Holiday Review Competition

Ho ho ho!

TWL is holding a gift giving, present receiving, egg-nog drinking, turkey basting holiday reviewing competition! Reviews are not restricted to games, you can review anything you like, if you think it would make a great (or bad) gift!

Winners will receive a tag courtesy of ILF, and entries open on the 25th of November, and close on the 25th of December. 

Now get writting and remember, NO RE-GIFTING!

I was writting like crazy.

I'll kick this off with a ten-year celebration of Half-Life.

Oh jeez, I don't even know WHAT to review; I haven't gamed in three centuries...helios_rietberg

You can review anything you think would make a good gift, it doesn't have to be a video game! :)

F-Zero GX Reviews

Allikiza

This F-Zero game is one of the most fast-paced racers out there, and though the gameplay gets hard, it's fun to play.

• Posted Nov 22, 2008 6:29 pm CT

As with most competitions (both online and offline), you must submit a fresh piece of work. It's both lazy and unfair to the other competitors to resubmit something you've already done.

Also, don't get the wrong idea here; this isn't strictly a review competition. It's also about recommending something worth gettnig for the holidays. So if you review a piece of Kleenex... you get the picture? :P

As with most competitions (both online and offline), you must submit a fresh piece of work. It's both lazy and unfair to the other competitors to resubmit something you've already done.

iloveflash

I'm feeling kinda lazy... okay I'll try doing a review for FC2

Also, don't get the wrong idea here; this isn't strictly a review competition. It's also about recommending something worth gettnig for the holidays. So if you review a piece of Kleenex... you get the picture? :P

iloveflash

:lol:

This game is two player, meaning that in story mode there are two people who play, I think ( I have not done this, so I am just asumeing! ).optiow

That sentence really made me disrespect your review. How can you review a game without having played the story mode? I think you should play all parts about the game before you review it. What if the story mode was horrible? Wouldn't that have affected your score? 

[QUOTE="optiow"]This game is two player, meaning that in story mode there are two people who play, I think ( I have not done this, so I am just asumeing! ).waZelda

That sentence really made me disrespect your review. How can you review a game without having played the story mode? I think you should play all parts about the game before you review it. What if the story mode was horrible? Wouldn't that have affected your score? 

I think he has played the story mode judging by the rest of the review, and the multiplayer in the PS2 version of SA is pretty much just an after-thought.

Here it is, my review for the competition:

Wii Music (7.0)

Disappointing

It offers plenty of fun, but it isn't a game for perfectionists.

What I find annoying when reading user reviews of wii music, is that it seems everyone made the mistake to think this game was going to be another Guitar Hero clone. People should know by now that the only games Nintendo make clones of are their own games. So first of all, let's have a look at what exactly Nintendo meant for this game to be. From reading some Miyamoto interviews, I got the impression this is what they wanted wii music to be:

1. A game that anyone can play and enjoy.
2. A way for those who are not skilled at playing instruments to express themselves through music.

So did they achieve it? I'll have a look at the two points individually.

1. It is definitely not a very complicated game to play. You mostly just use four different stiles. Piano stile (drumming with the remote and nunchuck), violin stile (Press B and hold for a tune and move the remote as though you are playing a violin), guitar stile (using the remote to play) and flute (simply press and hold the 1 or the 2 button). In addition to that you can press A or B on some instruments to change how they sound, and by shaking the nunchuck, you can make a little wah-wah on the guitars. So I do belive it is a game that everyone can play with no problem. The tune is already there when you start, so you just got to follow the rhythm. Frankly, there are some problems when playing it. If you miss a tone by just a little hundred of a second, it will sound aweful, so it's not quite easy for the youngest kids.

Can everyone enjoy it? Well, it's not appreciated by the hardcore gamer demographic. The lack of challenge is probably what they dislike. The game doesn't even give you point for your performance. The three mini-games are the only thing that measures your skill, and they are fun, especially being the maestro of an orchestra, but it's not enough. The only thing they've done to include the hardcore gamers, is to offer some nostalgia with game tracks to play. If you're a fan of Nintendo, you'll appreciate playing F-Zero or Legend of Zelda, but other hardcore gamers won't have much to look forward to.

2."A way to express yourself through music." When reading that, wouldn't it be natural to assume that you could make music in the game? Well you can't, even though I don't doubt it would be possible for Nintendo to make such an option with a game like Wii Music. It would have been great if (with some work) you could play any song whatsoever, even songs you have made yourself. Nintendo even said that wii music was to be considered more of an instrument than a game. On what instrument can you only play 50 songs?

The songs won't appeal to hardcore gamers either. Because at that point (as well), Nintendo have gone with the "E for everyone" approach. There is next to no rock and no metal. Most of the songs are child songs or songs that everyone has heard. The first 8 are "clasical" such as "Swan Lake" or "Eine kleine nachtmusik" followed by no less than 22 "traditional" like "happy birthday to you" or "the flea waltz." Then there are 13 "popular" like "Every Breath You Take" or "Woman" and 7 video games songs including the main theme of wii music itself. If the track list is not to your taste, it's a bad chance you will enjoy the game. If you want the complete list, you could check it out on Wikipedia or something.

So what did Nintendo mean by saying you could express yourself? Well you have a lot of freedom when it comes to how you play the game, and that's the big strength of wii music. You can play any of the eleven music stiles they recommend, or make your own stile. You can use any of the 65 instruments (that is when "cheerleader" and "Cat suit" are considered instruments) and record over what you've done. So you can play single player and still play all six members of the band using your Mii. Besides using whatever instrument you like, you can speed up or slow down the tempo, and you can also make a slightly different rhythm. You can experience with the music, like turning F-Zero into a funeral march or Bridal Chorus into a rock song. It feels great to affect the music in the way you like, and for those who, like me, have unskilled fingers when it comes to instruments, it feels really great to play all instruments in a band then watch a music video of it.

So the game offers lot of fun, but also has a lot of disappointments. Apart from the ones already mention, I'd like to mention that there is no microphone, so you can't sing. I goes since Nintendo couldn't make it easier to sing, they wouldn't have that included, which is rather sad. The ridiculous thing they used to replace it, was an instrument called "singer" using flute stile. The singer don't sing any words, and it sounds more like a rabbit from Rayman Raving Rabbids than a singer.

Despite a lot of flaws, Wii Music is a good, charming and fun game. I don't regret buying it, and if Nintendo should make a sequel where you could make music as well, I wouldn't hesitate to buy it.

Nice review - analytical in the way it should be. There's just this one thing:

The songs won't appeal to hardcore gamers either. Because at that point (as well), Nintendo have gone with the "E for everyone" approach. There is next to no rock and no metal.

What makes you think all hardcore gamers are interested only in Rock and Metal, or for the matter, even slightly interested in Rock and Metal?

My Far Cry Review's done. Here's the link:

Far Cry 2 review by sandy

Read and comment. Recommend it if you like it

My Far Cry Review's done. Here's the link:

Far Cry 2 review by sandy

Read and comment. Recommend it if you like it

sandyqbg

I think you have to post the review here. Either way it's non-editable during a competition.

[QUOTE="sandyqbg"]

My Far Cry Review's done. Here's the link:

Far Cry 2 review by sandy

Read and comment. Recommend it if you like it

iloveflash

I think you have to post the review here. Either way it's non-editable during a competition.

Will do

Blurb

Great vistas and cool eye candy but repetitive missions and a rather shallow uninnovative gameplay spoil the fun

Review

Far Cry... the game that set new standards for FPSes in terms of both graphics and game, one that has been used as a benchmark till not long ago. Along comes Far Cry 2 amid high expectation from Ubisoft with a promise of a whole new level of graphics and gameplay features. But does it live up to its promise?

The game puts you in the shoes of a mercenary, sent into an Africa torn by civil war, to terminate the Jackal, the guy who armed the warring sides. Unfortunately for your character, things go downhill when he gets smitten by malaria and gets caught in the crossfire.

The first thing that you notice when you get into the game is the beautiful graphics. It may not be as crisp as Crysis but the lighting and fire effects are well done. What more, it scales better too, which means you can enjoy its graphical excellence even on a relatively low end PC.

The lighting however also proves to be the undoing. It strikes the player as too bright, so far as to say that it becomes difficult to see in the midday sun (in-game, that is).

When we talk about the graphics it would do the game no justice if nothing is said about the sprawling African landscape. Right from dry savannah to the dense tropical forests, every vista is a treat to watch. The large play area has a striking contrast of environments with even some wildlife thrown it, which is the closest you can get to seeing Africa in a game so far.

If you think the eye candy is the best part of the game, wait till you experience the sounds. Obviously a lot of work has gone into it. The voice acting is apt. Even better is the sound effects - the gunshots and explosions, the hum of the jeep's engines, the rather subtle sounds of your environment. The star of the sound department is the background score. The action is accompanied by an intense score of drums, which fade into the background once the action passes.

The gameplay is quite a letdown, compared to the rest of the aspects. It comes across as repetitive and shallow. The weak storyline does nothing to remedy this situation either. You could be playing without knowing how the story is progressing and it would hardly matter.

The catchword is "freedom". Choose to take a mission you like, from either of the two factions - the UFLL and the APR, or one of the side missions. Go about completing the mission the way you want it. Destroy all enemy camps on the way or just focus on the target, avoiding anything that does not from a part of the mission or just play stealth and shed as less blood as possible. Even though some may not like this, I would say it is quite the positive aspect of the gameplay.

Far Cry 2 introduces the so-called buddy system. There are twelve potential "buddies" to befriend, who would assist you in achieving your goals. The more you work with your buddies, the more you gain reputation. However, you would often find yourself fighting your own battle while he fights his. The main advantage of this system is that it gives you more than one way to do a mission and at times you would find that doing the mission with your buddy gets the mission easier than if you would do it yourself.

Apart from the main missions, there are several secondary missions, in the form of missions for the "Underground", which secure you the much needed malaria pills, missions for the arms vendor which unlocks new weapons and other side missions, which serve primarily to extend your gameplay time. These side missions are repetitive which requires you to go to an enemy camp and kill all hostiles, followed by meeting someone, destroying something or killing someone. This might get boring soon.

The most irritating aspect of all this is the presence of numerous enemy guard posts and patrols. To get from one place to another you have to pass through several of these. They all look very similar and the firefights play out the same way. This, in my opinion, is the main reason why the game turns out to be not-so-great.

The other irritating aspect is the AI. What were the guys at Ubisoft thinking? Initially you may be satisfied with the "brilliant" AI, but it's not long before you realize that it's just a bunch of scripts overdone. True, the enemy tries to flank you (a bit), take cover and approach you cautiously, but it's not the sort of adaptive AI behavior you would see in Crysis or even Far Cry. As I've said it's overdone. The enemy will detect your presence and rush out from their camp to intercept you even when you're a mile away. Sniping is an even sorrier example for this kind of behavior. Regardless of how distant and well hidden you are the enemy will always zero in on your location the moment you fire your first snipe shot. So in reality stealth is not option.

Contrary to what Ubisoft and even Gamespot has proclaimed, interaction with the game world is pretty limited and is nowhere comparable to Crysis. There are few objects that you can interact with and the day-night cycle, which the developers claim to have a major effect on enemy behavior, does not have an appreciable effect. Nights mean that there are less enemy soldiers on the lookout which makes it easier for you to creep by or move closer. But once things get hot, night or day makes little difference. However, whatever world interaction is possible is quite rewarding. For example shoot vehicles or oil tanks to blow them up or throw a molotov cocktail into the dry grass of the savannah and watch it burn. If you're luck some enemy soldiers will get incinerated.

Lastly, weapon and vehicle handling. Vehicle handling is quite realistic. It's like they developed their vehicles as they would do for a racing sim, albeit slower and rickety. Vehicle damage plays an important role in speed and control of the vehicle. Each bump and every turn feels solid. The same cannot be said for weapon handling though. Weapons show visible wear and damaged weapons get jammed often. The recoil is lacking and the handling has been made easy. If not for the prominent sound effects, an AK-47 would not feel so much different from a light MG.

FINAL VERDICT:
In the end the game isn't all that bad. The missions get a tad too repetitive and irritating, but the way game is structured puts it a notch above the run-of-the-mill FPS. Even if not for the game itself, the sights and sounds are a treat in themselves. I would not call it a must buy but do try it if you can play it at a friend's or something.

[QUOTE="sandyqbg"]

My Far Cry Review's done. Here's the link:

Far Cry 2 review by sandy

Read and comment. Recommend it if you like it

iloveflash

I think you have to post the review here. Either way it's non-editable during a competition.

wtf Nobody said that, you are all terrible people.

Half-Life 1

I have a few select memories I will cherish forever. Most of them are common experiences everyone's had: their first kiss, a special moment, whatever the case may be. There's a single memory in that whole bunch that makes my eyes glaze over with nostalgia more than the others. One weekend I went up to my dad's, I installed Half-Life 1 on his terrible old machine, and I played it straight through. It is one of the best weekends I've ever had.

Despite its minor flaws. Half-Life stands up even today, ten years after its release. It may not look the part, and many of its puzzles and design concepts are outdated, but that doesn't diminish its significance at all; in fact, they just make the best parts shine even brighter. There are few modern games that can match the polish and brilliance of Half-Life 1, because as a package the game is simply phenomenal. It changed the way that I – and the entire industry, for that matter - looked at video games.

You could go beyond the actual game itself and talk about simply the excellence that surrounded it at the time and you'd have a review by itself; Counter-Strike and various other mods made the whole "Doom WAD" concept as relatively mainstream as the PC platform was ever going to get. But we can't ignore the game, either, or its legacy and impact on games since its release.

The game starts in a monorail. The game ends in a monorail. But by the end of it, the player has experienced a scientific disaster, an army takeover, an alien-government shootout, and traveled to another dimension. By the end of the game the player has battled with headcrabs and helicopters, saved scientists and launched missiles. And this is not Gordon Freeman experiencing this; it's the player. The player is doing these things. The player is Gordon Freeman. What makes Half-Life so impressive and compelling beyond the action sequences is that focus and sense of being in this world where anything could happen.

I came into the game a complete virgin, in the sense that I didn't know anything about Half-Life beside the fact that I wanted to play it. I follow the games instructions, and then – chaos. Everything turns into a nightmare. I step over dead bodies, dodge tentacles, and crawl beneath lasers. Even on the easiest setting it was a fight for me to survive in this dangerous world. And what blew me away was that the game didn't snap to a cut-scene to show me all of this; it used the game's own logic to tell a story. Everything is from the first person view.

The game is definitely hard, and sometimes unfairly hard. The first time I played it I was forced to cheat several times (No-Clip and God mode, anyone?), especially during the ridiculous jumping puzzles. Thankfully Valve learned their lesson and never tried that one again. But when we're discussing the more typical puzzles and battle sequences, the game never becomes unfair; it's always a matter of learning the system and surviving. That's the point of the game to begin with, anyway.

The AI was fantastic, and I'm inclined to say it still is. The marines will strafe around you, take cover, and throw grenades. Those guys were devilishly hard, and the game threw them out by the pack. But it was all fun to try out and mess with, because all of it felt so dynamic and playful at the same time. It was always a place to try new ideas to pass to the next room or overcome the obstacle, and trying to affect the situation is such a way that you can get by alive. One of the more curious sections of the game was watching a squad of marines battle an army of aliens; never before had I seen not only AI that could handle such situations, but also a game development cycle that was open ended enough to allow that to happen.

"Open-ended" was never a good way to describe Half-Life (especially the sequel) but it uses a feeling of exploration as a key motivator to get the player moving. The game was unique in the way that it melded the old LucasArts text adventures with the new-fangled FPS genre, creating a new breed of shooter that used more brain power that the typical Doom clone of the time. A player passes a room and gets to watch a scientist get attacked by a headcrab. It may be just basic scripting, but that certainly doesn't make it any less compelling.

The variety of environments are a factor as well. While a lot of the game takes place underground in Black Mesa, there were still a lot of different areas that showed off what Half-Life could do. Who can forget the battle with the helicopter? How about sneaking past the tentacle beast? Every experience is so terribly iconic, and what they existed in has a lot to do with it. The helicopter section couldn't have worked without a very open portion of the map.

The game isn't perfect; no game is. The last few levels of the game are the weakest, even though the player has been looking forward to seeing it the entire game. The first half-hour offers a very fast glimpse of Xen, but when the player gets there it's a little hard to navigate, and the overabundance of difficult jumping puzzles gets in the way of what would have been a very interesting level. That's not to say it wasn't (it looked really, really cool) but I very much doubt anyone actually enjoyed battling the final boss, a.k.a. the floating crap in the jar. Much too irritating.

Still, consider what it gave to gaming in general. It showed how to tell a basic story in a way that will interest people. Voice acting, and good voice acting, is key to making a story resonate. Don't rely on cutscenes to say everything (even though games still try to). Give a game good AI and they'll be playing it forever. Arguably it wasn't until Halo made FPS work on consoles that any of this become really widespread, but Half-Life was the one that really spurred it all along.

Half-Life didn't invent any of this stuff, just to be sure. System Shock 1 and Marathon both had excellent stories, and Half-Life took many elements from their game design. But in the process Half-Life made it big-budget and in that found its own identity. Half-Life is such an iconic and well respected game even ten years later, and its game design still holds up.

When I beat that floating crap in the jar, I was amazed. I beat Half-Life. For one of the first times in playing a video game, I didn't feel happy when I beat it. I was sad. I didn't wanted it to end. This game is the only one to accomplish that emotion within me, and it's odd that this game is the one. Half-Life 2 came along eventually, and blew me away all over again, but it was a different game. We still never really have gotten another Half-Life 1. We probably never will.

We have to cherish what we have. 

[QUOTE="iloveflash"][QUOTE="sandyqbg"]

My Far Cry Review's done. Here's the link:

Far Cry 2 review by sandy

Read and comment. Recommend it if you like it

Aberinkulas

I think you have to post the review here. Either way it's non-editable during a competition.

wtf Nobody said that, you are all terrible people.

I didn't know that myself. Ilf and Foolz are the culprits. Catch 'em

Half-Life 1

I have a few select memories I will cherish forever. Most of them are common experiences everyone's had: their first kiss, a special moment, whatever the case may be. There's a single memory in that whole bunch that makes my eyes glaze over with nostalgia more than the others. One weekend I went up to my dad's, I installed Half-Life 1 on his terrible old machine, and I played it straight through. It is one of the best weekends I've ever had.

Despite its minor flaws. Half-Life stands up even today, ten years after its release. It may not look the part, and many of its puzzles and design concepts are outdated, but that doesn't diminish its significance at all; in fact, they just make the best parts shine even brighter. There are few modern games that can match the polish and brilliance of Half-Life 1, because as a package the game is simply phenomenal. It changed the way that I – and the entire industry, for that matter - looked at video games.

You could go beyond the actual game itself and talk about simply the excellence that surrounded it at the time and you'd have a review by itself; Counter-Strike and various other mods made the whole "Doom WAD" concept as relatively mainstream as the PC platform was ever going to get. But we can't ignore the game, either, or its legacy and impact on games since its release.

The game starts in a monorail. The game ends in a monorail. But by the end of it, the player has experienced a scientific disaster, an army takeover, an alien-government shootout, and traveled to another dimension. By the end of the game the player has battled with headcrabs and helicopters, saved scientists and launched missiles. And this is not Gordon Freeman experiencing this; it's the player. The player is doing these things. The player is Gordon Freeman. What makes Half-Life so impressive and compelling beyond the action sequences is that focus and sense of being in this world where anything could happen.

I came into the game a complete virgin, in the sense that I didn't know anything about Half-Life beside the fact that I wanted to play it. I follow the games instructions, and then – chaos. Everything turns into a nightmare. I step over dead bodies, dodge tentacles, and crawl beneath lasers. Even on the easiest setting it was a fight for me to survive in this dangerous world. And what blew me away was that the game didn't snap to a cut-scene to show me all of this; it used the game's own logic to tell a story. Everything is from the first person view.

The game is definitely hard, and sometimes unfairly hard. The first time I played it I was forced to cheat several times (No-Clip and God mode, anyone?), especially during the ridiculous jumping puzzles. Thankfully Valve learned their lesson and never tried that one again. But when we're discussing the more typical puzzles and battle sequences, the game never becomes unfair; it's always a matter of learning the system and surviving. That's the point of the game to begin with, anyway.

The AI was fantastic, and I'm inclined to say it still is. The marines will strafe around you, take cover, and throw grenades. Those guys were devilishly hard, and the game threw them out by the pack. But it was all fun to try out and mess with, because all of it felt so dynamic and playful at the same time. It was always a place to try new ideas to pass to the next room or overcome the obstacle, and trying to affect the situation is such a way that you can get by alive. One of the more curious sections of the game was watching a squad of marines battle an army of aliens; never before had I seen not only AI that could handle such situations, but also a game development cycle that was open ended enough to allow that to happen.

"Open-ended" was never a good way to describe Half-Life (especially the sequel) but it uses a feeling of exploration as a key motivator to get the player moving. The game was unique in the way that it melded the old LucasArts text adventures with the new-fangled FPS genre, creating a new breed of shooter that used more brain power that the typical Doom clone of the time. A player passes a room and gets to watch a scientist get attacked by a headcrab. It may be just basic scripting, but that certainly doesn't make it any less compelling.

The variety of environments are a factor as well. While a lot of the game takes place underground in Black Mesa, there were still a lot of different areas that showed off what Half-Life could do. Who can forget the battle with the helicopter? How about sneaking past the tentacle beast? Every experience is so terribly iconic, and what they existed in has a lot to do with it. The helicopter section couldn't have worked without a very open portion of the map.

The game isn't perfect; no game is. The last few levels of the game are the weakest, even though the player has been looking forward to seeing it the entire game. The first half-hour offers a very fast glimpse of Xen, but when the player gets there it's a little hard to navigate, and the overabundance of difficult jumping puzzles gets in the way of what would have been a very interesting level. That's not to say it wasn't (it looked really, really cool) but I very much doubt anyone actually enjoyed battling the final boss, a.k.a. the floating crap in the jar. Much too irritating.

Still, consider what it gave to gaming in general. It showed how to tell a basic story in a way that will interest people. Voice acting, and good voice acting, is key to making a story resonate. Don't rely on cutscenes to say everything (even though games still try to). Give a game good AI and they'll be playing it forever. Arguably it wasn't until Halo made FPS work on consoles that any of this become really widespread, but Half-Life was the one that really spurred it all along.

Half-Life didn't invent any of this stuff, just to be sure. System Shock 1 and Marathon both had excellent stories, and Half-Life took many elements from their game design. But in the process Half-Life made it big-budget and in that found its own identity. Half-Life is such an iconic and well respected game even ten years later, and its game design still holds up.

When I beat that floating crap in the jar, I was amazed. I beat Half-Life. For one of the first times in playing a video game, I didn't feel happy when I beat it. I was sad. I didn't wanted it to end. This game is the only one to accomplish that emotion within me, and it's odd that this game is the one. Half-Life 2 came along eventually, and blew me away all over again, but it was a different game. We still never really have gotten another Half-Life 1. We probably never will.

We have to cherish what we have. 

Aberinkulas

"As with most competitions (both online and offline), you must submit a fresh piece of work. It's both lazy and unfair to the other competitors to resubmit something you've already done."

- The Washington Tribune, 1985

[QUOTE="Aberinkulas"]

Half-Life 1

I have a few select memories I will cherish forever. Most of them are common experiences everyone's had: their first kiss, a special moment, whatever the case may be. There's a single memory in that whole bunch that makes my eyes glaze over with nostalgia more than the others. One weekend I went up to my dad's, I installed Half-Life 1 on his terrible old machine, and I played it straight through. It is one of the best weekends I've ever had.

Despite its minor flaws. Half-Life stands up even today, ten years after its release. It may not look the part, and many of its puzzles and design concepts are outdated, but that doesn't diminish its significance at all; in fact, they just make the best parts shine even brighter. There are few modern games that can match the polish and brilliance of Half-Life 1, because as a package the game is simply phenomenal. It changed the way that I – and the entire industry, for that matter - looked at video games.

You could go beyond the actual game itself and talk about simply the excellence that surrounded it at the time and you'd have a review by itself; Counter-Strike and various other mods made the whole "Doom WAD" concept as relatively mainstream as the PC platform was ever going to get. But we can't ignore the game, either, or its legacy and impact on games since its release.

The game starts in a monorail. The game ends in a monorail. But by the end of it, the player has experienced a scientific disaster, an army takeover, an alien-government shootout, and traveled to another dimension. By the end of the game the player has battled with headcrabs and helicopters, saved scientists and launched missiles. And this is not Gordon Freeman experiencing this; it's the player. The player is doing these things. The player is Gordon Freeman. What makes Half-Life so impressive and compelling beyond the action sequences is that focus and sense of being in this world where anything could happen.

I came into the game a complete virgin, in the sense that I didn't know anything about Half-Life beside the fact that I wanted to play it. I follow the games instructions, and then – chaos. Everything turns into a nightmare. I step over dead bodies, dodge tentacles, and crawl beneath lasers. Even on the easiest setting it was a fight for me to survive in this dangerous world. And what blew me away was that the game didn't snap to a cut-scene to show me all of this; it used the game's own logic to tell a story. Everything is from the first person view.

The game is definitely hard, and sometimes unfairly hard. The first time I played it I was forced to cheat several times (No-Clip and God mode, anyone?), especially during the ridiculous jumping puzzles. Thankfully Valve learned their lesson and never tried that one again. But when we're discussing the more typical puzzles and battle sequences, the game never becomes unfair; it's always a matter of learning the system and surviving. That's the point of the game to begin with, anyway.

The AI was fantastic, and I'm inclined to say it still is. The marines will strafe around you, take cover, and throw grenades. Those guys were devilishly hard, and the game threw them out by the pack. But it was all fun to try out and mess with, because all of it felt so dynamic and playful at the same time. It was always a place to try new ideas to pass to the next room or overcome the obstacle, and trying to affect the situation is such a way that you can get by alive. One of the more curious sections of the game was watching a squad of marines battle an army of aliens; never before had I seen not only AI that could handle such situations, but also a game development cycle that was open ended enough to allow that to happen.

"Open-ended" was never a good way to describe Half-Life (especially the sequel) but it uses a feeling of exploration as a key motivator to get the player moving. The game was unique in the way that it melded the old LucasArts text adventures with the new-fangled FPS genre, creating a new breed of shooter that used more brain power that the typical Doom clone of the time. A player passes a room and gets to watch a scientist get attacked by a headcrab. It may be just basic scripting, but that certainly doesn't make it any less compelling.

The variety of environments are a factor as well. While a lot of the game takes place underground in Black Mesa, there were still a lot of different areas that showed off what Half-Life could do. Who can forget the battle with the helicopter? How about sneaking past the tentacle beast? Every experience is so terribly iconic, and what they existed in has a lot to do with it. The helicopter section couldn't have worked without a very open portion of the map.

The game isn't perfect; no game is. The last few levels of the game are the weakest, even though the player has been looking forward to seeing it the entire game. The first half-hour offers a very fast glimpse of Xen, but when the player gets there it's a little hard to navigate, and the overabundance of difficult jumping puzzles gets in the way of what would have been a very interesting level. That's not to say it wasn't (it looked really, really cool) but I very much doubt anyone actually enjoyed battling the final boss, a.k.a. the floating crap in the jar. Much too irritating.

Still, consider what it gave to gaming in general. It showed how to tell a basic story in a way that will interest people. Voice acting, and good voice acting, is key to making a story resonate. Don't rely on cutscenes to say everything (even though games still try to). Give a game good AI and they'll be playing it forever. Arguably it wasn't until Halo made FPS work on consoles that any of this become really widespread, but Half-Life was the one that really spurred it all along.

Half-Life didn't invent any of this stuff, just to be sure. System Shock 1 and Marathon both had excellent stories, and Half-Life took many elements from their game design. But in the process Half-Life made it big-budget and in that found its own identity. Half-Life is such an iconic and well respected game even ten years later, and its game design still holds up.

When I beat that floating crap in the jar, I was amazed. I beat Half-Life. For one of the first times in playing a video game, I didn't feel happy when I beat it. I was sad. I didn't wanted it to end. This game is the only one to accomplish that emotion within me, and it's odd that this game is the one. Half-Life 2 came along eventually, and blew me away all over again, but it was a different game. We still never really have gotten another Half-Life 1. We probably never will.

We have to cherish what we have. 

iloveflash

"As with most competitions (both online and offline), you must submit a fresh piece of work. It's both lazy and unfair to the other competitors to resubmit something you've already done."

- The Washington Tribune, 1985

You phail. Goodbye.

[QUOTE="Aberinkulas"]

hax

iloveflash

"As with most competitions (both online and offline), you must submit a fresh piece of work. It's both lazy and unfair to the other competitors to resubmit something you've already done."

- The Washington Tribune, 1985

Man, my respect for the Washington Tribute has just grown dramatically! An online competition in 1985 must've been incredibly innovative!

Nice review - analytical in the way it should be. There's just this one thing:

The songs won't appeal to hardcore gamers either. Because at that point (as well), Nintendo have gone with the "E for everyone" approach. There is next to no rock and no metal.

What makes you think all hardcore gamers are interested only in Rock and Metal, or for the matter, even slightly interested in Rock and Metal?

sandyqbg

I guess you have a point, of course not all gamers like those genres. But my impression is that they are the two most popular music genre among gamers.

About your review, I think it was good, though maybe a little to informative. But what I think was a contradiction, was when you said it was not-that-great. With GameSpot's system, 8.0 means it's great, so if you think it was not-that-great, maybe you should have given it a lower score. 

[QUOTE="sandyqbg"]

Nice review - analytical in the way it should be. There's just this one thing:

The songs won't appeal to hardcore gamers either. Because at that point (as well), Nintendo have gone with the "E for everyone" approach. There is next to no rock and no metal.

What makes you think all hardcore gamers are interested only in Rock and Metal, or for the matter, even slightly interested in Rock and Metal?

waZelda

I guess you have a point, of course not all gamers like those genres. But my impression is that they are the two most popular music genre among gamers.

About your review, I think it was good, though maybe a little to informative. But what I think was a contradiction, was when you said it was not-that-great. With GameSpot's system, 8.0 means it's great, so if you think it was not-that-great, maybe you should have given it a lower score. 

I'd have diven iot a 7.8 ut since GS has no 7.8 I rounded it off to 8.

Flash, I was posting that review on the thread so it wouldn't be ruled out because I didn't post it here. I know you guys would try to pull that.

I wrote that review for this contest. Case closed, you fail, thank you for being a complete worthless moron. Spell "fail" right and maybe you'd be getting somewhere.

Idiot. Pull your worthless head out of your butt before you throw this filth onto the internet, because it's a waste of time for me and everyone else to read it. And even if I didn't read it, you quoted me twice so I have to scroll through your crap every time I read this thread.

EDIT: More unwarrented and needless abuse added for Flash above.

EDIT2: I spell check my abuse now.

Flash, I was posting that review on the thread so it wouldn't be ruled out because I didn't post it here. I know you guys would try to pull that.

I wrote that review for this contest. Case closed, you fail, thank you for being a complete worthless moron. Spell "fail" right and maybe you'd be getting somewhere.

Idiot. Pull your worthless head out of your butt before you throw this filth onto the internet, because it's a waste of time for me and everyone else to read it. And even if I didn't read it, you quoted me twice so I have to scroll through your crap every time I read this thread.

EDIT: More unwarrented and needless abuse added for Flash above.

EDIT2: I spell check my abuse now.

Aberinkulas

*Quotes so that such epicness is recorded*

- Gears of War 2 Review -

 Score: 9.5

Verdict: Amazing

Epic's follow-up to the critically acclaimed best seller is a truly epic experience.

From the intense, addictive online multiplayer, to engaging campaign mode, Gears of War 2 hits the bulls eye. It is highly detailed with beautiful environments and well crafted multiplayer maps. The gameplay, like it's predecessor, is highly addictive. Especially online with friends.

The campaign is very well constructed and has a good variety of gameplay mechanics. It is fun to play through alone, but even more fun with a friend in online co-op mode. The story itself is enjoyable, and while its not necessarily better than the first, it does have a great amount of twists and turns, surprises, and very exciting moments that will keep a player intrigued, as well as keep them playing.

The online mode is where Gears of War 2 really excels. Although it is buggy at times, along with the occasional lag, it is still one of the best multiplayer experiences available. The maps are all almost flawless in design. Some include environmental effects that can be fatal to players, which adds a great deal of excitement to the online gameplay. The team size has been increased from four players to five and a party mode has also been added, which makes for a more sociable environment and makes it easier for players to stay together from match to match.

Horde mode is arguably the best new feature in Gears. It is a fast-paced, insanely fun arcade-like mode of gameplay that can be played on any one online map. The mode itself takes some time to complete with a full team of five, but it is worth fighting until the very end. There are 50 waves of the Locust horde to snipe, torque, hammer, grind, scorch, frag, blow up, and chainsaw in order to score a well-deserved 50 achievement points.

Gears of War 2 is, without a doubt, overall one of the best games to hit the Xbox 360 all year. A must-play for any action junkie.

Just a quick question: Are these posts moderated by Gamespot, or just by the union administrators? Just want to know if we are allowed to write whatever we want, with any kind of colorful language that seems fit, or if it needs to be lobotomized and dumbed down to make sure its suitable for four year old kids and not offending any major Gamespot sponsors.Blue_Tomato

Well either way we can't write words like clasic og stile without having to spell them wrong. (Man, that is annoying when writing game reviews). 

Nice review - analytical in the way it should be. There's just this one thing:

The songs won't appeal to hardcore gamers either. Because at that point (as well), Nintendo have gone with the "E for everyone" approach. There is next to no rock and no metal.

What makes you think all hardcore gamers are interested only in Rock and Metal, or for the matter, even slightly interested in Rock and Metal?

sandyqbg

I agree, I absoutely hate rock/metal, I listn to Rap and im a hardcore gamer lol

[QUOTE="Blue_Tomato"]Just a quick question: Are these posts moderated by Gamespot, or just by the union administrators? Just want to know if we are allowed to write whatever we want, with any kind of colorful language that seems fit, or if it needs to be lobotomized and dumbed down to make sure its suitable for four year old kids and not offending any major Gamespot sponsors.waZelda

Well either way we can't write words like clasic og stile without having to spell them wrong. (Man, that is annoying when writing game reviews). 

Substitute your L's for capital i's. [Insert coin here]

Just a quick question: Are these posts moderated by Gamespot, or just by the union administrators? Just want to know if we are allowed to write whatever we want, with any kind of colorful language that seems fit, or if it needs to be lobotomized and dumbed down to make sure its suitable for four year old kids and not offending any major Gamespot sponsors.Blue_Tomato

Both. The union admins (Ie. me and the officers) have no problem with swearing, though. Of course you should probably bear in mind that the mods do (I've never seen anyone modded here, though) and substitute swear words for ****.

I've always wondered why they substitute swear woulds for ****. What does **** have to do with anything? Do they like ****? Do they abhor ****? Are they **** heads? Wtf, you know?

...Don't mind me, I'm just being a ****. :P

I've always wondered why they substitute swear woulds for ****. What does **** have to do with anything? Do they like ****? Do they abhor ****? Are they **** heads? Wtf, you know?

...Don't mind me, I'm just being a ****. :P

iloveflash

****ing hell! a lot of blanked out words there officer. You need to watch your language aroungd the recruits, we might just start saying **** as well.

You're a bad influence ILF. :|

Before:

Bang on! top hat, jolly good, pat on the back! That was a very good history of the union, and I am rather sad that I did not see it in it's early days. It must have been hard not finding any members, but it worked out in the end, for I don't see the Lounge going anywhere soon. I just hope my union becomes as good as this one.optiow

After:

[QUOTE="iloveflash"]

I've always wondered why they substitute swear woulds for ****. What does **** have to do with anything? Do they like ****? Do they abhor ****? Are they **** heads? Wtf, you know?

...Don't mind me, I'm just being a ****. :P

optiow

****ing hell! a lot of blanked out words there officer. You need to watch your language aroungd the recruits, we might just start saying **** as well.

You're a bad influence ILF. :|

Before:

[QUOTE="optiow"]Bang on! top hat, jolly good, pat on the back! That was a very good history of the union, and I am rather sad that I did not see it in it's early days. It must have been hard not finding any members, but it worked out in the end, for I don't see the Lounge going anywhere soon. I just hope my union becomes as good as this one.Foolz3h

After:

[QUOTE="iloveflash"]

I've always wondered why they substitute swear woulds for ****. What does **** have to do with anything? Do they like ****? Do they abhor ****? Are they **** heads? Wtf, you know?

...Don't mind me, I'm just being a ****. :P

optiow

****ing hell! a lot of blanked out words there officer. You need to watch your language aroungd the recruits, we might just start saying **** as well.

Exactly, You are teaching me bad things.

You need to watch your language aroungd the recruits.

optiow

It's quite a contradiction when you make a typo in a sentence where you tell someone to watch their language.

(I hope I didn't make any typos, because if I did, I'd look like a big idiot) 

[QUOTE="optiow"]

You need to watch your language aroungd the recruits.

waZelda

It's quite a contradiction when you make a typo in a sentence where you tell someone to watch their language.

(I hope I didn't make any typos, because if I did, I'd look like a big idiot) 

Nope, you made no typos, and I er... did that typo on purpose... yeah I did it, well deliberately. Just testing you to see if you picked it up... Look a distraction!

* runs from computer *

[QUOTE="optiow"]

You need to watch your language aroungd the recruits.

waZelda

It's quite a contradiction when you make a typo in a sentence where you tell someone to watch their language.

(I hope I didn't make any typos, because if I did, I'd look like a big idiot) 

But where's the full stop for the brackets?!

[QUOTE="waZelda"][QUOTE="optiow"]

You need to watch your language aroungd the recruits.

Foolz3h

It's quite a contradiction when you make a typo in a sentence where you tell someone to watch their language.

(I hope I didn't make any typos, because if I did, I'd look like a big idiot) 

But where's the full stop for the brackets?!

How did I not pick that up?

[QUOTE="Foolz3h"][QUOTE="waZelda"][QUOTE="optiow"]

You need to watch your language aroungd the recruits.

optiow

It's quite a contradiction when you make a typo in a sentence where you tell someone to watch their language.

(I hope I didn't make any typos, because if I did, I'd look like a big idiot) 

But where's the full stop for the brackets?!

How did I not pick that up?

More importantly: how did he not pick it up?

[QUOTE="optiow"][QUOTE="Foolz3h"][QUOTE="waZelda"][QUOTE="optiow"]

You need to watch your language aroungd the recruits.

Foolz3h

It's quite a contradiction when you make a typo in a sentence where you tell someone to watch their language.

(I hope I didn't make any typos, because if I did, I'd look like a big idiot) 

But where's the full stop for the brackets?!

How did I not pick that up?

More importantly: how did he not pick it up?

The million dollar question.

So when's the competition closing? And when's the resultssandyqbg

Reading the original post could be a good idea some times. The competition closes at December 25th and I assume we won't have to wait long for the results.