Is There Anything Gamers Don't Complain About?

by on

Sometimes the gaming community really sucks. They can be whiny entitled brats who are never pleased and find flaws with anything game developers do however good or bad. The latest example? Id's new Rage DLC. Now correct me if I'm wrong but haven't gamers spent the past five years complaining that developers should wait until after the game is released and patched to work on additional content? Haven't they yelled that developers are selling out when they agree to publisher demands for day one DLC? And those publishers are greedy asses who only want to nickel and dime the community by releasing unfinished games and then charging for content that should have been on the disc in the first place? Are these not the comments I see on the forums every single day?

Yet here is Id releasing DLC a year after the game is released, after putting out countless patches to fix gamers' complaints with the initial game. Here is a developer who fixed their game and then spent a decent amount of time putting together DLC after the fact and what do people do? Complain of course! Why didn't Id release the DLC when I was still playing the game? I already uninstalled the game! I am over that game, why wait so long?!

Are people serious? Do they even realize how utterly hypocritical they are? What, does a developer have a two week window where it is okay to release DLC and any time before and after is too early or too late? Or are people suddenly getting why DLC is made concurrently with the main game? If you don't plan your DLC in advance, and have it ready to be completed shortly after the release of the main game people have moved on. The whole point of DLC is to keep people interested in the game post-release. Releasing it months or years later IS pointless. That is what developers and publishers have been saying all along. Yet no one will accept it. But here we are and the truth is out there. Releasing DLC a year after release like all gamers claim they want is pointless because people have moved on. No one cares anymore. People have already sold the game on consoles or uninstalled it on PC. DLC doesn't work when you make it all after the fact. You HAVE to work on it (mind you not finish it but work on it) before the release of the main game or it will never get done in time to be worthwhile to anyone.

Of course gamers will forget about this within a week or two and will go back to complaining like they always do. And then this will come up again and someone like me will write another blog like this and people will see the flaw in their thinking for about a day before deciding to just complain about all of it. People wonder why great developers leave the industry. Often publishers get the blame. That isn't it most of the time. Most of the time it is the so called "fans" who spend more time whining about how some minor thing has completely ruined a game for them than actually enjoying the game. I assure you that if you know a developer by name then chances are he has a multi-million dollar contract. As soon as that contract is up he could retire happily. Imagine how much money Miyamoto makes in a year. And he's been doing this for decades. He doesn't do it for the money. None of the big names do. They have more money than they could ever spend. No they do it because they love making games, and they love making games because they love making people happy. And at some point if no one seems to be enjoying your games then there is just no reason to do it anymore. And usually it seems that way because of some tiny entitled minority, and this minority ruins it for the rest of us who realize that games aren't something worth filing petitions over. They aren't worth death threats. They aren't worth hate mongering. And I really hope that one day gamers learn to grow up and enjoy their hobby instead of bashing it at every chance they get.

This Is A Blog All About Sexism

by on

Just kidding. This blog has nothing to do with sexism. It actually has to do with Final Fantasy. Unless you think Final Fantasy women are sexist. But that is a whole different argument. Anyways, this blog really is going to talk about the desire people have for Square Enix to remake Final Fantasy 6,7,8 or other FF entries before 10 generally starting with IV. You ever notice how no one talks about FFV? I seriously have no idea what that game is about or even if it exists at all. I've heard of fans of every other entry, but V? No not that one. Is it the runt of the litter or something? Anyways, back on track.

So I have a theory about people who want SE to remake early FF games. My theory is that these people have not played these games since they were released in the 90's. Why do I think this? Pretty simple really. If you were to play those games today, I can't imagine how anyone would want to see those lines voiced out loud. The dialogue is horrible. Atrocious. Just awful. I'm not bashing the overall story, but if people were to step back for a moment and really envision those lines being spoken out loud would they still want to hear them? I'm sorry, but these stories don't hold up. They just don't. The gameplay of some of them is probably decent enough to still be worth playing, but I feel that for most people, FF, at least post V, is about the story. And their memory of the story is one shaded by rose tinted glasses of childhood nostalgia. It's like people who claim 80's TV cartoons were so much better than modern cartoons. Have you actually gone back and watched He Man? The show is laughable. So are all the shows from that time. Anyone who still claims they are a fan of them has either not seen them since they were new or is unable to reconcile their childhood fantasies with modern realities. Yea, cartoons suck now. But they sucked just as much 10 or 20 or 30 years ago. The Final Fantasy games were not written by professional writers. They were written by designers who have no real training in the field. There is a reason today's games tend to be written by professional writers. Designers make gameplay. They may come up with a brilliant story. But it takes a real writer to turn that story into a script that sounds like something a human would actually say.

Point is, you, you nebulous FFVII loving people out there, don't really want a FF remake. A lot of people say Square fell apart when they merged with Enix. That may be true, but that isn't the cause of their downfall. The cause is the arrival of voice over. As soon as Square had to actually write lines that people would speak their games were suddenly much more poorly received. The quality didn't actually change. In fact, overall, the dialogue in FF13 is probably the best in the series outside of 12. What changed is that players suddenly had to hear these ridiculous lines spoken out loud and it SEEMED like the writing was worse. It really wasn't. In fact the same group of people have been making FF since 7. A couple people have switched roles and obviously Sakaguchi left entirely, but in general, the team remains identical. The series simply didn't change. People just didn't have to hear the earlier entries spoken out loud. Just try reading the script from some of these games out loud with a group of friends. And tell me honestly that those lines sound like something a real person would actually say. They don't. They are both poorly written and poorly translated.

So sorry to bust the collective bubble of Final Fantasy fans, but simply put, that beautiful version of Final Fantasy 8 you have imagined made on modern consoles just wouldn't be the same. Or, it would be, but it won't be nearly as great as you remember it. In fact it will probably be pretty bad. You'll blame Square Enix of course and say that they just coudn't capture the magic a second time around. Really the game will be a better looking, better sounding version of what you played. Just what you played isn't nearly as good now as it was 15 years ago. Sorry.

Put your faith in a new game written by a professional writer. Trust me, that is where SE needs to go if it wants to recapture the magic of its earlier games.

Guess The Games

by on

Hello all. Recently there was a fun little forum game going on over on Giantbomb. Users had to create a picture containing parts of four different screenshots from four different games. Other users then had to guess what game the screenshots came from. I thought it would be fun to post all of my entries in a single blog here for everyone to guess on. Not much of an editorial but I thought it would be fun. So here are my three entries, each containing four games for twelve games total.

EDIT: I'm going to list the games as they are guessed to make it easier for people.

EDIT 2: Anc the game comes to a close. Good job everyone. A lot of classic games were named today stemming as far back as the mid 70's. Hope you all enjoyed it!

2365180-gameguess3_large.png

1. Blood - The early shooter from Monolith, known today for games like FEAR and Gotham City Imposters

2. The Longest Journey - A turn of the century adventure game considered by many to be the greatest game of its type ever made. It's sequel Dreamfall came out six years later, and the third game in the series is finally on its way after a 7 year wait.

3. Jazz Jackrabbit - An early platformer from Epic Games (Gears of War, Unreal) and designer Cliff Blezinski.

4. Ultima Underworld - The original game from Looking Glass Studios, the team that would go on to define the career of Warren Spector and Ken Levine and launch the free form style of gameplay that Spector is known for today.

2365081-gameguess_large.png

1. Heart of Darkness - This 90's PS1 game by Eric Chahi is in my opinion one of the most underplayed games of all time. Chahi's earlier game, Another World, get's a ton of love but this game made in the same style is sadly often ignored.

2. LSD Dream Emulator - No, LSD doesn't stand for... Oh wait yes it does. Probably the weirdest game ever made, this Japanese only PSOne legend is about as strange as they come. The game attempts to simulate the random nature of dreams and certain other things that can't be mentioned here. Good luck finding a copy. They don't even have this one on Ebay. But there are some great Youtube walkthroughs if you are interested.

3. Black Onyx - Most people will cite Dragon Quest as the first JRPG but it is actually predated by Black Onyx, arguably the first JRPG ever made. The game is heavily influenced by Wizardry and would go on to inspire Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy. Sadly forgotten by time, Black Onyx is one of the most important milestones in gaming history.

4. Metal Arms: Glitch In The System - People often complain today about short, mindless shooter campaigns. Metal Arms was anything but. A lengthy, intense, and all around brilliant third person shooter that got swept under the rug due to its cartoony nature, Metal Arms sadly doesn't get the same sort of love from people that other quirky last gen games like Psychonauts and Beyond Good and Evil do, despite playing better than either of those games.

2365150-1548889_img_5_large.png

1. I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream - This 90's point-and-click adventure game is based on the legendary short story by Harland Ellison, and tells the tale of a group of five people tortured by an AI for over one hundred years following the destruction of humanity. Both the story and the game basically shows each of the five characters being tortured.

2. Akalabeth - The first game from Richard Garriot, creator of the Ultima series. This game is one of the first publicly sold RPG's, predating Wizardry, Ultima, The Bard's Tale, Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest. If you want to see how the RPG genre got its start in video games look no further than this game.

3. Alien Carnage - Also known as Halloween Harry this side scrolling action game is a game I spent a lot of time playing in the 90's. It was one of many now obscure PC games published by the then mighty Apogee Software.

4. Witchaven - Back in the mid-90's Doom style shooters were all the rage. Witchaven was a first person melee game built using the legendary Build Engine. It is probably the least famous of the Build Engine games, another one being the first game on this list, Blood.

Day One Patches

by on

This generation there have been a lot of shady business practices sneaking into gaming. We have things like Online Passes, Day One DLC, Season Passes for DLC that hasn't even been announced yet, and Pay2Win schemes ruining game balance. All of these things, though, I can understand and even accept from a business perspective. The Pay2Win is an awful way to design a game, but if there is a market for it then go for it. The others are just ways to try to stay in business in a field without much margin for error. Over the past couple of weeks, though, two games have done something I just don't agree on, on any level. Medal of Honor: Warfighter, and Assassin's Creed 3, both shipped incomplete. Both games featured numerous game breaking bugs in the code on the disk. The majority of these bugs (though not all) were fixed with a day one patch. Now I find this to be a disgusting thing for a company to do. As a designer and the founder of a game company, I would be utterly ashamed to release a game that was so broken on so many levels. It just is a terrible way to do business.

Now I understand the reasoning behind it. Ubisoft and EA each spent tens of millions of dollars marketing these games, so delaying the release date would be financially devastating in that way, and it might also move the games out of the all important Holiday season. The quarterly profits of either of these companies would plummet without the release of these games. But I just have to wonder, are the results of one quarter more important than the reputation of a major franchise? Especially in Medal of Honor's case, it is hard to imagine the franchise rebounding from this game anytime soon. EA had an uphill battle already convincing gamers that Medal of Honor was as worthy a game as Battlefield. Even if the game had been great it still wouldn't have done remotely as well as Battlefield 3. But if the game had shipped without bugs, and if the game itself had just been given more time to fully explore Danger Close's vision, then EA would have earned itself its share of fans. And those core players might have convinced their friends to get Medal of Honor 3 instead of Black Ops 3 in two years. And if that process repeated a couple more times you could easily see Medal of Honor selling 10+ million units in four or five years. Now that chance is gone. Rebounding from this game will be all but impossible. Medal of Honor has failed. So, yea, EA will probably sell a couple million copies of this Medal of Honor, but the chance for franchise growth has been substantially limited by releasing a game that wasn't ready.

Assassin's Creed 3 is in a better spot. That is partially because the core game is simply better than Medal of Honor would ever have been, and partially because the previous entries in the series were much better received than recent Medal of Honor games. Still, AC3 was supposed to be the next big jump in the series, akin to AC2. And while it is supposed to be a pretty great game, the presence of numerous bugs definitely hurts the experience. And those without the day one patch might experience some pretty serious bugs.

And that brings me to maybe the major point of this blog. Is it okay to assume that everyone who wants to play AC or MoH have both an Internet connection and a harddrive to store these patches on? On PS3 this is probably a pretty safe assumption. All models contain harddrives and built in Wi-Fi. But for the 360 the same isn't true. Pre-Slim models have no built in Wi-Fi and a fair number had no built in hard drive. Those that did had a very small harddrive that might be pretty full at this point. So I think it is fair to say that for many 360 owners, playing AC3 or MoH will be a significantly gimped experience. These people will not be able to play the game that the developers intended. They will be stuck playing a buggy and partially broken mess. That just isn't fair. It isn't right that a portion of paying customers will not get the finished version of the game, although neither game is technically "finished" even with the patches. That just isn't right and no business argument will make that right. If I as a company manager fail to finish my game on time then I should be the one to suffer for it, not the gamers who buy my game. That is called taking responsibility for your failures as a developer.

I've been there. In fact I'm there right now. Things don't go as planned. Just recently my company launched a Kickstarter for our game Broken. The Kickstarter was unsuccessful for a number of reasons, but one of those reasons was that we didn't launch the Kickstarter on the day we had advertised for weeks in advance. Why? We were releasing a demo of the game day and date with the Kickstarter. Now part of the problem was that we had some issues with Kickstarter that delayed the release no matter what, but the other part was that our demo simply wasn't up to our quality standards. There was a major game breaking bug in the game that I simply would not let appear in the demo. We literally were working on this bug until mere minutes before the Kickstarter launched. This delay, among numerous other reasons, caused us significant financial hardship, but none of us were willing to release a broken product to gamers, even just in demo form.

Now I don't have any shareholders to answer to when my game doesn't ship on time. But that shouldn't change anything. Developers should finish a game and then ship it, not the other way around. It is a matter of artistic and corporate integrity and it should not be sacrificed for anything, including financial gain.

What do you guys think? Is it important for a developer to finish a game before they ship it? Do you mind downloading day one patches? Are you ever going to give Medal of Honor another chance? What do you think the next game will be to follow in this disturbing trend?

Steam Greenlight and Creative Bankruptcy

by on

Recently I've been going through the Greenlight games on Steam. For those who missed the memo, Steam is crowd sourcing its approval process for indie games. Now we the people get to vote on what games end up on Steam. Is this a dream come true for gamers? Maybe, but it also clearly displays just how many mediocre or even bad games people work on. I hate to bash other developers but someone has to say it. The games on Greenlight rarely show any creativity or originality and often are downright boring looking and many are just ridiculously ugly. Having looked through well over 100 games only a couple really captured my attention. There seems to be some belief among indie game developers that by giving your game a pixel art style and writing a chiptunes soundtrack you suddenly have a good game. This simply isn't true. For one thing, like any form of art, pixel art isn't inherently good. There is good pixel art and bad pixel art. The same goes with chiptunes. For me, a game needs more than a pretty art style to be compelling. So even the games that do look good and sound nice don't really do anything for me. How many platformers, puzzle platformers, and action platformers using this retro style do we need? There are so many and so many excellent ones that there just isn't any reason for more. It is sad to see gamers bash major companies for lacking creativity when all of these indie developers are making clones of games made 20 years ago. There are a couple other genres that seem common on Greenlight. Really bad looking first person shooters are one. My advice: The genre is super saturated so your indie shooter that looks and plays just like any other shooter isn't going to cut it. Then we have the isometric RPG. Again, there are a ton of masterful isometric RPGs on the market both real time and turn based. I get that the genre may have died down in recent years, but making clones of 15 year old games just doesn't cut it with me. I get people have fond memories of all of these old games but why simply copy these old games? All Greenlight has proven to me is that the average indie game developer has no creative new ideas. They just want to recreate the games they played as kids. It just saddens me. It is even more sad for those games on Greenlight games that actually do something interesting. Seeing those games buried under a torrent of crappy retro inspired games is just plain sad.

So what about you guys? Are you as tired of Retro style games as I am? Do you have any favorites from the games on Greenlight?

Splitting Games Up

by on

I know this topic has been talked about before by some other people but I wanted to discuss it in light of recent events. Something that THQ talked about a couple years back was releasing games at a reduced price that included only some base content and then let players buy the additional content they wanted. The idea was that you could save money by not purchasing a part of the game that you didn't want. The execution of this idea was horrendous. The game (some MX VS ATV game) was still $40 which didn't go over well with critics or players. So while the price of the base game was too high, I think the concept is actually very smart. Recently Sony tried doing something similar with Starhawk. For its PSN release, Sony released two versions of Starhawk. You could get the MP mode alone for $30 or both the SP and MP for $40. PSN Plus users got the SP alone for free. This split seemed really smart to me. I have no interest in getting involved in a MP game as complex as Starhawk but I downloaded the SP mode to try it out. I think this would be a smart road to take for a lot of games. I would be happy to pay $20 for just the Call of Duty single player mode. And I'm sure more than a few players would be overjoyed if they only had to pay $40 if they didn't get that SP mode. I would bet 75% of COD players never even touch the campaign. So why not give them just the multiplayer for a reduced price? And then offer the single player for $25 or something.

I think one of the key reasons such a method hasn't worked in the past is because no physical retailer has the shelf space to stock 3 different versions of Call of Duty. But on PSN or XBL it is easy to put up multiple versions of a game and let the player decide what parts he or she wants to buy. I really hope that Sony continues to do this with their releases. It would be awesome if I could buy just the SP in God of War Ascension for example. And I could care less about the MP in Uncharted so if they end up making another one of those I would be interested in just buying the SP. So what do you guys think? Is it smart to offer multiple versions of the same game for different players? What about offering a base game and then letting players choose what content they want to add onto it? The idea seems smart to me and I think it would be popular among a lot of players who only play games in either multiplayer or singleplayer modes. Why pay for something you are never going to touch, right?

My Journey Through Metal Gear Solid: Part 1

by on

A few weeks ago Hideo Kojima released footage from the new Metal Gear game entitled Ground Zeroes. After watching the lengthy trailer and the extended demo I made a decision. I was going to finally play Metal Gear Solid. Yes, up to that point I had never experienced a Metal Gear game. I hate stealth games and I'm not a fan of lengthy cutscenes either so the series just always seemed like something I wouldn't enjoy. But I told myself that I needed to play these games if for no other reason than because they are major pieces of gaming history. I began my journey by downloading the original game from PSN. I was ready to dive into a deep abyss filled with super spies, government conspiracies, nuclear weapons, ridiculous boss battles, plot twists upon plot twists, and of course the titular weapons of mass destruction, Metal Gear.

Game One: Metal Gear Solid

I came into the original Metal Gear Solid a bit apprehensive. PS1 games have a lot of trouble standing the test of time, especially when you have no nostalgia for the game in question. Metal Gear Solid is one ugly mess but the lack of detail only slightly hurts an otherwise pretty good game. Obviously story is a major aspect of Metal Gear Solid. Snake's battle against his brother at Shadow Moses is one full of twists and turns. It is incredibly overwritten on one hand, and very interesting on the other. I think I liked the concept of the story more than the execution. Kojima tends to use two paragraphs to say something that I could say in one sentence. Maybe for some people that is part of the charm but for me it just seems silly. Still, the characters were compelling and well acted, and the twists were creative and unexpected. Revolver Ocelot quickly became my favorite character in the series which made the ending phone call all the more interesting for me.

I have to put in an aside here about how offensive I find female characters in every Metal Gear Solid game I've played thus far. If you want a great example of a game that treats women in an absolutely atrocious manner look no further than Metal Gear Solid. The infamous male gaze is so prominent here that it would be humorous if it wasn't played so straight. Snake ends up sounding like a sexist pig throwing out pickup lines that would turn off a playboy bunny. I usually don't like commenting on this type of thing but the purely awful portrayel of Meryl in this game is just kind of disgusting. And that isn't even mentioning that she spends most of the game getting rescued by Snake who falls in love with her almost solely based on her body. The two seem to be in love at the end of the game but they've spoken no more than a couple paragraphs to each other ever. It's just a piss poor relationship and it is something that is continued throughout every game in the series I've played thus far.

As far as the gameplay was concerned, I didn't mind the overhead camera as much as I do in most games simply due to the radar. In fact I think I spent more time looking at that radar than I did looking at the main screen. That is obviously not a great thing, and it also made the game ridiculously easy, but it solved a difficult problem. I also didn't enjoy having to backtrack through the facility multiple times after I got better keycards. The game never made it clear when you needed to backtrack and I often wandered around for quite a while before calling everyone on my codec multiple times to figure out what to do. Other than that I think the gameplay holds up rather well. The boss battles were still quite enjoyable and were the highlight of the game (and eventually the whole series) and the sneaking, while a bit frustrating worked well enough. I decided to play the game on easy as I was more interested in experiencing all the game had to offer than challenging myself with the stealth mechanics. I also hate stealth games so I appreciated being able to shoot my way out of a bind.

Overall I think Metal Gear Solid was an enjoyable experience and a great start to a series that turned out much better than I was expecting. The cutscenes were overly long and the overhead camera was a bit of a pain to work around, but for a game nearly 15 years old, MGS stands the test of time and remains one of the more enjoyable games I've played this year.

End of Part 1

In part two I'll talk about Metal Gear Solid 2 and 3 and how I felt that the series improved in some ways, yet got worse in others.

Broken Kickstarter Launch Day Revealed

by on

Hello all of my Gamespot friends. As most of you know I have been working on a game for the past seven months called Broken. For several months now we have been preparing a Kickstarter campaign to help us fund the rest of development. Our goal is to raise $15,000 over the course of around 30 days. This money will go towards legal fees, licensing costs, and testing and development costs. With $15,000 we believe we will be able to deliver a high quality PC version of Broken as well as a Mac and iOS port. Additional money will be spent on additional levels of polish, especially on the ports. The PC version will be released first with the additional versions continuing development until we feel they are of the highest possible quality on their specific platform.

Today I would like to reveal that the Kickstarter will launch on Sunday September 9th at 5:00 PM and will end on Friday October 12th at 6:00 PM. Starting today I will be taking questions here, on our Facebook page (Broken the Game) and on our Twitter page (@Brokenthegame). Your support is greatly appreciated and I humbly ask you to pledge as soon as the page is up. The first two days of a Kickstarter are hugely important to its overall success. If we can reach 25% of our goal by the 48 hour mark we are vastly more likely to meet our goal than if we make less. So please support and share the message with friends and family. For current info on the game please visit our website. We'll have more updates there and on all of our social media throughout the next month. Thank you all in advance!

A Good Free To Play Game?

by on

Free to Play (F2P) games have gotten quite a bit of hate from the gaming community. And rightfully so. Many F2P games are ruined with a pay to win model that makes them actually far more expensive than a normal $60 boxed game. That in and of itself sucks, but even if I had limitless amounts of money I still wouldn't like the system. For me, a lot of the fun in a game is unlocking everything. The proverbial carrot on a stick is what makes many games fun. One of the key reasons behind the success of Call of Duty is that persistent unlock system that constantly gives you rewards for playing well. If I could just pay $50 to unlock everything *cough*Battlefield 3*cough* then the game wouldn't be fun anymore. I don't find any joy in paying extra money to slaughter everyone. Once I've reached that point then for me the game is finished. I'm good enough. I don't need to play anymore. Mastering a game is a major aspect of the fun. Without it the game is no longer appealing to me.

So about a week ago I had a hankering to play a multiplayer shooter. It was probably brought on by the release of CS: GO. I decided that I didn't really want to pay $15 for another version of Counter Strike though, so I decided that I would try a F2P shooter. The most popular one was Team Fortress 2 but that had been out for so long I thought that most people would be a ton better than me at this point. So I decided to go with Tribes: Ascend. I had never played Tribes before, but the game had gotten great reviews and a ton of people seemed to like it.

To my surprise Tribes turned out to not be a pay to win shooter. It did have a persistant unlock system, but unlocks could be earned just by playing the game, and very few of the unlocks were all around better than what you started with. Most unlocks offered a different variation of the same weapon. So a grenade launcher might do more damage but have less of a splash radius. The basic equipment was always good enough to stay competitive and equipment leveled up as you played so even the most basic weapons would eventually prove worthwhile.

In addition, the game was pretty damn fun. Tribes is all about speed. You can "skate" along the ground at breakneck speeds and all classes have a jetpack that can fly you around the map with ease. Assault rifles and snipers are all but useless in this game. You'll never be able to carry a bead on a player long enough to take him out. Most weapons are explosive weapons. Shooting is all about predicting where you opponent will be in 5 seconds and firing at that spot. Jetpacks have limited power so it's important to keep track of your power level. Standing on the ground is a surefire way to die. And most bases are elevated and require you to fly up to them.

Now I like playing the Capture The Flag mode. You also have a basic team deathmatch and a capture and hold mode. I enjoy playing a technician because I suck at shooting. This engineer like role sees me keeping the base up and running. It's a common role in class based shooters with a slight twist here. See every base has a generator that powers defenses, and well as deployables like force fields, mines, and turrets. Without these a game is all but lost. So in addition to taking the flag, your goal in the game is also to destroy the generator. And my goal as a technician is to repair it and defend it. To do this technicians are armed with turrets and later with mines. I rarely get a kill with my measly SMG. But my job isn't to kill people as much as it is to fix things when the enemy destroys them. It's a pretty fun class that I honestly had never tried in another shooter. And I found it to be very enjoyable here in part because of just how important base defenses and deployables are in winning a game. I get more experience as a technician with a K/D of 0.3 or so than I do as an assault class with a K/D of 2.0+.

So overall I'm really enjoying the game. In fact I enjoyed it so much I spent $10 to unlock some stuff so I could show my support to the development team. Again, none of what I unlocked was significantly better than what I already had. And all of it could have been unlocked after a couple weeks of playing, but it gave me more options and gave me a chance to support a game I have found I really enjoy despite my preconceptions about free to play games and multiplayer shooters. If you have a chance this weekend give the game a try. It's free and it's double XP this weekend as well. It truly deserves everyone's support.