• 3Nov 09

  Q4 2009/Q1 2010 Super-Mania

  If anyone has actually been reading these blogs, I would be both amazed that someone even noticed and I would also be humbled and willing to write in a less editorial manner. I see that I was recently awarded the Connoisseur of Games emblem. I suppose it is nice to know that someone thinks I have good taste in video games and that I am not a complete wanker. Anyway, let's talk about up and coming.

  Modern Warfare 2. The very name brings to mind many different things for many different people. Console gamers are of course, unanimously overjoyed at the news that has been coming out of Infinity Ward's secret rebel base. For us PC zealots however, IW may not be as cool and good-willed as we thought. For anyone who has been living under a rock for the past month, you should probably know the following: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 for the PC was rocked by the news in early October that the game would not support user-generated servers (and thus user-generated content), not even dedicated servers. Most console gamers just shrugged and went back to their sticks or sneered arrogantly at their PC counterparts who, for the most part stared at their screens in disbelief. Could it be, that Infinity Ward, the company that was built on the PC community and if not for them, Call of Duty would not even exist, had finally sold us out? Robert Bowling AKA "FourZeroTwo", one the foremost spokespersons for Infinity Ward attempted to assuage PC gamers' fears with a rundown of the new PC plan on his blog. Instead of dedicated server/Server List setup, IW had gone way out of their way and made a whole infrastructure called IWnet. This IWnet is very similar to what console gamers know as, ummm, the only way they can play multiplayer: A matchmaking interface. It does have one saving grace, and that is the private match option. Working closely with Steam, Valve's brainchild of a fully-intergrated gaming/social networking/online store of a program, CoD:MDWF2 would allow players to create a private match, complete with their customer tailored match options, game mode, player limit, rules-set, etc., and only people who are invited directly or who are currently in that player's party can join. In case you were wondering, this would mean that MDWF2 would require Steam to function and now you would be able to easily make and track friends unlike in CoD 4 where you would have to keep track of your buddies through your own means or just hope to see them on their favorite servers. But what it all comes down to is that, why fix something that ain't broke? IW claims that this change would cut down on "cheating" and "rule breakers" who go unpunished. Most CoD 4 vets would tell you that on any dedicated server worth its salt, there are active admins who vigorously enforce their server's rules and PB (Punkbuster) is almost always enough to catch 99% of hackers without any admin input whatsoever. This means to most people and, I will admit myself included, believe that IW had an ulterior motive that Mr. Bowling would be too ashamed to admit: That IW is being instructed by Activision-Blizzard to build IWnet, expressly for the purpose of cutting out user-generated content. If they are able to do so, the only content anyone can get comes directly from the source, Infinity Ward. This means that Activision could then charge WHATEVER THEY WANT for extra content such as map packs and new content and no one can do anything about it. I am all for capitalism, after all, we would not live in the gaming society we do now without it. But there are some things that are just seriously ****ed up and cutting out a custom-content community that has thrived by the good-will of a developer for almost a decade in the spirit of making a few bucks is surely one of them. If this game is but the first of such occurences, the game corporation climate may come full circle, with Activision-Blizzard being the new EA Games and EA/DICE promising a more community-friendly approach to how they do business.

  Well, that is quite enough of the heavy stuff, let us move on to better and brighter news.

  It seems that despite all the hemming and hawing, Mass Effect 2 is slated to be all it's cracked up to be, although I am sad to say it has been delayed (let's hope they're just taking more time to refine their product). Honestly, self-proclaimed RPG aficionados need to open their eyes and realize that having an improved, more elegant combat system than Mass Effect 1 can only be, well...an improvement. A vast majority of Mass Effect fans will tell you that the only thing that seemed lacking or unrefined in the first game was the COMBAT SYSTEM. These people who think that streamlining the combat aspect of Mass Effect will magically warp it into some twisted version of Bioshock need to step back from their monitors and reflect a little. I think if anyone told me they absolutely loved the combat in Mass Effect 1 and would not want it changed in ANY way, I would tell them that they need to stop whacking their temple with a hammer and get some psychiatric assistance. Ok ok, getting back into the editorial mode a bit. But honestly, everyone needs to not stress about proposed changes to a game formula when it is confidently stated by ALL of the developers interviewed that they believe the change to be a positive one (although I think we can agree that no matter what IW says, no dedi servers is all around a **** idea). And if all else fails, go play the game at a friends house before going out to buy it and THEN feel free to spout doom and gloom on the forums. But don't get tunnel vision people, for Bioware has another potentially whicked project coming to fruition very soon and that is Dragon Age. Oooo, goody goody. Bioware finally goes back their roots to make another game where we get to slice and dice **** up (as well as blow things up with some particularily nasty and sufficiently gory spells). If anyone is like-minded with this particular gamer, then that means EVERYONE is about to have a nerd-gasm over the bloody sexiness that is Dragon Age. It is what Oblivion should have been, it is what Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance should have been (not that I didn't like it!). Now ok fine, I will follow my own advice and not judge a book by its cover. After all, I will never honestly know how good the game is until I play it, but anyone can admit that the trailers form a ****ing SWEET cover for the book.

  Well that is all folks. Until next time, keep your buns dry and your weapons loaded cause it things are ****in CRAZY out there!

  • Posted Nov 3, 2009 12:36 am PT
  • Category: Games
  • 0 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 30Jun 09

  Reviews, ugh

  I sure everyone has experienced it. People review things they haven't experienced. I'm telling you, nothing makes me more angry than people writing reviews, and putting scores on things they have not purchased, played, watched, etc. Especially since many people try to base whether or not they will pay real money for these things on the average ratings. I mean, I could go to Fandango right now and look at movies slated for the fall and for christ's sake, they already have 1,200 reviews! Some of them say the dumbest things like "Looks like it will be great" or "I can't wait". It all comes down to my biggest pet peeve: people going on about things they know nothing about. Anyway, now that that's over with on to the current events.

  Starting play Modern Warfare again. Damn World at War is such a let-down. I mean, the weapons are all crap. I suppose they're all from WWII, but still I mean come on. The only good weapons in the game are the Garand and the MP44, which is ironic since the one in CoD 4 was terribad. Tanks are crap, no one should ever put tanks in a CoD multiplayer...ever. And then if that's not enough, they've got snipers using a PTSH as an anti-infantry rifle. I mean, utter butchery of history. It's a weapon designed for a two-man team to take out lightly armored vehicles. If you could find the person on Earth who can carry that weapon at the hip and stand while firing it, I would love to meet them. Then again I shouldn't expect much from Activision, they are practically the new EA Games. The Guitar Hero franchise has gone to **** since they took over. I mean, it's not like the songs aren't any good, but their hardware is utter crap. I had to buy a new Guitar Hero 3 controller after only a year of use, because my original no longer worked. And I was lucky the first time around apparently, because the second one crapped out within a month. And again with Guitar Hero World Tour, the new guitar had lots of cool features like the ability to slap note, sythisize effects, blah, blah, blah. All that would have been great if the controller worked for more than a couple months. I'm telling you Activision needs to take notes from Harmonix who clearly know a whole lot more about quality control. I used the same Rock Band guitar all the way up until I bought the sequel with no problems whatsoever. And again, with Rock Band 2, I ravaged that new shiny wireless controller until my fingers were raw, but it is still working perfectly. I even used my Rock Band 2 controller to play Guitar Hero, since it's more responsive and always works, knock on wood. Overlord II turned out to be as great as the first, better even thanks to new included features, though it was nowhere near perfect, see my review for details. Codemasters pulled some cheap crap on me though with their whole eStore. Join our club the said, here's a birthday discount they said. And after all of that it turns out they have an eStore for ever country EXCEPT the United States. Customer services says they are currently working on making an eStore for the U.S. and in the meantime, any applicable discounts are not usable in the supported US retailers. I love it when someone tells me I get a 20% discount and then says, oh but you are live in America, so you aren't eligible. But that didn't stop them from asking me to join and sending me birthday discounts and whatnot. Whatever, at least Overlord II was only 39.99. Finally, as I am sure all you Blizzard Fanboys and Girls are aware, Starcraft 2 is just on the horizon. At least there is one video game company that has never let me down, not once. Blizzard Entertainment forever, Activision-Blizzard be damned. At least it was some sort of merger and not a takeover like EA did right before they ruined 3 different game franchises in the same year. Speaking of EA, at least it sounds like they are beginning to get the picture. They have returned to their roots and apparently we should be expected Battlefield 3 any year now. I hope to god they have got their **** together, because despite a rocky start, Battlefield 2 was the **** back in the day. From what I hear about Bad Company, it sounds like they may have done just that. For all the malice I hold for EA, I am willing to give them a second chance.

  Anywho, thanks for listening chill-dren, this is Three-Crog, Owwwwww, and you're listinen' to Galaxy News Radio. We're Radio Free Wasteland and we're here for you.

  • Posted Jun 30, 2009 3:24 pm PT
  • Category: Opinion
  • 0 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 27Sep 08

  My First Blog: a Rant it is, Yes!

  Just kidding. Anyway, this is my first blog so I don't know what to expect. I will begin with an odd question. How does a single reviewer at Gamespot, someone who is supposed to be trusted source of gaming intel, rate a game far lower than the majority of users and even some of the secondary critics . Even now I am still trying to wrap my mind around it. Specifically, I am talking about recent Pandemic release, Mercenaries 2: World in Flames. The gamespot 'expert' who review this game rated it a mere 5.0, citing "game-crippling bugs" and "shallow gameplay", while the critic score out of 47, 47 reviewers, said the game was an average of 7.3. Not to mention the score of 2,730 users, which averaged at 7.9. That is bordering on Great. I will admit, the game has its flaws. But it is no more flawed than the original Mercenaries. In fact, I would state that there are flaws that have been resolved between that game and in this one, namely the soldiers that stick around inside building after you've levelled them and continue to shoot you through walls. I actually did not see that bug in the newest installment.

  I personally have only a few complaints about Mercenaries 2. Firstly, there isn't much to do after you've done everything (kind of self-explanatory), which happens to be a major problem with open-ended games in general. Also, your allies will occasionally turn on you when you're defending the church on that one PLAV mission. And lastly, getting allies to jump into your helicopter is pure torture. That's about it. The gunships are enormously fun to bomb around in, most of the missions are aimply awesome, and the Fuel-air RPG is possibly the most fun weapon I have ever used in any Mercenaries game (oh yeah by the way, that is a real weapon, designed by the Russians, look it up). I scorn the comment that the missions are repetetive. In no way is that true. At any particular moment, I may be defending a church from legions of tanks, blasting the supports of an oil rig with C4, or chasing a corrupt Venezuelan general at high speed who took my support operative hostage. This really is a decent game. By no means is it perfect, I'll admit to that. But I haven't even played the coop mode yet and I still like this game.

  Of course, I concede that as a reviewer, Aaron is entitled to his opinion. But the evidence he sights is somewhat skewed, making me think that he really didn't play the game all the way through. He also states that the previous Mercenaries game was better. I can't even see how he came to that conclusion, since the original game didn't have anything that World in Flames hasn't got, except for maybe marginally better voice-overs, and instanced 'boss' levels (For each Ace of a particular suit). Having beaten both games once (Mercenaries 1 more than once), I can say without a doubt, that the game deserves at least a 7.3, which I might add, is conservative compared to what 2700 other players have said.

  • Posted Sep 27, 2008 10:45 am PT
  • 0 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg

See Previous Blog Posts »