Picking a Side

Ice T is your God.


You may remember a while ago I posted up a piece about tutorials in multiplayer and easing the player into the online portion of a game. Check it out.

Modern Warfare 2 has landed and the first time you play multiplayer it is totally brutal. There is no easing in or tutorial and it is hard and frustrating. The game came out on a Tuesday and thanks to a retailer sending it out early, I had it on Friday. I jumped into the online a few days before the game came out and I was already getting *destroyed*.

In the first Modern Warfare I would consistently place in the top three players on my team and was fairly happy with my performance. When I played MW2 I was always near the bottom until I hit level 4 and then I jumped right to the top again because I unlocked a gun that was usable. For the first hour and a half of playing I was angry and frustrated. I felt gimped by the default classes and as soon as I unlocked the M4 I felt liberated and I could play the game and compete.

The first four levels in multiplayer do not allow you to compete, they are there to show you all the cool stuff you can unlock. They are frustrating and painful but you play and get through them because every kill you happen to make is something to savour and cherish.

MW2 is an amazing game top to bottom and the shooting and moving is so well honed that even though xxxSepiroth69xxx keeps no scoping you, the game is still fun.

It is a brave move to make the barrier to entry for the multiplayer so high in a game aimed at such a mass market crowd but it works. They won't get 100% people enjoying both the single and multiplayer portions of the game becasue of the skill level but their multiplayer player base will grow substantially because despite being hard, it is rewarding.

In other Ice T related news, Borderlands is excellent and is the epitome of a social coop experience. In coop the game doesn't scale until you get four players and so me and Phil have been tooling around and thoroughly enjoying playing a game together and just chilling out. The quests are typical for an RPG and it is the complete opposite of MW2. There are no set pieces or brisk pacing in Borderlands, it is all about grinding through quests at your own pace and enjoying the loot system. It is rare to see a game as focused as Borderlands and it is all the better fot it.

I also have a total crush on the Siren. DON'T JUDGE ME.

Other business:

• I'm on Twitter now, www.twitter.com/chopemon
• Rogue Warrior hits the shelves at the end of the month and people were really enjoying it at the Eurogamer Expo.
• I'm going to be a company shill and evangelise the multiplayer in Alien vs. Predator. I can talk about it as it has been showed to the public. It is super tense and exciting and the species based game modes are amazing. Look for it in February.
• Rachel has just posted a small Tekken 6 review which blew me away when I read it. Check it here.
• A colleague of mine writes a very funny blog (he is a very funny man) and you should hit it up here.
• One last thing before I hit the 360, A bunch of us recently went to see MC Lars and he is good peoples. He puts on a fantastic show and he is a super nice guy to hang out with. Here is a picture of us being all hyphy:

I'm Reloading, Cover Me.

Warning: this isn't the most reasoned post in the world and isn't a necessarily a well thought out argument. I hope it makes my point though.

I've just put the bow on the ODST campaign (Normal difficulty on solo) and I feel like I can wade into to all the nonsense surrounding the reviews that all the internauts are getting so worked up about.

In summary for those who have not followed the parade of insanity, Halo 3 ODST isn't a valid game/worth the cost because:

1. It is around 6 hours long.
2. It doesn't bring much new to the table.
3. The adversarial mode is just Halo 3.
4. Looks a little bit rough.
5. Some other nonsense.

Leaving reviews out of it for the moment, I want to go through the list and talk about why I hate videogame ragenauts on the internet.

It is around 6 hours long

So we're judging art (which games are) based on length are we? You know, the problem I’ve always had with the Mona Lisa is that it only takes me a couple of seconds to look at it. Maybe if someone were to pad it out with more space I might like it more. Or maybe blow it up way big so I can't just walk into a room and see it. Make it so I have to crane my neck and take a few steps back. Maybe you could make it so big that you have to put it on the side of a building and I have to go outside and on to the roof of another building. Basically anything that adds length to the experience as that will be better.

To be blunt, anyone that judges a piece of art based on its length is missing the point.

It might only be 6 hours but what if those 6 hours are the most potent hit you’ve ever taken? Are these people saying that if it was longer and full of filler they’d be happier? Length does not mean better. ODST weighs in at whatever length it takes you to finish it and when I played through it (without counting the hours) it felt like a nice neat package. Small but perfectly formed. Sure, I could have gone for some more but that’s because I could play Halo all day.

If you say that you are only going to play through it once and be done and you feel cheated by that, cool. You are missing out on the coop, the collectibles and the harder difficulties in a game that can happily stand multiple playthroughs but good for you. I know some people don’t play online or have friends but that’s not the game’s fault.

It doesn’t bring much new to the table

Anyone that sits on an internet forum postulating that every game has to innovate needs to look at other entertainment mediums. My integrity as a designer was once called into question by someone who said they feared for the industry because I argued that Call of Duty World at War was still a good game despite not innovating very much. For every game that innovates I am more than happy to have a truck load that don’t because I play a lot of games and sometimes I am super cool with just shooting stuff in the same way people watch episode after episode of the same TV show.

In ODST’s case it may not bring much new to the table but by God does it do things right. I’m going to do a study on the level and combat design of the game soon so I don’t want to spoil that but I will say that Bungie have really honed their craft. Over the years they have experimented and iterated on their combat sandbox and every combat zone in ODST is the best they’ve ever done. The placement of cover, lines of sight to enemies and pick up placement is some of the best to ever grace a videogame. If you don’t like Halo’s combat model then sure, you’re not going to like this but for people that do enjoy Halo, the combat here is some of the most thrilling and fun Bungie have ever done.

I doubt you will ever get the feeling of the Silent Cartographer again but get over it.

The adversarial mode is just Halo 3

Do you ever stop to think about whether something is fun rather than how you can dismiss it in the comments section?

The adversarial may be Halo 3 but it is all of Halo 3. All the DLC is included. If, like me, you have already paid for all the DLC Bungie have put out then you are re-buying stuff but think of it like this: as angry as you are now, think back to all the fun you’ve had over the last two years with it and how it was money well spent. I can’t really offer an amazing argument that will change your mind about re-buying the Halo 3 multiplayer but there are poverty stricken children around the world who would do anything to be in a position to whine about the hardship of having the option to buy a luxury entertainment item. Grow up and get over it.

Yes, I realize the irony.

Halo 3’s versus multiplayer is still awesome and is still the multiplayer destination of choice for a lot of people. Just because it isn’t new, doesn’t mean it detracts from the product.

It looks a little bit rough

Ok, you got me there. The visuals are a bit jaggy and the textures a bit blurry. That being said, I adore the lighting in this game. In places it is literally stunning. It really compliments the art direction of the game and there were times when I just stopped and looked at the vistas. Other times I was having fun actually playing the game and wringing my hands about the fact that it doesn’t do native 720p couldn’t have been further from my mind.

Some other nonsense

This is the bit that really bugs me.

Most internet commenter posters and forum members are close minded and are either trying to look cool online or judge and comment about a game they either haven’t played or that has irked them for some random reason. I have commented before about the bizarre mindset some gamers have where they treat every game as something that has to justify itself to them and if the game doesn’t meet some arbitrary standard they have set they deem it offensive and proceed to tell the world about it as if anyone cares.

Someone once told me that Rainbow Six Vegas 2 isn’t a sequel as it doesn’t use a new engine, it recycles some assets and doesn’t add a whole lot new to the franchise. This is like saying that Episodes 5 and 6 aren’t sequels as they both used cameras, the same actors and some of the same props as Episode 4.

In summary

I realize this isn’t the most reasoned post I have ever done and I’m sure I come off as the ODST Defense Force or whatever but I wish more people would realize that 99% of people buying games are not the people whining about the review score and that these fools didn’t garner so much discussion on podcasts, news sites and blog posts.

It annoys me that at the launch of an excellent game, the discussions I’m having with people are about the comments section in the Edge review rather than how awesome the first time you meet a pair of Hunters is. I was basically asked to defend the game by people that haven’t played it but are aware of the reviews and people’s feelings about said reviews.

I’m not saying the game is without flaws and I am not saying that people shouldn’t be discussing all aspects of the game but I wish all close mindedness and immaturity on display on the internet could suddenly become intelligent discussion. Look at the Dyack/Neogaf debacle where a highly intelligent and interesting developer managed to get dragged into avatar wars with forum trolls and that became a news story that overshadowed the games launch.

We want to know why the ‘mainstream’ doesn’t discuss games intelligently. Perhaps it is because the fans of games can’t do it either. This is a quote from the comments section on the Edge review:

“As I haven't played the game, it's hard to comment accurately. But I must admit that my first response, after reading the text of the review, was absolute shock at the fact that the final score was a 9. The review read like a 7.”

Apparently commenting accurately about a game means debating which random number someone gave it.

Jesus wept.

The wine has worn off now and I don’t know if I have properly made my point so let me leave it at this: instead of judging games against random standards based on outdated preconceptions of what a game should offer for a certain price and how you are offended by stupid things like the time it takes someone that isn’t you to complete the game, how it doesn’t change the world and what number some dude wrote at the end of a block of text, judge a game based on how much fun you’ve had with it. And please stop acting so offended by it on internet forums. There’s a whole world out there to be really offended by and worked up about.

My Guerrillas, Let Me Show You Themz.

Like a futuristic sledgehammer to your minds my Red Faction Guerrilla review is up over at NTSC-UK.

I had a lot of fun with this game and can't wait to see what Volition do with the series.

As always the rest of my reviews can be hit up here.

I head to PAX next week so if you're lucky you may be getting daily posts. I am also going to endeavour to write a proper feature about it.

Bionic Assassin

My reviews for Bionic Commando and Velvet Assassin went up recently over at NTSC-UK.

As ever, writing with those guys was a great experience.

I also want to point you to the review we recently put up of Rainbow Six Vegas and the ensuing comments thread.

Many people questioned why a review of a (nearly) three year old game went up now and why it criticised the game so much. Pretty much everyone in thread disagreed with the text and score with one person saying that because because it goes into Metacritic we should be embarrassed about putting a review up that so many consider 'wrong'.

Rather than being considered an embarrassment, it should be considered a celebration. NTSC-UK publishes reviews that have something to say, no matter the game or the release date. When reading them I tend to look at reviews as a discussion between myself and the reviewer and that reading their critique I inform, enforce and explore my own feelings and views on the game.

I will go ahead and say that I disagree with many of the points in the R6V review but it is a fascinating read because the reviewer's view point is so opposed to my own. He came at the game from a totally different angle to me and that is super interesting to me.

When we are subjectively reviewing a subjective piece of art, can someone be wrong?

I would argue not.

Outbursts Revisited

The last blog was pretty angry. I have been having a few outbursts recently. There are many reasons why but I feel bad about not properly explaining the Red Faction and Prototype comments (I stand by everything I said about that news post).

Note, the post this refers to has since been removed. Professionalism and what not.

Creating a great game is incredibly hard. For a studio aiming to produce triple A content on a current gen platform there are incredible and massive barriers to overcome. You have to create tech that is up to and maybe above a certain standard, generate a huge amount of art, get the backing of a publisher, create a solid and/or innovative design and then hone the gameplay. That is before the natural problems of dealing with a team of 100+ humans arise.

Prototype and Red Faction Guerrilla are both fantastic games. Their core concepts are exceptionally well realised and are amazing experiences. Special mention must go to the tech in each games. Wow, just wow.

Anyway, my problem with both games is that the difficulty curve doesn't match the game progression. Both games have a number of quirks that are incredibly unfair in certain situations and I specifically want to talk about Prototype in this regard.


For all their victories, videogames have never solved the super hero problem well. In a traditional videogame that has all of the trappings of a videogame (specifically a health bar in this case), super heroes often cause ludonarrative dissonance. How can Wolverine die? Why is Superman taking damage from things that aren't kryptonite?

Prototype runs into this problem as you play a character that is basically a god. He may not have the ability to create matter (maybe I didn't unlock that) but he outclasses every other character in the game. He has an overwhelming amount of powers and many of these dramatically change the game.

As a designer you are faced with a problem. How do you kill a god?

In this case they chose a high level answer and a low level answer.

For the high level they created an engine that can handle Godzilla. That is to say that at any time the screen can be full of fleeing civilian AI, military infantry and vehicle AI, zombie horde AI and monster AI all interacting. It is total chaos and it looks stunning. For the player it means there's probably one hundred things all trying to kill you at once. Therein lies a massive player weakness; chaos. Sometimes you just get overwhelmed, can't crowd control, get pinned and beaten to a pulp. It is frustrating but one of the few ways the designers can actually get you killed.

The low level solution (by which I mean discreet values or mechanics) is that in certain animations during which you have no control, you can be hit and killed. When hijacking a vehicle or consuming something for health you can be hit and knocked out of said animation. You can choose to enter into the animation but due to the zoomed in camera during the lengthy animations you cannot see what is going on and can be hit by the Hunters (which are really annoying as they have very little group AI to stagger their attacks) or missiles or tank shells and lose all of your health. This is really frustrating and eventually forced me to give up on the game.

Prototype is a great game and there is a lot of fun to be had but I am done with difficulty spikes and dying through no fault of my own.

I must reiterate though, Prototype is a great game.

On the subject of writing about games (last post), I want to link you to four of my favourite pieces of writing about games.

Ex GFW editor Sean Molloy talking about personal gaming.

Tim Rogers talking about Super Mario Bros. 3 as a memoir (read all 7 pages or die).

A review of Dead Space by Tim Rogers (I adore Dead Space BTW).

Leigh Alexander talking about the completely misguided Silent Hill Homecoming reviews.

I have also been wanting to pimp MC Lars for a while but haven't found a reason so whatever, here it is. He is one of my favourite rappers and it has been a joy to watch him grow as an artist. His new album is thoroughly excellent and it worth buying the physical CD for the emotional liner notes that catches you completely off guard. So here's a video (it's about videogames y'all).

The Good Nazi Zombie is a Dead Nazi Zombie

My review for the Nazi Zombie mode in Call of Duty World at War just went up over at NTSC-UK.

Check it here.

This was a great review to write because of all the fun I had playing it with S-Dog during our beer soaked evenings at his place. Discovering all the ins and outs of the game mode with his was one of the best gaming experiences ever. Props also go out to my brother who I have fended off the undead with online.

This review is a great example of the ethos of NTSC-UK's review system. I didn't really have anything I wanted to say about the full game of World at War but I have a lot to evangelise in the Nazi Zombie mode. Most sites would require me to cover the entire game but because NTSC-UK values quality over quantity I get to write about aspects of games that mean something to me. Check out Charles's review of Mirrors Edge to see another example of a writer focusing on a particular aspect of the game and producing a really strong review.

As always, the rest of my reviews are here.

I also want to tease a new feature I'll be posting up next week. Myself and Ben G are collaborating on a game design feature for this blog that will either be off the chain or a massive disaster. We'll see later next week.

I shall also be posting up some kind of brain fart about a slightly scientific way to place cover in your shooting games. It may lead to my Gamasutra piece, we'll see how it goes.

Far Cry 2 Review is Up

When not making or playing games, I sometimes write about games. At the moment I only write for NTSC-UK, a wondeful import gaming site full of intelligent people and great discussion. Recently I graduated from just being a forum member and into being a writer for them.

NTSC-UK is a little different from most review sites in that we don't get sent games to review (publishers don't like our pro import stance) and so we review games that we own and feel that we have something to say about. This is why I think the writing on there is so good, people aren't just reviewing any old bilge, these guys have something important to say.

The reviews sometimes aren't timely either for one reason or another. In this case, Far Cry 2 came out last October. My review only just went up as I only completed the game in January/February time and because NTSC-UK likes to give each review a refreshing amount of breathing space it took a while for it to get posted. Normally each review gets top billing for a week with full banner support before another review is posted and takes the banner spot.

This was an interesting review for me as my time with the game was pretty uneven. I spent the first six hours absolutely hating the game. At the six hour mark something just clicked and the next fourteen hours were absolutely wonderful and I fell in love with the game. I wanted to focus on this love and also to talk about the questions the game asks and the kind of metaphors it brings up. These aren't fully explored in this review as it was hard for me to articulate them and talk about the rest of the game in the word limit.

It was great fun to write and the writing staff at NTSC-UK are a great bunch to work with and have proved invaluable in my recent reviews. I have spent a number of years writing almost nothing but bullet pointed lists of rules for programmers and very brief reports for work so this kind of critical writing was hard to get back into but I was given excellent support from the guys.

The Far Cry 2 review can be hit up here, and the rest of my reviews are here. If you like reading about games in a way that isn't in the god awful Gamespot style, please browse through the rest of the site, there is some great content up there.