As some people who followed the Computer Games Magazine saga are aware, we finished our May 2007 issue in the first week of March, sent it to the printers, and were then told it wouldn’t be printed and were all laid off. (And by “all of us,” it was mainly myself and our art guy at that point. Other people stayed around longer to shut things down.)

Anyway, our featured review that month was of Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, the oh-so-controversial big MMO of early 2007. We had a tag-team, three-man review of the game, by myself, Tom Chick, and Kelly Wand.

I was rummaging through some files and found the text. I think it was a lot of fun to read. (It was especially fun to do; at least it was when Kelly wasn’t getting me killed.)

So, here it is (hah hah, Tom Chick gave it 4 stars):
(more…)

OK, a few ground rules: I don’t own a Nintendo DS. I haven’t played Mass Effect or The Witcher. And I probably didn’t play your favorite game, or I didn’t like it. So there.

Notable games that didn’t make the cut: Crysis and Call of Duty 4. The former made the latter’s linearity and heavily scripted gameplay feel very, very tired, and I’ve already documented how much Crysis ultimately disappointed me.

So, here’s the list.
(more…)

Call of Duty 4

It’s hard for me to gauge my feelings on this game because I played it in its entirety after I’d started Crysis (but hadn’t reached its sucking bits). Its linear, heavily scripted gameplay—even when implemented with as much skill as Infinity Ward delivers here—feels tired and dull compared to the open-endedness of Crysis. Yeah, all of those in-engine scripted scenes are amazing. But we all get the same amazing scenes, and we all play it the same way. (I didn’t try multiplayer, and I’m told it’s fantastic. I also played it on the 360 instead of the PC, only because I borrowed it rather than bought it.)

Still, a few segments stood out. The sniper mission is brilliant, beautifully capturing a feeling of dread and panic that you’ll be detected. (The fact that you and your companion look like Treebeard is a bonus.) The only goofy part is crawling under a parade of cars in the open; in a “real” scenario, you’d probably just go around the soldiers.

The second is an airborne attack, where sit in a plane high above the action coldly launching bombs, rockets, and various other implements of death at little white dots that scurry about. That those dots are people—and the fact your fellow soldiers in the plane are constantly offering accolades when you score a good hit—probably says more about modern war than any Hollywood polemic. And it was so obvious that there’d be collateral damage, though that’s never discussed.

Whether or not Infinity Ward designed it to be unsettling or not (and in the context of a game that’s mostly “rah rah, soldiers are fucking badass!” I’m going to go with “no”), it disturbed me. While the game makes it clear you’re fighting against “very bad people,” it made modern war seem horribly unfair, particularly when contrasted against most games being forced to “balance” the US versus its enemies for gameplay purposes.

With a week off, I figured I’d catch up on my backlog of games. Some old, some new. Some borrowed, some… blah

First up, Crysis.

Oh dear.

I wanted to love it, I really did.

My most anticipated game of the year turns out to be my biggest disappointment. The people that gave it such high reviews must either dig the multiplayer or have stopped playing about mid-way through the game. Because for its first half, it’s the greatest sandbox combat simulator ever, 100% worthy of its 98s and 5-stars, and 10/10 cups of drool.

You can create these amazing stories, like the time I was being chased by a helicopter, cloaked, ran into a building… and then the helicopter started launching rockets into all the buildings, eventually hitting mine, causing it to collapse on my head and kill me. That’s not a scripted scene like you find in Call of Duty 4. (More on that one later.) Another favorite was driving my Hummer into a village, hop out, let it roll into the middle, then shoot out its rather conveniently placed above-bumper-placed gas can and have the vehicle explode into a fiery ball, taking out half the soldiers. I did that twice.

But once it hits the “zero-g” segment, crikey. That entire stretch is a total momentum killer. (And to think I’d signed up a cover story just to reveal this segment; it would have been our June issue, I believe.) Poor controls, vague objectives, confusing and boring layouts. There’s even a stretch where you get to sit around for a few minutes waiting.

And once you emerge from this boring stretch, you’re hit with chaos. And not the good kind of chaos, like you get in a firefight. It’s the kind where you die and have no idea how or why. You also get stretches where your framerate dips into the single digits. You get boss fights that are comically bad. You get a horrible flying segment. You get… oh, forget it. It’s just terrible from start to finish. Some of the gameplay segments appear to be engine showcases more than good design decisions. (”Look, see? We can do that! Sign up our engine today!”)

Why doesn’t Crytek trust the brilliance of its core gameplay? This game could have been escalating military action from start to finish and been “Game of the Year” material. Instead, it’s just another shooter too obsessed with throwing “new stuff” at the player every hour.

Clearly, this game was ahead of its time.

I hate Spring Mario.

There, I said it. I hate something about Super Mario Galaxy.

If I posted this on a forum, I’d be flamed. My opinions on gaming would no longer have any validity. I’d probably be called an anti-Semite racist for good measure too.

It’s amazing how much of a free pass people give Nintendo, especially a Mario game. If anyone else released this exact game, every review would be full of criticisms: Too little health, too much “try and die” gameplay, too linear, etc. Instead, it’s mostly, “Best Game Ever Made!”

Let’s use one example. You have three health, with an occasional red mushroom that doubles it. (These are usually found before a boss battle.) To offset the decrease in health, Galaxy has occasional save points within a galaxy, and there are plenty of ways to get an extra life. (By the end of any session, I’ll typically have twenty or more… of course they reset back to five every time you reload. Bah.)

But let’s say another game does this, say something with space marines or a dude with a gun. People would be screaming that repeatedly killing off the player isn’t gameplay or game design, it’s sadism. Why isn’t it more next-gen? What about letting the player save anywhere? Where’s the open-endedness? Why is there no player choice? Where’s the branching narrative?

None of these are particularly great criticisms of Super Mario Galaxy, but no one would dare raise any of these kinds of issues for a couple of reasons. One is that it’s never had these features. Of course it never was in 3D until Mario 64, so I’m not sure why we don’t expect it to evolve more with the times. Super Mario Galaxy isn’t exactly a re-imagining of the franchise for the Wii—it’s merely a better version of Super Mario Sunshine—but no one would accuse Nintendo of resting on its laurels, of not challenging its players, of not pushing gaming forward.

You don’t dare criticize a big Nintendo game. You would receive so much hate, threats, people saying you hate gaming (and possibly Jesus), and attacks on your overall credibility for daring to offer (possibly legitimate) criticism.

Like Spring Mario. I fucking hate Spring Mario. Yeah, a spring wrapped around Mario. It’s cute. But who thought it was a good idea to take the best thing about a Mario game—running! jumping!—and throwing it out to make the movement horrible, and the jumping even more horrible? And why would you build entire levels around horrible movement and jumping?

So can you love Super Mario Galaxy and hate Spring Mario? Probably not. Clearly I hate gaming. And freedom. The terrorists have won.

What the hell? I suddenly find myself with all three consoles right now. It’s the first time I’ve had every console since, uh, the Atari 2600.

So, here’s what I’ve been playing:

Wii: Super Mario Galaxy. Yeah, it comes out on Tuesday. but I got it Thursday because a co-worker’s wife works at Nintendo. I’m as skeptical as anyone about everything from Nintendo being god’s gift to gaming, but it’s pretty damn terrific despite the fact it’s way easy. (Though not quite as easy as Super Paper Mario.)

It’s probably the most 3D game ever made, even more than Descent. It’s constantly shifting perspectives, flipping the world, fucking with gravity. If you have problems navigating in 3D space, you’re screwed. But for those who can manage, it’s crazy good.

Xbox 360: Conan. I have reasons for playing this beyond fun, but after a fairly weak start, it’s sort of growing on me. It’s a total B-game; the graphics sorta blow, it’s overly linear, and it’s just a God of War clone. But the combat is oddly satisfying and over-the-top violent, with decapitations, arm chopping, stabbing, flipping, etc. There’s topless girls you need to save, and after you release them, they present themselves… it’s very 15-years old.

PlayStation 3: Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction. I haven’t played this that much yet, but whoa… it’s gorgeous. I missed this series on the PS2, but so far so good.

I also downloaded some demos (currently downloading the one for Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune). Heavenly Sword is gorgeously vapid, and Ninja Gaiden Sigma is… well, it’s Ninja Gaiden for the Xbox, only prettier. MLB 2K7 for the PS3 has the most retarded hitting scheme using the Sixaxis; you “push” the controller forward to hit. Thank god it can be disabled.

Of course I’ve also been playing some PC games. Hellgate: London, for example. It’s a bit of a mess (the interface, yikes), but I haven’t experienced a single crash so I can’t totally get my hate all over it. (I know everyone else is having all sorts of problems; guess I have the magic compatible machine.) It’s just full of loot-y, randomized goodness.

I also picked up Gears of War for Windows. I didn’t care much for it on the 360, so I figured I’d give the PC version a go. I set up Live for Windows, though I haven’t seen PC achievements appear on my 360 gamecard. (Anyone know if they’re supposed to appear there?)

I’ll be picking up Call of Duty 4 soon (though I may just borrow someone else’s 360 version to blast through the single player, since I have little interest in multiplayer), and I’m somewhat interested in The Witcher.

But it’s Crysis that’s got me all hot and bothered. If you haven’t tried that demo, it’s absolutely killer. It’s basically a remake of FarCry with dudes in powersuits and with less sucking (the last third of that game.) Yeah, it’s gorgeous, but it’s all about the open-ended gameplay, tons of amusing ways to kill people, and a physics engine to die for. Every time you say, “I wonder if I can do that?”, you try it and find out you can. It’s my most anticipated game of the year right now.

I never update my blog because I’m lazy.

I have, however, been playing some games in the last few weeks. After Bioshock, I mucked around with Medal of Honor: Airborne, but put it aside after an hour or so. I find it exhausting to play for some reason.

In the last couple of weeks (or days), I blasted through the single-player Halo 3 and both solo parts of The Orange Box on the PC. (I also joined GameFly so I can play more 360 games without actually buying them. And I’ll be getting a PlayStation 3 in a few weeks… a free one, in fact. Yay for “buyer rewards” on the credit card I used to use for all of my work expenses.)

If only judged as a single-player game, Halo 3 is the most overrated game of the year. (more…)

Ohmygoodness, what an original headline!

Like everyone else in gamelandville, I’ve played through Bioshock. And it’s good. Very good. “Game of the Year” good. It’ll probably lose out to that “Halo” thing or Rock Band, but in the case of the latter, comparing it to a game with its own custom controller isn’t fair. If Bioshock came with its own $200 “Big Daddy” helmet interface, it’d be a 1-to-1 comparison. (It’ll be interesting to see how Halo 3 feels after blasting through Rapture. Consider the bar raised. A lot.)

But I’m not just here to praise Bioshock and admit my crazy man-crush on Ken Levine. I’m here to rip it to shreds. So, without further ado, I’ll break this down Adrenaline Vault-style, with individual ratings. Because that’s how I roll. (I’m fairly certain there are no spoilers here.) (more…)

That’s some crazy insight, no? Of course Windows is critical to the future of PC gaming. Duh. Major, major duh.

But I’m not talking about Microsoft Windows; I’m talking about playing games in a window.

Consider your lifestyle, or at least that of everyone around you. We’re all multitasking whenever possible. We’re sitting at our computers—or have them on our laps—while watching TV or a DVD. We’re reading or working on public transportation. We’re talking on phones while we drive… or waiting in line, or walking down the street, or cooking, or… doing other things. There isn’t enough time in the day to do everything we want, so we optimize our time and tasks to group as many things as possible together. We feel like we’re wasting time doing one, single, linear task.

(Is this why people see fewer movies? Would people go more frequently if they could IM friends while watching? God help us if that ever happened.)

Let’s consider PC gaming. Most games require 100% of your attention, all the time. That’s fine and dandy—and how it should be for many games—but they also occupy 100% of your screen real estate. And this absolutely flies in the face of most people’s typical PC usage. We run multiple applications in multiple windows, constantly switching between them. It can be as simple as working on a document in Word or Excel and having a browser open for quick Google searches. Or maybe you’re doing some file copying in the background, or listening to music via iTunes, or torrenting your favorite episodes of Star Trek. We gotta use all of those cores on our Core 2 Duos, right? (more…)