What can I say? I'm suffering serious writer's block these days.

In any case, what bothers me about these comments:

1. The rhetoric would seem to suggest that any video game featuring women at all is inherently sexist. This means women better accept their only acceptable role models are men, and crazy stupid animals (think "Viva Pinata" and "NintenDOGZ") and completely undermines the revolution spawned by Sarah Kerrigan towards depicting women as equals with complicated backstories, level abilities and protagonist prowess, and...

2. The idea that a woman advocating for more female inclusion in video games needs to "put her penis away" and "stop trying to be one of the guys" is inherently sexist and justifies the continued exclusion of females, which...

3. Inherently props up the continued subjugation of women in video games (rather than work within the system to create stronger female role models, we'll just sit around and complain about them, accepting we're all reduced to air-headed Juggies) and women who play video games (they just want to be dudes, or they just want to impress dudes) and...

4. Ultimately proves that the column is right. Until more women get involved, this will continue to be the attitude dispensed towards women gamers.


Interesting note. All of the comments here seem to accuse me of trying to conflate the sexes by blurring the line between being an individual woman who enjoys games and a woman trying to fit in with a guy crowd. Yet earlier today, my office intercepted a call from your local yokel insisting that I would likely spend the rest of my life alone with my 50 cats (for the record, I have two dogs because although my pomeranian has been known to behave in a rather cat-like fashion, I DESPISE cats) because I'm too interested in drawing distinctions between the sexes.

And this is just reason 450,429,549 why I need to get out of the midwest.

DoW II: The Next Big Thing?

I spent a substantial amount of time last weekend playing the open multiplayer beta for Relic's Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War II. These are my preliminary thoughts.

Couple of quick disclaimers here: (1) I played the first one for a while, but ultimately thought that, as an RTS, it had more potential than substance; and (2) the beta I played was clearly incomplete (no campaign, no skirmish mode, etc.), so this shouldn't be considered comprehensive. But it's never too early to begin speculation, so here I go.

First off, the game looks pretty impressive: whether you're talking about the extensive list of individual animations, the (almost) completely deformable terrain, or the highly-detailed units, this is inarguably a very polished product. It's clear that the developer was intending from the beginning to give the player exciting, detailed, and authentic (at least for a fantasy-inspired futuristic RTS) battles, on which subject the game succeeds quite nicely. Explosions frequently shook the entire battlefield, and the violence that takes place between "armies" is positively giggle-inducing. And yes, there is a reason I put that last term in quotes: for all of its eye candy, Dawn of War is still, at its heart, a glorified squad tactics game.

And to me, that's the biggest problem about DoW II. When I saw my supply counter (you know, the current/maximum number of troops in combat), I noticed that it topped out at "100". No big deal, since troops in these things are usually delegated in single digits...............whoops, strike that. Out of the four races, the cheapest unit you can buy comes in at nine supply points, which means that under no circumstances can any race field more than eleven units at a time.

And that just seems to make the battles kind of small. While skirmishes are a fact of life in DoW, pitched battles are intense, satisfying.......and absurdly short. It seems that there is a TON of buildup initially for about three minutes worth of good action. Assuming the losing side can piece itself back together, there is potential for rinsing and repeating. But it'll be more of the same, since the unit selection for each side leaves a good deal to be desired. Not only are choices kinda sparse (maybe six or nine per race), but they ALL fall under the same basic templates, echoing my complaint about every RTS since, like, Warcraft III. Melee. Light ranged. Heavy ranged. Mech walker. Heroes are OK, but I think they were better implemented in Lord of The Rings: BFME II -- in this game, they are fairly cookie-cutter, and aside from various pre-sets of gear, there's virtually no customization. And why is everything ground-based........?

So, my (admittedly) pre-mature verdict? Entertaining for a weekend, but DoW's apparent lack of depth bodes ill for its long-term playability. Here's hoping the single-player campaign is as good as Relic says it is.

Hold that thought, actually: just double the unit limit and I'll be good to go.