I've talked before about the downhill trend of the Need for Speed series. While there are usually some redeeming qualities about every new game that comes out (graphics being the pinnacle), there is something missing from the entire series... Oh, I know what it is; fun.
Ok, now the Hot Pursuit iterations of the games were not meant to be the most dynamic, in terms of controls, plot, or anything resembling a true racing game. What they are is Cops vs. Bad guys in an arcade racing throw-down. Which, I will admit, is pretty awesome (I still wish I had clutch control, however). The graphics in the most recent release are down-right jaw dropping, and really, watching some idiot hit a spike strip at 190mph still makes me giggle.
All that said, there is so much of this game that I absolutely cannot stand. For starters, I started the game, and because it was a rental, I had to sit through a three minute commercial for the next Need for Speed Shift. What. The. Fuck? I don't care, and I never will care. If I want a racing simulator (a good one), I'll buy the next Forza when it comes out (by the way, Forza 3 < Forza 2). Truly, I almost shut the game off and sent it back right then.
Moving on. The game then proceeded to talk to me for a good 5 more minutes to tell me about exciting features I will never use, and kept me from, oh, I don't know, actually playing the game? Stop telling me about this shit and let me play! If I was really all that interested in those extra features, I'm sure I can figure them out easily enough.
EA Online: still blows.
Not kidding.
And I'm not talking about having to pay in order to use it. Why? Because I use Xbox Live Gold. If I really had a problem with paying to play online, I'd probably never shut up about it. My issue with EA Online is the same problem I've had with EA Online since Underground 2; good luck finding a decent server connection cause, Lord knows, they can't use the Xbox Live networking backbone like everyone else.
Now, normally I'd have a whole rant in here about the lack of a garage, or open world driving, but, truth be told, that's not what the Hot Pursuit iterations are about. Neither are the Shift iterations. My problem with them is the utter lack of some kind of respect for the players out there who don't care about corporate greed and bullshit and simply want to play a game. I don't want to have to jump through all that crap just to drive an arcade game. The only times I'm interested in doing that is if there is a learning curve involved. Even then, a game like Midnight Club: LA managed to pull that off in spades.
What the hell EA?
It's a similar problem I see with a lot of games now. Where they get so bloated on corporate sponsors and celebrity voice acting, that they've become the videogame equivalent of the summer popcorn flick... only more irritating.
One final note. Part of me really wants to see another Need For Speed game that is, essentially, Most Wanted 2. Update the graphics, fiddle with the physics and damage, but give me the same gameplay. Make it a challenge to get back to your garage or hideout to escape the cops. Make me work for every upgrade and addition to my car. Provide an in-depth car customization system (including headlights, you bastards!), and a storyline that lasts longer than 6 hours. What I really want is Underground 2's customization (with the auto-sculpt feature added), Most Wanted's storyline and overall gameplay, and Shift's physics and damage engine.
Is that too much to ask?
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Rock Band 3... Not so much Rock as Band
I admit it. I'm a sucker for a good round of Guitar Hero or Rock Band. They are the kind of games that are challenging as a videogamer, interesting as a musician, and so damn entertaining as a music lover. Except those times when drunk roommates think they can sing "Painkiller" by Judas Priest, on expert, while drunk. My ears have just started the long road towards healing.
Anyway, the newest Rock Band offering is pretty decent fare. The controls are pretty standard by now (I haven't gotten my hands on the Pro guitar controller, yet. But I will... Oh yes, I *will*), and the customization options are all there. I still wish Harmonix would include a better in-game Guitar selection, but that's just me, really. Pretty much the same-old, same-old. Except for the keyboard. That little addition is nuts.
While adding in a keyboard, with a functioning octave on it, is pretty sweet. I do take issue with a by-product of its inclusion; one that makes me kind of wish I went with Guitar Hero: Warriors of Rock, instead.
You see, one of the biggest draws games like Rock Band and Guitar Hero have for me is a substantial playlist of music available. While I could go out and buy these songs and just listen to them, the video gamer in me loves tackling them in a game setting, with the music front and center. Needless to say, the type of music included in these games is a big draw for buying them. It's not the only draw, but a major one. I'm not really impressed with the included song selection for Rock Band 3. They seemed to lay heavily on songs that have either keyboard or piano parts, and by the end of the first playlist, I had already played through a dozen songs that I would never touch again (Smoke on the Water? Low Rider? Get Up, Stand Up? Everybody wants to Rule the World? Seriously?) While I may enjoy those songs some of the time, they are not what I would consider to be fodder for the average video gamer (Bonus point for adding "Before I Forget," though).
However, having the back-catalog of songs is definitely in Rock Band's favor. Plus the addition of the Pro Guitar and Pro Drum Kit controllers is another huge incentive. Even considering the somewhat lackluster song list for RB3, the Rock Band franchise blows Guitar Hero out of the water when it comes to song selection (Sorry, Red Octane, them's the breaks).
And don't get all defensive and claim I added those songs because I'm a whiny irritant who complains about songs being "too hard." Raining Blood kicks the shit out of me, and yet I keep popping in Guitar Hero 3 every so often, just to see if I've become good enough to beat it.
All that being said, the game was meant to be played socially. And as a song list for including as many people as possible into a game session, Rock Band 3 is very well equipped. I would also like to add that, while I may complain about the song list, the game is still awesome, despite my crappy controller deciding to randomly miss every forth note ("Plane-arium").
Now, my horrible complaining aside, the fact of the matter is that Rock Band 3 is awesome sauce in video game form for the rhythm game genre (I imagine it tastes like cinnamon apple sauce).
In the end, it really does come down to musical preference. Just because I think "Smoke on the Water" is the guitarist's version of chopsticks, and that Bob Marley and the Wailers were not geniuses, doesn't mean that other people can't disagree. That's one of the best things about music. However, if you happen to be drunk and want to try and match Mr. Halford's vocal range, I might take exception to that. Unless, of course, you are, in fact, Rob Halford. Then, by all means, belt away, man. Belt away! \m/
Anyway, the newest Rock Band offering is pretty decent fare. The controls are pretty standard by now (I haven't gotten my hands on the Pro guitar controller, yet. But I will... Oh yes, I *will*), and the customization options are all there. I still wish Harmonix would include a better in-game Guitar selection, but that's just me, really. Pretty much the same-old, same-old. Except for the keyboard. That little addition is nuts.
While adding in a keyboard, with a functioning octave on it, is pretty sweet. I do take issue with a by-product of its inclusion; one that makes me kind of wish I went with Guitar Hero: Warriors of Rock, instead.
You see, one of the biggest draws games like Rock Band and Guitar Hero have for me is a substantial playlist of music available. While I could go out and buy these songs and just listen to them, the video gamer in me loves tackling them in a game setting, with the music front and center. Needless to say, the type of music included in these games is a big draw for buying them. It's not the only draw, but a major one. I'm not really impressed with the included song selection for Rock Band 3. They seemed to lay heavily on songs that have either keyboard or piano parts, and by the end of the first playlist, I had already played through a dozen songs that I would never touch again (Smoke on the Water? Low Rider? Get Up, Stand Up? Everybody wants to Rule the World? Seriously?) While I may enjoy those songs some of the time, they are not what I would consider to be fodder for the average video gamer (Bonus point for adding "Before I Forget," though).
However, having the back-catalog of songs is definitely in Rock Band's favor. Plus the addition of the Pro Guitar and Pro Drum Kit controllers is another huge incentive. Even considering the somewhat lackluster song list for RB3, the Rock Band franchise blows Guitar Hero out of the water when it comes to song selection (Sorry, Red Octane, them's the breaks).
And don't get all defensive and claim I added those songs because I'm a whiny irritant who complains about songs being "too hard." Raining Blood kicks the shit out of me, and yet I keep popping in Guitar Hero 3 every so often, just to see if I've become good enough to beat it.
All that being said, the game was meant to be played socially. And as a song list for including as many people as possible into a game session, Rock Band 3 is very well equipped. I would also like to add that, while I may complain about the song list, the game is still awesome, despite my crappy controller deciding to randomly miss every forth note ("Plane-arium").
Now, my horrible complaining aside, the fact of the matter is that Rock Band 3 is awesome sauce in video game form for the rhythm game genre (I imagine it tastes like cinnamon apple sauce).
In the end, it really does come down to musical preference. Just because I think "Smoke on the Water" is the guitarist's version of chopsticks, and that Bob Marley and the Wailers were not geniuses, doesn't mean that other people can't disagree. That's one of the best things about music. However, if you happen to be drunk and want to try and match Mr. Halford's vocal range, I might take exception to that. Unless, of course, you are, in fact, Rob Halford. Then, by all means, belt away, man. Belt away! \m/
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Fable III; Oh, how you rock!
Yeah, the game is awesome, on so many levels it's so very hard to describe them all. Nor will I try to do so, as the attempt would probably give me altitude sickness. And that's not something I can easily live with (bah-dum-pish! ...nevermind).
Anyway, after the disappointment that was Fallout: New Vegas I was hoping for a game that was, oh, I don't know, polished? Complete? Lacking major bugs? All of the above? If there is one thing that Lionhead Studios learned from with Fable, it was to at least try to follow through with promises related to gameplay mechanics. After spending a large portion of time with Fable 3 over the last week, I can safely say that Peter Molyneux's crew have given us another well polished, entertaining game with loads of easter eggs, in-jokes, top-notch voice acting, and decent gameplay (I do have some issues with the game, but more on that later).
First off, I have long been a fan of British comedy (Monty Python rules!). It's an educated sense of humor that requires as much brain power, at times, as a critical thinking exercise. Granted, Monty Python and the like can be just as silly as anyone else, but it's an educated silliness (in stark contrast to, say, the Jackass movies). One of the aspects of the Fable games that I have adored the entire time is the very prevalent sense of humor the games have. Self-referential, self-deprecating, and utterly hilarious, Fable 3 is one of those games that I am willing to replay just for the jokes.
And the jokes are everywhere: flavor text, achievement descriptions, mission completion text, and all manner of places you wouldn't expect to find them. There's one point, when you're running through one particular mission, there's a running commentary that, as both a video gamer and a table-top RPGer, busts my gut over references to stuff that carries across the Pond for most gamers. It gives me hope that gamers everywhere go through the same things (and dealing with rule mongers is the same, no matter where you go).
The humor of the game is one of the best aspects of the game, but that doesn't mean that the game is completely silly, or lacks any kind of depth to the story. While the premise is fairly straightforward, for the first part of the game it plays just like any other Fable game. You run around, complete missions, beat the crap out of hobbes, balverines, and hollow men, and generally enjoy the experience. Once the first part ends, however, the challenge really ramps up.
Unfortunately, I'm may run a spoiler or two in this section, so if you don't want to have any of the game spoiled for you, I suggest skipping ahead a little. Basically, the well known portion of the game is straightforward, but Peter Molyneux really hits you with a curve ball once your character becomes the Monarch.
This incredibly dire situation is approaching, and you find out why your character's brother was doing the horrible things he was doing. Now, if you're like me, you probably went around and became a property magnate as soon as possible, so you don't really have any cash flow issues. However, once you realize that the amount of people in your kingdom you will save is based entirely on how much money you can raise, suddenly, that amassed wealth is nowhere near enough, and you find yourself torn (particularly if you're a "good" character). Do you become a ruthless tyrant to save as many people as possible? Or do you honor all of your promises and potentially sacrifice innocent lives in the coming storm? I found out very quickly that it's very tough for me, knowing what is coming, and still honoring the promises made earlier.
Granted, my evil characters won't face such moral dilemmas; namely because of the way that I play evil characters (Lawful Evil, in D&D parlance).
One of the best features added for this game is the ability to hold another character's hand and leading them (or, if you're evil, dragging them) around. I'm not sure what it is, but that small little addition makes situations seem that much more immersive. It becomes a little silly when you have to lead full-grown adults around like a little child, but, c'est la vie.
Another nice feature was an overall update on the graphics engine. It still uses the engine they created for Fable 2, but with a lot of improvements across the board. One of the nicest changes (it's a pet peeve of mine from Fable 2) is that your character's eyes seem to actually be linked together, rather than trying to look in two directions at once. Other improvements in the graphics include better lighting effects, and an overall better look to clothing and weaponry. This does come at the cost of some bottles and other "minor" objects being toned down to simpler models and textures, but it doesn't detract from the overall feel.
However, this boost comes with a cost. There is a noticeable lag in framerate and game speed, particularly when there are either a lot of characters on screen or you are doing a lot of action very quickly. By contrast, I never really saw that much slow-down in Fable 2. It's not enough to really detract from the gameplay, as it seems to register button presses during the slow-down, so you don't screw up on jobs or in combat.
There are a few drawbacks to combat. Namely the somewhat twitchy nature of the blocking and flourish mechanic, and the wonky camera work stand out as big issues for me. There are times where I would go to block, only to realize that the game was stuck on the idea of me doing a flourish. It rarely happened the other way around. And the camera problem exists in most 3rd person action RPGs, so it's just the nature of the beast.
There are some features that I'm not going to go in-depth about; the lack of a menu system (for the most part), the loss of a large portion of the RPG structure, and the somewhat short playtime. All of these are either non-issues (the lack of a menu system, in my mind, was implemented spectacularly), or are just the same-old-same-old (Fable games have never been the longest RPGs out there).
Simply put, Fable 3 is the best of the trilogy so far. It's not the biggest, baddest game on the block, but it also isn't loaded with bugs and other issues. It's well polished, complete, entertaining, and a laugh riot. And really, that's all that matters.
Anyway, after the disappointment that was Fallout: New Vegas I was hoping for a game that was, oh, I don't know, polished? Complete? Lacking major bugs? All of the above? If there is one thing that Lionhead Studios learned from with Fable, it was to at least try to follow through with promises related to gameplay mechanics. After spending a large portion of time with Fable 3 over the last week, I can safely say that Peter Molyneux's crew have given us another well polished, entertaining game with loads of easter eggs, in-jokes, top-notch voice acting, and decent gameplay (I do have some issues with the game, but more on that later).
First off, I have long been a fan of British comedy (Monty Python rules!). It's an educated sense of humor that requires as much brain power, at times, as a critical thinking exercise. Granted, Monty Python and the like can be just as silly as anyone else, but it's an educated silliness (in stark contrast to, say, the Jackass movies). One of the aspects of the Fable games that I have adored the entire time is the very prevalent sense of humor the games have. Self-referential, self-deprecating, and utterly hilarious, Fable 3 is one of those games that I am willing to replay just for the jokes.
And the jokes are everywhere: flavor text, achievement descriptions, mission completion text, and all manner of places you wouldn't expect to find them. There's one point, when you're running through one particular mission, there's a running commentary that, as both a video gamer and a table-top RPGer, busts my gut over references to stuff that carries across the Pond for most gamers. It gives me hope that gamers everywhere go through the same things (and dealing with rule mongers is the same, no matter where you go).
The humor of the game is one of the best aspects of the game, but that doesn't mean that the game is completely silly, or lacks any kind of depth to the story. While the premise is fairly straightforward, for the first part of the game it plays just like any other Fable game. You run around, complete missions, beat the crap out of hobbes, balverines, and hollow men, and generally enjoy the experience. Once the first part ends, however, the challenge really ramps up.
Unfortunately, I'm may run a spoiler or two in this section, so if you don't want to have any of the game spoiled for you, I suggest skipping ahead a little. Basically, the well known portion of the game is straightforward, but Peter Molyneux really hits you with a curve ball once your character becomes the Monarch.
This incredibly dire situation is approaching, and you find out why your character's brother was doing the horrible things he was doing. Now, if you're like me, you probably went around and became a property magnate as soon as possible, so you don't really have any cash flow issues. However, once you realize that the amount of people in your kingdom you will save is based entirely on how much money you can raise, suddenly, that amassed wealth is nowhere near enough, and you find yourself torn (particularly if you're a "good" character). Do you become a ruthless tyrant to save as many people as possible? Or do you honor all of your promises and potentially sacrifice innocent lives in the coming storm? I found out very quickly that it's very tough for me, knowing what is coming, and still honoring the promises made earlier.
Granted, my evil characters won't face such moral dilemmas; namely because of the way that I play evil characters (Lawful Evil, in D&D parlance).
One of the best features added for this game is the ability to hold another character's hand and leading them (or, if you're evil, dragging them) around. I'm not sure what it is, but that small little addition makes situations seem that much more immersive. It becomes a little silly when you have to lead full-grown adults around like a little child, but, c'est la vie.
Another nice feature was an overall update on the graphics engine. It still uses the engine they created for Fable 2, but with a lot of improvements across the board. One of the nicest changes (it's a pet peeve of mine from Fable 2) is that your character's eyes seem to actually be linked together, rather than trying to look in two directions at once. Other improvements in the graphics include better lighting effects, and an overall better look to clothing and weaponry. This does come at the cost of some bottles and other "minor" objects being toned down to simpler models and textures, but it doesn't detract from the overall feel.
However, this boost comes with a cost. There is a noticeable lag in framerate and game speed, particularly when there are either a lot of characters on screen or you are doing a lot of action very quickly. By contrast, I never really saw that much slow-down in Fable 2. It's not enough to really detract from the gameplay, as it seems to register button presses during the slow-down, so you don't screw up on jobs or in combat.
There are a few drawbacks to combat. Namely the somewhat twitchy nature of the blocking and flourish mechanic, and the wonky camera work stand out as big issues for me. There are times where I would go to block, only to realize that the game was stuck on the idea of me doing a flourish. It rarely happened the other way around. And the camera problem exists in most 3rd person action RPGs, so it's just the nature of the beast.
There are some features that I'm not going to go in-depth about; the lack of a menu system (for the most part), the loss of a large portion of the RPG structure, and the somewhat short playtime. All of these are either non-issues (the lack of a menu system, in my mind, was implemented spectacularly), or are just the same-old-same-old (Fable games have never been the longest RPGs out there).
Simply put, Fable 3 is the best of the trilogy so far. It's not the biggest, baddest game on the block, but it also isn't loaded with bugs and other issues. It's well polished, complete, entertaining, and a laugh riot. And really, that's all that matters.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Fallout: It's definitely not KotOR II... really!
This is much more of a first impression kind of post, given that I haven't really been able to give New Vegas a full workup yet, as I've only played the game for about 6 hours or so, and much of that time was spent redoing particular missions because the difficulty has been cranked up.
Now, I'm not necessarily complaining about an increase in difficulty. I like challenging. Challenging is fun. My problem with this comes from the apparent need Obsidian Software has with creating a product that is almost, but not quite the original. What I mean by this boils down to an almost pathological need by Obsidian to take something that worked (for example Knights of the Old Republic), change some things in a good way (KotOR 2 combat system), then screw everything else up.
Take, for instance, the multitude of combat situations you find yourself in. I'm not a gamer to shy away from combat, that's for sure. But when you add in multiple ammunition types, that cost way too much at the beginning, then start throwing enemies that really require one of those ammunition types to kill effectively, things start to get messy pretty quickly. This leads me to my next issue, quest structure and story.
I know there is something to be said for old salts at a game hating starting/entry level quests. Most of us feel they are unnecessary, and often pointlessly simplistic. However, Fallout 3 managed to get you through these particulars rather painlessly, and even autosaved right at the end of the tutorial area so that if you wanted to create a new character, you didn't have to go through that whole mess again. And, once you got out into the Capitol Wasteland, there was a very distinct goal; one that you actually felt like completing. With New Vegas, unless you're one of those people who really wants revenge for an event you really aren't connected with, there's very little point (initially) in going through the main quest other than the fact that it's there.
Hey, Obsidian, here's a hint; if you want us to care about an event, let us get to know the character first, before shooting them in the head. Obviously your character had some kind of life prior to getting shot in the head, show us a little bit of it; make us care about the character's fate. Fallout 3, you cared for the character because you were able to be part of the character's life prior to the horrible trauma that forces you into the wasteland.
Part of me thinks that Obsidian is obsessed with proving that their games aren't the same as their predecessors, despite using the same game engine and graphics.
Another minor issue is with the voice acting. Not that the voice acting itself is bad, but there is a obvious lack of randomness to many of the characters you meet. Fallout 3 suffered from this, as well (as did Oblivion) and it's still a bit of a sticking point for me. You're recording voices into a computer which can, shock of shocks, modulate voices. No, my real issue with the voice acting in New Vegas is this somewhat unsettling feeling that the voices are partially disembodied from the characters on screen. It's weird, and I can't fully describe it. There's just something off about it.
However, the game's many bonuses more than make up for these issues (at least in my mind). I think my favorite change is the reduction in the number of Perks that you get. By the end of Fallout 3, there was a list of Perks as long as my arm to try and choose from and there was no sense of prioritizing since there was always the thought in the back of you head of, "Oh, it's ok, I'll just get the other perk next level." In New Vegas, you really need to plan ahead for the Perks you want, and tailor them to what you are trying to do with your character. Do you want to focus on beefing up the skills you use most, or use the perks to offset your skill deficiencies?
All-in-all, I think it is a well-made game, I just have to give it more of a chance. Look for a full post once I beat the game.
Now, I'm not necessarily complaining about an increase in difficulty. I like challenging. Challenging is fun. My problem with this comes from the apparent need Obsidian Software has with creating a product that is almost, but not quite the original. What I mean by this boils down to an almost pathological need by Obsidian to take something that worked (for example Knights of the Old Republic), change some things in a good way (KotOR 2 combat system), then screw everything else up.
Take, for instance, the multitude of combat situations you find yourself in. I'm not a gamer to shy away from combat, that's for sure. But when you add in multiple ammunition types, that cost way too much at the beginning, then start throwing enemies that really require one of those ammunition types to kill effectively, things start to get messy pretty quickly. This leads me to my next issue, quest structure and story.
I know there is something to be said for old salts at a game hating starting/entry level quests. Most of us feel they are unnecessary, and often pointlessly simplistic. However, Fallout 3 managed to get you through these particulars rather painlessly, and even autosaved right at the end of the tutorial area so that if you wanted to create a new character, you didn't have to go through that whole mess again. And, once you got out into the Capitol Wasteland, there was a very distinct goal; one that you actually felt like completing. With New Vegas, unless you're one of those people who really wants revenge for an event you really aren't connected with, there's very little point (initially) in going through the main quest other than the fact that it's there.
Hey, Obsidian, here's a hint; if you want us to care about an event, let us get to know the character first, before shooting them in the head. Obviously your character had some kind of life prior to getting shot in the head, show us a little bit of it; make us care about the character's fate. Fallout 3, you cared for the character because you were able to be part of the character's life prior to the horrible trauma that forces you into the wasteland.
Part of me thinks that Obsidian is obsessed with proving that their games aren't the same as their predecessors, despite using the same game engine and graphics.
Another minor issue is with the voice acting. Not that the voice acting itself is bad, but there is a obvious lack of randomness to many of the characters you meet. Fallout 3 suffered from this, as well (as did Oblivion) and it's still a bit of a sticking point for me. You're recording voices into a computer which can, shock of shocks, modulate voices. No, my real issue with the voice acting in New Vegas is this somewhat unsettling feeling that the voices are partially disembodied from the characters on screen. It's weird, and I can't fully describe it. There's just something off about it.
However, the game's many bonuses more than make up for these issues (at least in my mind). I think my favorite change is the reduction in the number of Perks that you get. By the end of Fallout 3, there was a list of Perks as long as my arm to try and choose from and there was no sense of prioritizing since there was always the thought in the back of you head of, "Oh, it's ok, I'll just get the other perk next level." In New Vegas, you really need to plan ahead for the Perks you want, and tailor them to what you are trying to do with your character. Do you want to focus on beefing up the skills you use most, or use the perks to offset your skill deficiencies?
All-in-all, I think it is a well-made game, I just have to give it more of a chance. Look for a full post once I beat the game.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Fall is the Gamer Blockbuster Season
And this year, October takes the cake; for me at any rate. Let's see, this month we have Fallout: New Vegas, Fable 3, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, Vanquish, and Star Wars: The Force Unleashed 2. Son of a bitch...
Granted, I'm not exactly going to purchase all of them (although I've already purchased two of them), but that's a lot of gaming to deal with in one month! How the hell can I devote enough time to each of them? Particularly when one of them is a reboot of one of the longest running video game franchises of all time? How can I possibly devote a full experience when I have to worry about the others coming out right afterwards? What is the answer?
I can't. Pure and simple.
In the past, I have usually handled these situations in much the same way. You prioritize. In this case, the two games that I know I am going to play this month are Fable 3 and Fallout: New Vegas. The others I will get to, especially Castlevania. The others are like the icing on a delicious cake of pure gaming; they add a little something extra, but aren't the best part (at least for me, anyway).
Now, this list only really covers those two gaming platforms I care about (PC and Xbox). Not that I hate the PS3 or the Wii, it's just that I don't use those systems, so I don't keep up-to-date with their release calendar. I'm willing to bet good money that if you were to combine all the systems together, October would be impossible to wade through without tripping over a game that someone is drooling over.
For example: I have a good friend who *loved* Bioshock 1 and 2. Unfortunately, her boyfriend isn't the same kind of pushover I am. Since she's not the best of gamers (no offense!), particularly with first-person shooters, she loves to play vicariously through me. With Bioshock Infinite coming out, I have to keep the mop and bucket ready whenever she visits because she has to watch that trailer and things go downhill.
And it's not just October. Last month we had Halo: Reach (the puddle from that game alone could probably have powered the Hoover Dam for at least a week) and in the near future we've got Star Wars: The Old Republic, WoW: Cataclysm, Dead Space 2, Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit (EA, redeem thyself!), CoD: Black Ops... I could go on, but I'd probably hit my word limit for this blog.
Anyway, the long point of this, somewhat disjointed, article is that it really is a great time to be a gamer, but also, my wallet bleeds every fall.
Granted, I'm not exactly going to purchase all of them (although I've already purchased two of them), but that's a lot of gaming to deal with in one month! How the hell can I devote enough time to each of them? Particularly when one of them is a reboot of one of the longest running video game franchises of all time? How can I possibly devote a full experience when I have to worry about the others coming out right afterwards? What is the answer?
I can't. Pure and simple.
In the past, I have usually handled these situations in much the same way. You prioritize. In this case, the two games that I know I am going to play this month are Fable 3 and Fallout: New Vegas. The others I will get to, especially Castlevania. The others are like the icing on a delicious cake of pure gaming; they add a little something extra, but aren't the best part (at least for me, anyway).
Now, this list only really covers those two gaming platforms I care about (PC and Xbox). Not that I hate the PS3 or the Wii, it's just that I don't use those systems, so I don't keep up-to-date with their release calendar. I'm willing to bet good money that if you were to combine all the systems together, October would be impossible to wade through without tripping over a game that someone is drooling over.
For example: I have a good friend who *loved* Bioshock 1 and 2. Unfortunately, her boyfriend isn't the same kind of pushover I am. Since she's not the best of gamers (no offense!), particularly with first-person shooters, she loves to play vicariously through me. With Bioshock Infinite coming out, I have to keep the mop and bucket ready whenever she visits because she has to watch that trailer and things go downhill.
And it's not just October. Last month we had Halo: Reach (the puddle from that game alone could probably have powered the Hoover Dam for at least a week) and in the near future we've got Star Wars: The Old Republic, WoW: Cataclysm, Dead Space 2, Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit (EA, redeem thyself!), CoD: Black Ops... I could go on, but I'd probably hit my word limit for this blog.
Anyway, the long point of this, somewhat disjointed, article is that it really is a great time to be a gamer, but also, my wallet bleeds every fall.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Gaming Rigs and Mods Galore
Work blows. Not really. I like my job, but I've been busy with work and such, so I haven't had much time on my hands to write about anything more important than Capt. Croton and his dashing adventures (I'll explain later). However, there have been a lot of recent changes in my gaming structure recently and I figured, what the hell, why not go back to my blog, fire it up again, and see what happens!
Man, I'm such a tool.
From the Depths of Hell...
Not really, but I'm dramatic like that. So, last month I decided that I would not let Star Wars: The Old Republic pass me by. Given the game will only be available for the PC, I decided it was high time that I put my money where my mouth is and actually knuckle down and build my gaming rig. It was an adventure unto itself, and required that I kick myself in the ass on more than one occasion for not thinking ahead.
These are the lessons we learn.
Anyway, from the get-go I wanted an AMD rig, so my first major purchase was, of course, the case. Still with me? Good. An Antec 300 to be exact. Now, when Antec says that their case is a "mini-tower" I thought to myself, "Ok, won't be too big, certainly not nearly as big as my brother's Antec 900." So, lo-and-behold the case and power supply arrived on the same day and I eagerly opened them both: "Mini-tower" not so much. Well, I'll qualify that: for a gaming rig, yes, it is mini. For any other purpose, this bastard is substantial. No cramped places you have to weedle around in, there was plenty of space for everything. Which is good, because the motherboard I purchased was a full ATX size board.
Speaking of, I purchased the first motherboard (that's right, I said "first") through Newegg. Now, I've generally had good luck buying the open box stuff they've got. Most of the time the open box stuff works just as well as the new stuff. Not this time, apparently. I get the motherboard out its box and get it installed in the case. I connect all the cables and get everything good to go. I installed the first processor (again, yes, the first processor, and no, it only had one processor slot), RAM, HDD, everything. It was good to go.
I press the power button and... nothing. I go through the standard troubleshooting. After several hours of frustration (over the course of several days), I figure out that the problem isn't a bad processor, bad RAM, or even a bad video card (yup, bought two of those little fuckers as well). It was a bad set of RAM slots on the motherboard! Yay! So, much to my chagrin, I head over to the only MicroCenter in the state and purchased a much better motherboard (ASUS Crosshair IV - I love you so much). Pop that baby into the case, reconnect everything, and... Works like a fucking charm! Hooray!
"Wait a minute, what about the processor?" I hear you ask. That, was another piece of stupidity on my part. You see, the power supply I purchased was a 650watt Rosewill. Haven't had a problem with it. However, the amperage was set wrong and I didn't even think to check it until after I had purchased a better processor. D'oh!
Like I said, sometimes these are the lessons we learn after not having built a home rig for several years. So, in the end I now have a much more powerful computer. The stats are as follows:
AMD Phenom II x4 965 ~3.4Ghz
A-Data Gaming 8GB RAM
XFX ATI Radeon HD 5750 1GB
2x 250GB SATA Hard Drives
ASUS Crosshair IV Motherboard
On-board HD audio
Antec 300 case with full compliment of case fans
Rosewill 650-watt power supply
DVD -RW
Not everything is a chore, right?
So, after getting my computer up and running, I wanted to test out a few games that I really, really wanted to. Namely two games with massive modding communities: TES: Oblivion and Fallout 3. I have to say, when you install one of these games and it autodetects your hardware to run everything on Ultra-high, you feel pretty good about yourself.
Anyway, I get the games installed and straightaway head over to http://www.tesnexus.com/ and http://www.fallout3nexus.com/ and start browsing. Several days later, after having snapped back to my senses from the haze of awesome, I began to realize several things about mods.
1) Not all mod creators are equal, particularly with clipping issues.
2) So-called "God mods" will never touch my computer.
3) Even some rebalancing mods are a pain in the ass and make me feel like I'm cheating.
4) I really wish idiots would stop. We don't need flamboyant retextures of existing armor.*
5) No, I really don't feel like I should be able to take down a Deathclaw with a combat knife.**
*Not all retexture mods are bad. There are some beautiful retextures out there. This is against the idiots who just recolor the armor without thought to the health of the human eye.
**This really is just more of my issue with God-mods. I hate them so.
Anyway, as much of an issue I have with a lot of mods, there are some that are so far-and-away cool that I can't help but highly recommend them (the only one I will mention here, namely because I want people to contact the author and have him move his ass on finishing it, is Terminator: Cybernetic Dawn. It's all kinds of awesome).
I think that's probably enough from me for now. Catch you all on the flip side.
Man, I'm such a tool.
From the Depths of Hell...
Not really, but I'm dramatic like that. So, last month I decided that I would not let Star Wars: The Old Republic pass me by. Given the game will only be available for the PC, I decided it was high time that I put my money where my mouth is and actually knuckle down and build my gaming rig. It was an adventure unto itself, and required that I kick myself in the ass on more than one occasion for not thinking ahead.
These are the lessons we learn.
Anyway, from the get-go I wanted an AMD rig, so my first major purchase was, of course, the case. Still with me? Good. An Antec 300 to be exact. Now, when Antec says that their case is a "mini-tower" I thought to myself, "Ok, won't be too big, certainly not nearly as big as my brother's Antec 900." So, lo-and-behold the case and power supply arrived on the same day and I eagerly opened them both: "Mini-tower" not so much. Well, I'll qualify that: for a gaming rig, yes, it is mini. For any other purpose, this bastard is substantial. No cramped places you have to weedle around in, there was plenty of space for everything. Which is good, because the motherboard I purchased was a full ATX size board.
Speaking of, I purchased the first motherboard (that's right, I said "first") through Newegg. Now, I've generally had good luck buying the open box stuff they've got. Most of the time the open box stuff works just as well as the new stuff. Not this time, apparently. I get the motherboard out its box and get it installed in the case. I connect all the cables and get everything good to go. I installed the first processor (again, yes, the first processor, and no, it only had one processor slot), RAM, HDD, everything. It was good to go.
I press the power button and... nothing. I go through the standard troubleshooting. After several hours of frustration (over the course of several days), I figure out that the problem isn't a bad processor, bad RAM, or even a bad video card (yup, bought two of those little fuckers as well). It was a bad set of RAM slots on the motherboard! Yay! So, much to my chagrin, I head over to the only MicroCenter in the state and purchased a much better motherboard (ASUS Crosshair IV - I love you so much). Pop that baby into the case, reconnect everything, and... Works like a fucking charm! Hooray!
"Wait a minute, what about the processor?" I hear you ask. That, was another piece of stupidity on my part. You see, the power supply I purchased was a 650watt Rosewill. Haven't had a problem with it. However, the amperage was set wrong and I didn't even think to check it until after I had purchased a better processor. D'oh!
Like I said, sometimes these are the lessons we learn after not having built a home rig for several years. So, in the end I now have a much more powerful computer. The stats are as follows:
AMD Phenom II x4 965 ~3.4Ghz
A-Data Gaming 8GB RAM
XFX ATI Radeon HD 5750 1GB
2x 250GB SATA Hard Drives
ASUS Crosshair IV Motherboard
On-board HD audio
Antec 300 case with full compliment of case fans
Rosewill 650-watt power supply
DVD -RW
Not everything is a chore, right?
So, after getting my computer up and running, I wanted to test out a few games that I really, really wanted to. Namely two games with massive modding communities: TES: Oblivion and Fallout 3. I have to say, when you install one of these games and it autodetects your hardware to run everything on Ultra-high, you feel pretty good about yourself.
Anyway, I get the games installed and straightaway head over to http://www.tesnexus.com/ and http://www.fallout3nexus.com/ and start browsing. Several days later, after having snapped back to my senses from the haze of awesome, I began to realize several things about mods.
1) Not all mod creators are equal, particularly with clipping issues.
2) So-called "God mods" will never touch my computer.
3) Even some rebalancing mods are a pain in the ass and make me feel like I'm cheating.
4) I really wish idiots would stop. We don't need flamboyant retextures of existing armor.*
5) No, I really don't feel like I should be able to take down a Deathclaw with a combat knife.**
*Not all retexture mods are bad. There are some beautiful retextures out there. This is against the idiots who just recolor the armor without thought to the health of the human eye.
**This really is just more of my issue with God-mods. I hate them so.
Anyway, as much of an issue I have with a lot of mods, there are some that are so far-and-away cool that I can't help but highly recommend them (the only one I will mention here, namely because I want people to contact the author and have him move his ass on finishing it, is Terminator: Cybernetic Dawn. It's all kinds of awesome).
I think that's probably enough from me for now. Catch you all on the flip side.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Ok, Ok, I realize I may sound hypocritical...
Given the fact that a few posts ago I was berating PC gamers for bitching about not being able to cheat, and with the vast array of PC Gamers lamenting the so-called "death" of PC Gaming, I've been increasingly irritated by this seemingly meaningless "war."
Let me paint a picture, if you will indulge me, of the issue. Many companies have started to produce cross-platform games and many of these games are not necessarily optimized for PCs. Since they have to run on a variety of hardware configurations, they need to be set for these consoles to play them.
I will freely admit that PCs are capable of much better graphics than consoles. However, when you look at the fact that hardware has reached a point of diminishing returns, it's not rocket science to come to the conclusion that it really doesn't matter all that much. I get just as much entertainment out of games regardless of the system I play them on.
Added to this the irrational fear that lack of PC exclusivity means that manufacturers have forgotten them, makes PC gamers rather paranoid.
Which, somewhat, leads me to my point. Why is there such a paranoia? Instead of focusing on the idea that we are all video gamers, PC gamers have latched onto this fear of being forgotten.
Fear not, my PC playing brethren! PC gaming will never die. And I certainly hope it does not, for you are the regulating force which keeps all of the console fanboys in line!
PC Gamers, rock on!
Let me paint a picture, if you will indulge me, of the issue. Many companies have started to produce cross-platform games and many of these games are not necessarily optimized for PCs. Since they have to run on a variety of hardware configurations, they need to be set for these consoles to play them.
I will freely admit that PCs are capable of much better graphics than consoles. However, when you look at the fact that hardware has reached a point of diminishing returns, it's not rocket science to come to the conclusion that it really doesn't matter all that much. I get just as much entertainment out of games regardless of the system I play them on.
Added to this the irrational fear that lack of PC exclusivity means that manufacturers have forgotten them, makes PC gamers rather paranoid.
Which, somewhat, leads me to my point. Why is there such a paranoia? Instead of focusing on the idea that we are all video gamers, PC gamers have latched onto this fear of being forgotten.
Fear not, my PC playing brethren! PC gaming will never die. And I certainly hope it does not, for you are the regulating force which keeps all of the console fanboys in line!
PC Gamers, rock on!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)