F.3.A.R Review

When I think of the all time greatest first person shooters my mind trails back to 007 Golden Eye on the Nintendo 64. Likewise if I think of my favourite horror games I’m drawn towards the likes of Resident Evil or Silent Hill. Now if I was to merge these two great genres into one game I would come up with a little something like F.E.A.R. Fast forward 2 sequels and we wind up with Day 1 Studio's thrilling F.3.A.R.

While not as polished as say, a Modern Warfare or as creepy as Eternal Darkness, F.3.A.R essentially blends the two genres into one meshing moulding hump of unnerving, dark action-packed madness. You are Point Man, who has been captured and is then rescued by your brother, Paxton Fettel. Yes you, the protagonist of the first game in the series, are rescued by the antagonist of the same game. You then are off to find Alma so you can finish your original mission. If a newcomer came to the series you can bet that they would be confused right off the bat. There is no explanation for anything, you simply just dive into the unknown, and frankly, confusing story.

The game play is where the real deal is at however, with F.3.A.R delivering in spades. The cover system, while implemented in earlier games these past years, is a great mechanic which is used well throughout the game. Whether your hiding from a mech or in a dog fight with seven other guys, you really feel as if you are battling for dear life and the only thing protecting you from death is the crate from which you hide. Of course this is due to the great AI who, unlike in other games in the same genre, move to a better vantage point or change tact completely depending on how you choose to attack, adding a sense of realism to a somewhat stagnant formula.

How you play a first person shooter is ingrained on any gamer familiar with the genre, it is a proven control scheme. F.3.A.R does itself no harm in this department, creating clean crisp controls which we have become so accustomed to love. From looking down the scope with the left trigger to blasting the bullets into the skulls of enemies with the right, it feels almost natural now. While there isn't much innovation in the way you use F.3.A.R, there isn't much wrong with it either mind you.

Lighting is definitely a mammoth aspect which must be treated with utmost care by developers, especially when dealing with a horror themed game. The common terror of not being able to see what could hunt you from the dark is a feeling which many people (including me) can relate to. In the scenes when the effect is needed, F.3.A.R is superb, forcing you to use your flash light to see only a meter ahead. The implementation of this however is limited, and could have been used more.

Visually F.3.A.R is stunning, brimming with detail and awesome scenes which make you froth at the mouth. Whether it be escaping from an exploding prison or jumping aboard a leaving helicopter, the quality of the cut scenes will leave you astounded. They are let down, however by the text which connects each interval, explaining what has been happening, effectively destroying any immersion the player had in the game.

No horror, nay no game can ever be complete without a sound score that compliments the scenery. F.3.A.R's soundtrack succeeds in it's attempt to instil a sense of engrossing environment. From being bombarded with soldier after soldier to stalking through a deserted mall, you can guarantee a fitting piece of music will be playing. succeeding in raising even the smallest moment into either an adrenalin fuelled raucous of mayhem or even a creepy crawl through the shadows. Add in the soldiers conversations before you show yourself or during the stand off and I dare say that without the score, the F.3.A.R experience would not be the same.

Included in F.3.A.R is the ability to play the campaign in a co-op environment, either by online of off-line. This feature, added in with the superb multi player modes, such as survivals or death matches, proves the point that this was the real focus for F.3.A.R. Multi-player is head and shoulders above the single player campaign, which is disappointing or exciting dependant on what you are looking for.

While yes, I must admit I have praised F.3.A.R quite a bit, it does come with it's downsides. The story is near impossible to follow for a newcomer to the series, requiring them to have at least played a previous game in full to understand. The frights, while there, are too few and far between and it is hard to call this a horror/first person shooter for this reason. It seems as though the developers took maybe too much of a leaf out of call of duty's handbook.

If you are looking for an immersion, fear fuelled shooter, I would suggest holding onto your money. If, however you are looking for a solid shooter, with horror elements that holds it's own as a stand alone multi player game I highly recommend buying F.3.A.R. While the single player campaign is short and underdone, the multi player will have you playing for hours on end.

Story: 5

Gameplay: 8

Visuals: 8

Sound: 8

Multiplayer: 9

Overall: 7/10

final fantasy part 1

Finally I have put part one of my final fantasy let's play up on YouTube . check it out at my channel . mrtokidok1

[Posted with iBlogger from my iPhone]

final fantasy part 1

Finally I have put part one of my final fantasy let's play up on YouTube . check it out at my channel . mrtokidok1

[Posted with iBlogger from my iPhone]

Multiplayer Overload

Multi Player Overload

Video games are a source of entertainment, whether for the single player adventurer or the allure of multi player mayhem. Both types of gaming can be enjoyed by all, when implemented truly. Since the inception of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, and the exceedingly popular online gaming platform it seems as though we are being force-fed games which are half finished, all in the name of cash. This unfortunate occurrence has sent the general mainstream video game industries into a state of desperation that I can only call a syndrome of, and forgive my use of cliché here, “Jack of all trades, master of none”.

Now it seems every game being released is given the post-production overhaul of features, which in my humble opinion is detrimental to both the game quality and the company's reputation. As a gamer it feels like being baited with a bottle full of promises only to have it crash down upon my skull. To slap on modes of play which feel as if they were never intended in the first place is what can only be described as lazy development at it's worst. A prime factor in this movement has been the rise to power of the Call of Duty series, primarily off the back of the immensely popular online multi player. The cash rolled in for the franchise and other developers took notice, now it seems almost every game must have a multi player of some sort.

I'm not against multi player in any way, I love sharing the experience of the game I loved with another. The point I am trying to make is it now seems like for every game it has become a necessity to add, regardless of the quality of it. Evidence can be found in this years release of games, almost all of which are sequels, which now have multi player implemented, when it wasn't before. It is painstakingly obvious in some games that multi player is hacked on just as a selling point, as if no one will play the game unless it has online functionality. My SNES didn't have online functions but I sure as hell enjoyed playing “Donkey Kong Country” for hours on end. Why is multi player such a necessity these days to sell a game?

We can look on the other side of the coin at the newly released F.3.A.R, a horror/first person shooter for those who do not know. This game series has had strong single player campaigns backed up by strong multi player capabilities, until this edition. Let me explain, the single player adventure is a “whopping” three to four hours long, yes you did read correctly. This begs the question of why did they even bother adding a half-assed single player if all they were going to do is focus on the online multi player aspect. Frankly I don't find my COD copy death matches frightening, even in a horror/fps.

On some rare occurrences both multi player and single player modes have meshed beautifully, forming the games which people speak of as the games of the system. These rare wonders include Super Mario Bros. Wii and..... By gosh I genuinely can not think of any modern day games which the single player campaign is just as strong as the multi player. It seems that unless focus is zoned in on one mode, we are left with ugly half breeds which should not be shown the beauty of daylight.

While yes I do understand a need for some games to implement online functionality and multi player, I would much rather it add to the experience. In the current climate all the developers are doing is adding the features for show, effectively dragging a great single player game down to an average multi player game or vice-versa. Developers releasing half finished projects only confirms the slippery slope our community is following from once proud creators of quality, not quantity.

Let's Play Final Fantasy Series update

Well suffice to say I'm not the roleplaying expert I thought I was as before the second boss fight I have effectively gotten lost at least four times. I'm in a situation where I am certain I will die which is no good, no good at all Scherbatsky. Anyway a visual representation should be in the mix as my footage is really building up, gaining more and more kilobits of dust every day. Well that's my wisdom for today. Have fun Shalaylays.

[Posted with iBlogger from my iPhone]

EA Pimp Slapped Me

Well being asked to write about digital distribution got my heart racing all fast-like. See I'm new to the scene and so far I must say that I'm vastly impressed with the amount that Steam offers for so little. I'm not impressed, however, with EA's addition into this growing commodity that threatens to destroy brick and mortar retailers.

Origin.

The name even makes me want to vomit my insides out onto the wall of the money whores like EB Games. What is the point of having games on the digital distribution program at the same price as the disc version? Never mind the fact that there are new release games on Steam (which is already established in it's own right) for at least two thirds of the price. That's not accounting for the various sales held daily which, in some cases, slashes games by up to 80% or more!

What possible reason could they have other than attempting to cheat the gamers out of their hard earned cash. While finding the time to simultaneously dishing out a cold, wet slap from their pimp hand directly to the intelligence of every sane-minded gamer around.

Retailers traditionally take their cut of the price before giving any profits to the developers, the digital distribution completely eradicates that problem, which is good for developers and consumers alike. There is no real reason as to why they EA charge what they do, nor why they think they can get away with it. Going so far as to now completely stop Steam from releasing Battlefield 3 in order for them to be the only ones who profit from the venture. This has subsequently created a swift reaction from their Steam community going so far as to boycott the game until a Steam release.

Steam ushered me into the cinema of digital distribution, offering me my popcorn, Skittles and a large Solo. Even puffing the cushion on my seat for extra comfort. EA however yanked me in, raped my consumerist values and sat me down on a bed of nails.

The future is digital distribution, there is no denying the advantages which are associated with it for both company and consumer. That is, as long as Steam are involved and EA and it's Origin are not.

Are We Losing Originality In Our Games?

Over the past 30 years we have been treated to some of the greatest stories known to man. Ranging from time travellers saving the very fabric of time itself, down to a fat plumber who is saving his princess. How he actually caught her in the first place is questionable though. What made each memorable story of the past stand out? It had it's own originality, either in the actual narrative or the mechanics of the actual game itself. Yes we have had talented writers and developers over the years, and even to this day we still do if we take a quick glimpse at the indie scene. Why then are games either being rehashed for full price or franchises being run into the ground with sequels and trilogy's that really aren't needed.

Take Bungee's immensely popular “Halo” series on the Xbox/360/PC for instance. The original game was built up to be one of the most influential and commercial hits of the past 10 years. Lauded world wide for its innovation, the series is now a staple for Microsoft and a major weapon in the console wars. This is evident with the franchise now having a new trilogy announced at the latest E3. Not a new game in the series though, oh no, a trilogy as well as a high-definition remake of the original. Surely this is going a bit far, truly this is the definition of running a series into the ground for the blood-money of millions. Oh and just so you know, Bungee have left the series and palmed off this new trilogy to the lesser known “343 Industries”.

It seems like any game which does well commercially is going to have a sequel, which is understandable. What really irks me though is the lack of creativity from many mainstream publishing studios. Many of the games which are on the radar for this year are sequels such as Battlefield 3, Modern Warfare 3, Assassins Creed: Revelations, you get the point. Each of these series rightly deserves these sequels, don't get me wrong, but why can't the developers take a chance?

The only reason many of these series even have sequels is because they took a chance on a previously unknown game idea. While not a direct comparison if we take a gander at the Apple store we can see millions of games, some bad yet some bursting with creativity. Would it be that much of an ask for the corporations to give these indie developers a platform from which to metaphorically spread their wings from? Apple have done it and I'm sure they would never look back upon that chance.

I can name many a series which should have ended at the first or second game, but were rehashed until they were effectively put into the category of “for fans only”. It is these games where the studios are wasting their time, talent and resources in creating, simply relying on the game name to sell. With so many talented writers and developers around the tools for creation must be unleashed upon the world. If this is done and corporations and even smaller companies take notice of the results, the gaming community as a whole can and will benefit. This will create more opportunities and this will create much higher quality games in general.

The Witcher - First Impressions

First things first, I was looking forward to The Witcher. I really was, honest! I even made a promise of a review on my blog for it. I went out to JB Hi-Fi, I took my eftpos card out of the wallet, swiped my life away and specially bought the enhanced edition. I was excited, I couldn't wait to get home and play this game which I'd heard nothing but rave reviews about. Sadly I was wrong, oh so very wrong. So wrong in fact that I can't give a review, I can only give a “First Impressions” that in no way took the full game into context, but only the first 5-6 hours.

Why you say? Oh why can't you give a review didn't you at least play the game?

To that I say codswallop, to truthfully review a game you must have at least played most of the game and as I said before, I couldn't bare forcing my way through this one. I tried to like this ghost of a game, oh I wanted so badly to like it, but this game filled me with rage. There, I have said it, this role playing game (my favourite game genre might I add) has stand out problems that made, no, implored me rage quit like a 13 year old COD enthusiast contradictorily swearing for fair play.

What problems could this game IGN gave an 8.3 have?

Let's see, my computers specs completely outweigh the recommendation for highest quality, yet it still has massive frame rate drops at the cut scenes. By massive I mean gargantuan, I felt like I was watching a storyboard of what the action was supposed to look like. Never mind the amount of tinkering it took to get to the “smooth” choppiness at its lowest quality. While you may be able to forgive the game for these flaws after you have it going the utter disgust I had when, in the background of talking NPC's, I saw another NPC doing a little chopped up jig, in the background of the whole screen.

The sound gave The Witcher some brownie points, with voice acting to be of a generally high standard. It was something I could put up with and not overtly boring for the most part, but why must my character speak so monotonously even during a castle siege. It begs the question of did they even check these opening scenes for quality? Or did they just rush it out the door for a quick buck?

While i'm not completely against tutorials and the such in games, surely it's going a bit far when using the menu becomes too confusing. Early on in the game I decided not to use the alchemy as the amount of reading needed for each and every thing was beyond a joke. Yes RPG's have a lot of reading and memorising but for the tutorial stage to go on for almost an hour is a a bit too far.

While the combat system is a bright spot for the game, with the player having to time each click in order to create combos, or the use of magic in the game with the right click. Compounded upon the need to change fighting style for each enemy as well as pause the game to search the inventory for alchemy such as healing potions or buffs.......Wow I just filled up a whole paragraph by lightly describing the battle system. Whoever said a simple battle system was bad?

The story seemed to move on after you had finished quests, which had nothing to do with the story. In fact its quest system is close to another extremely popular game which is built upon quests with no real point, although that game is built upon social bonds, of which The Witcher, being a single player off-line game, has none.. Oh WOW, you know the name of that world wide phenomenon eludes me at this point in time, no matter on with my conclusion to the scathing.

I must admit that although I have hated my time with The Witcher, I will more than likely attempt to play it again, hopefully with more excitement and less anticipation. The fact that I have played it though, means that I expect a lot less than right now. I will now give a disclaimer to say that I have played six hours of the game, the narrative never grabbed me, the gameplay confused me, the sound bored me and the graphics effectively made me rage quit. This was my experience, and first impressions of a game I bought, it is not a troll, nor biased.

What games have you bought that made you rage quit?

When is Piracy Acceptable

Piracy is an age old debate in the gaming universe, with legions of people condemning the practice and swarms of others recommending the action. When one commits to learning about each side of the argument, topics such as overpriced games or support the developers come into the fray. But surely there is a safe zone in the battlefield that would be a point of truce, or maybe even a temporary cease-fire of onslaughts. I believe our saviour is the Emulation scene.

How much time must be given before piracy is acceptable though? Now I'm not talking about downloading the latest Call Of Duty or Resident Evil edition. Certainly not. These games are still running their retail life-cycle, but games which have ceased production, games like “Joe & Mac” and “The Lost Vikings” for the SNES. Even all the way up to the PSX/N64 era with classics like Conkers Bad Fur Day. These games which are next to impossible to come across, let alone find a good condition console to play them on. I remember spending my pre-teen years playing some of these games and even now yearning to play them again almost as much as I want to play say, “The Witcher 2” etc.

Due to the lack of demand and inaccessibility put forward by progress, these games are not stocked in retail outlets any more and you can forget about renting them in that case. As the supply and demand rule of thumb, the rarer the item, the more it costs. Which is understandable, however I do not want to have to buy a collectors edition of a game 20 years old worth say $60 just for the re-experience. If, like many of the younger generation, I had never played the game before I'm even less likely to pay for it, which is a shame. Many classic, ground breaking games may lose their shine and become forgotten in years to come due to these very limitations.

On the flip side the ease and access of the Emulator scene is growing in leaps and bounds, with talented developers taking time out of their life to create freeware programs which run these earlier games. This hobby makes it possible for a new gamer to experience games like, as an example, The Legend of Zelda or any of the Final Fantasy's, broadening their gaming expertise.

The downside to these great advancements is, unfortunately, that it is illegal to have the game files on your computer after 24 hours unless you already own a retail version of the game. Past the 24 hour mark you are considered a pirate, just the same as average Joe who modded their PS3 and downloaded Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3.

The fact of the matter is that after the retail cycle of a game has run its course, or at least the console it was on, the limitations of accessibility to these games must be lifted for others gain the experience frequently talked about in online forums for themselves. At this point in time if I download my all time favourite (as a child) game “ The Lost Vikings” for the SNES, which isn't available, I would be considered a pirate and treated as such by the authorities.

If there are no means of accessing these games and companies aren't trying to re-release them, I don't see why we shouldn't be allowed to download and play the classics for free.

Assassins Creed Brotherhood Review

Assassins Creed : Brotherhood

The success of a franchise is dependant on the amount of improvement shown for each new addition. If there is no improvement there can be no immersion, basically the franchise or series will fail. Allowing oneself to fall into the world of Ubisoft Montreal's Assassins Creed Brotherhood can be compared to waking up in the morning for work. You can't not do it, and believe me you don't want to sleep through this Renaissance classic.

You revisit the role of Ezio Auditore da Firenze, dashing to women, deadly to any who cross his path, picking up right where Assassins Creed 2 finished. You find Ezio under covers, no seriously he is in bed with another woman. Sadly life decides to throw a curve ball at Ezio, one thing leads to another and suddenly he is taking revenge on the rulers of Rome and the whole corruption of Catholic church. The Templars versus Assassins template is still in the background, but the forefront of evil is shown in the persona of the Borja army and its leader , Cesare Borja. While the story is not as strong as Assassins Creed 2, it's written well enough to keep you ploughing through the missions like butter.

Assassins Creed's gameplay is overhauled with each addition to the series, Brotherhood proudly flying the flag above it's predecessors. Ezio seems to be gaining agility with age as he completes feats which would be deemed impossible by any normal standard. Free running from building to building over the rooftops has been made to feel even more flowing as you move swiftly around Rome with ease. Cutting down enemies fast is clearly now the focus of the series, unlike in previous instalments which required you to counter at the right time for a kill. Now you are given the tools to mow down large groups of enemies quicker than a poloticians twist of tongue. The developers have even gone so far as to let you build your own assassin army, comprising of citizens that you liberate from the Borja reign. You can then send the recruits out to various missions, or keep around, to dispatch of unwanted attention. Of course the number of assassins available for use depend on your influence on the city. Much like Grand Theft Auto San Andreas you raise your reputation by taking out enemy strongholds, Assassins Creed Brotherhood's version being the many Borja towers spread through the vicinity.

Graphics have been upgraded ever so slightly on the last game, now showing the aging Ezio with every wrinkle and grey hair standing out from the rest. The scenery is beautifully perfected, from the bricks and pavement of Rome to the outlying farming regions. Rome itself will grow from a decrepit city to a flourishing populous if certain requirements are met by the player. It is clear that much work has gone into the creation of such a visually stunning world in which the player can fully interact with. It is a pleasure to stand atop one of the towers and look out upon the skyline in all in all it's glory, or to ride through the farming communities surrounding the populous.

Completely engrossing the player into the Renaissance period is complete in Brotherhood. Each character is voiced superbly from the main characters doen to the most miniscule citzen. Ezio Auditore da Firenze comes alive with his suave persona being conveyed just as well, if not better, than the previous installment. Even the less important sounds such as the pedestrians walking around the city and its outlying regions are given the full treatment through to the very small one liner parts. It's hard not to immerse yourself in Ezio's quest for revenge when it feels so alive.

If killing the CPU is starting to bore your assassin nerves Ubisoft have the perfect solution for you. New to the series is an online multiplayer option which allows the player the opportunity to act out their murderous desires in games of cat and mouse. it is Implemented well, as you are given a target to assassinate, while simultaneously being targetted by another player. You are given the chance to break the chase using objects such as massive gates which actually are very effective. For the thrill seekers however you are still able to free run the rooftops to find your escape.

Ubisoft Mobtreal have made it a habit to improve their mechanics with each release. This principle is especially true with Assassins Creed Brotherhood, it is an improvement on essentially every aspect, save for maybe the narrative, and is especially enjoyable. The sounds, however well enacted, tend to wear thin nearing the end game through the limited in-game script, although do not detract from the experience. The facial effects tend to be overshadowed only by games such as Rockstars very recent LA Noire, which is nothing to detract from the total playing experience.

With the quality of game Ubisoft Montreal have churned out of the factory lately, expectations are high for the new installment, Assassin's Creed: Revelations. If you are an avid follower of the historically epic series Assassin's Creed, this game is a must have. If you tend to play games casually, Assassin's Creed Brotherhood creates quite a case for itself to slide it's way into your personal collection. Either way this game is a must play for anyone and stands on it's own as much as a singular game in addition to Ubisofts epic adventure series.

Score:

Story: 8
Gameplay:9
Visual:8
Audio: 8
Multiplayer: 7
Overall: 8/10

[Posted with iBlogger from my iPhone]