Saturday, February 14, 2009

Mirror's Edge


About a month ago the PC version of Mirror's Edge was released. I anticipated this release because the game was a unique and new concept, and now that I've played it the concept does not disappoint. The mechanics of the game are fun and original, and while I was initially skeptical of a first-person platforming game, the game pulls it off wonderfully. The time trials are addicting and fun as well.

Unfortunately, the time trials are the core of the experience, because the story mode is very lacking. The game's developer, DICE, is primarily experienced with multiplayer-only games, and it shows, because the level design just does not work well a lot of the time. The mechanics encourage navigation of obstacles and finding ways to quickly traverse large areas, but the level design favors slow climbing and platforming puzzles. The mechanics also favor avoiding combat, and the player dies very quickly in combat. However, there are a handful of spots in the game which require combat, and these portions seem unfair and generally not fun. Finally, the game is very short, clocking in at perhaps 5 hours. This could be a good thing considering how inconsistent the level design is.

As I said, the real fun of this game is the time trials. I've never dabbled much in speed-running but I can see the appeal now. Experimenting with faster routes and tiny adjustments to squeeze a few more milliseconds off my time is a ton of fun. Once I had 3 stars on almost every time trial map, however, there just isn't much else to do in the game. There's a map pack coming soon, but it costs money, and I generally hate paying for any extra game content unless it's an actual expansion pack.

The mechanics of Mirror's Edge are great and fresh. With better single player level design, this could have been an excellent game. It's a shame how it turned out, but I hope DICE has learned some lessons and will make the sequel far superior.

Sunday, January 18, 2009

System Shock 2


I've only played this for maybe an hour total and it is already scarier than anything I've played before. This includes FEAR, Dead Space, Bioshock, and Resident Evil 4. I'm not much for scary games in general, and as such I find it difficult to play SS2 continuously. I try, though, because it is undeniably a quality game. Here's why:

The gameplay is much like Bioshock. You explore a sort of living envinronment - a nonlinear world with unscripted enemy AI that will attack you on sight. There are weapons - with very limited ammo, of course - as well as "psionic powers", much like Plasmids in Bioshock. These can freeze enemies, move objects telekinetically, or light things on fire. Beyond Bioshock, however, is an extensive RPG-style stat system and inventory. Everything in the game must be dealt with in real-time. Nothing in-game will pause it, including inventory screens, computer interfaces, or stat upgrades. Of course there is an escape menu that lets you save, load, change options or quit, and this does pause the game. A totally real-time gameplay experience is a feature that many people consider Dead Space as famous for developing, but clearly SS2 came first, which surprised me. (On a side note, many people also consider Dead Space innovating the concept of a HUD built into the character's player model. This is also not true, because Roboblitz did it first. Interestingly, Roboblitz is a great game that was the very first to make use of the Unreal Engine 3, something people falsely credit Bioshock with.)

This always-real-time experience is part of what makes System Shock 2 such a scary game. If you want to stop and read a computer screen or a text log, you need to be careful because a mutant could attack you while you do so. If you want to shuffle your inventory around or use some items, you need to keep an eye out for enemies. It's very tense, made even more so by the fact that enemies WILL appear right behind you. The first time I encountered an enemy in the game was most astonishing. I was wandering through a corridor, and saw an item on the ground. I looked down at it to pick it up. When I looked back up and turned around, a mutant was an inch in front of me in the middle of swinging a wrench. I jumped out of my seat, my hands momentarily left the keyboard, and I took damage. When I regained my wits I bludgeoned him with my wrench, pleasantly finding that they only took a couple swings to kill. Every time I met an enemy, I experienced that same feeling of surprise and fear, because enemies appear infrequently and often startle you. As soon as they spot you, they will run straight at you and try to kill you, so any time you spot one of these mutants you have to immediately deal with it. This is different from Bioshock, where splicers will often ignore you if you're not very close.

That's all I'm going to say on this game, because I can't stand to play it too long on account of how I don't particularly like feeling startled a lot. I enjoyed playing Bioshock more, but I understand the reason many people prefer SS2, and even consider it one of the greatest games of all time. It's very high-quality, even if it doesn't appeal to me personally a lot.

Next up, Mirror's Edge!

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Ketsui Death Label on the DS


This game is the entire reason I now own a Nintendo DS. After roughly 8 or 9 hours with the game I have no regrets at all.

If you know anything about shmups you probably know that Ketsui is one of the most highly praised games in the genre. It's also well-known that it is one of the rarest and most expensive games in the genre, because it never left the arcades. Guess what, now it is! Ok, it's not actually the full arcade game. It's a "Death Label" version of the game. This means that the game only contains bosses, of exceeding difficulty. This might seem lame to some people that a game consists entirely of 11 bosses, each of which can be beaten in a few minutes at the most. The game, however, offers much more than that. The insane brain-numbing bosses are a large part of Ketsui's popularity in the first place. It offers 9 different difficulty modes, each consisting of different sets of the bosses with different difficulties. The range of difficulty is such that one boss on Novice difficulty will be entirely different from the same boss at Very Hard difficulty, or even on Death Label difficulty.

Even though surviving every mode is difficult enough - although the game does give you progressively more starting lives so that eventually you should be able to conquer it - there is also a fun and unique scoring system in place, one that actually differs from the original arcade game. In the original game, scoring involved point-blanking enemies with the normal shot, which started a short timer and allowed you to kill enemies with the lock-on shot for large point-chips. It was fair simple compared to many Cave scoring systems, but enjoyable and not as restrictive as the chaining found in Dodonpachi or Mushihime-sama. In Death Label, some elements were retained. Namely, the risk-reward system of point-blanking enemies for more points. The closer you are to a boss while using lock-on shot, the bigger the point-chips you get, and the faster your score grows. At the same time, this increases your point multiplier. You can lower the multiplier by getting hit or by using lock-on shot to destroy enemies, so it is a careful balancing act to whittle down the health of a boss by point-blanking it with lock-on shot, and then deliver the killing blow with the regular (much weaker) shot, all without being hit at all. It's very challenging and involves changing your entire strategy on some of the bosses if you want to score well. I'm looking forward to re-learning all 11 bosses, in all 9 modes, to improve my score.

This is the first true bullet-hell shmup on a portable console, and it works surprisingly well. The fat DS is really great because of the big d-pad! The bullets are bright and colorful, which means they aren't hard to see on the small screen of the DS. If you have a DS, and you don't have Ketsui yet, do yourself a favor and go import it from japan. It's an awesome game.

Saturday, December 20, 2008

Fallout 3, I-Fluid, and other odd things

Haven't posted in a while, so here's what I've been up to:

Fallout 3 is definitely awesome. It is basically oblivion with guns, from a gameplay perspective, but I don't think there's anything wrong with that because I liked Oblivion. I also have to admit that killing supermutants over and over is getting a little repetitive now, but everything else about the game is pretty great.

Another game I recently bought on a whim on Steam is a little indy gem called I-Fluid. Think of the game Gish, but in 3D. You play as a water droplet. Levels are set mostly on kitchen tables and counters littered with various fruits, breads, plates, silverware, and paper towels. Because the game is physics-based, you need to avoid the absorbent surfaces like paper towels and dry bread, because they will absorb you and kill you. There are a variety of goals, from 'go from point A to point B' to 'move all 7 tomatoes into the bowl'. Oh, that's right, you can also possess fruits and control them. The game is pretty darn creative and easily worth the $10 it is selling for on Steam right now (hint, go get it).

I also haven't posted since Left 4 Dead came out. As amazing as that game is, I haven't been playing it much, because I've finally broken down and decided to get a gaming mic. Left 4 Dead pretty much requires it for maximum enjoyment, and I could definitely use it in TF2 as well. Who knows, maybe I can finally look into joining a clan now that I'll have a mic (clans require them).

Thursday, November 13, 2008

Spike TV's Video Game Awards are a Travesty

That's right, the Spike TV Video Game Awards. They're just terrible. Today the nominees were announced for the annual award show, and it just doesn't bode well. Let's take a look, shall we?

Best Independent Game Fueled by Mountain Dew (Not a Judge Category)
World of Goo
PixelJunk Eden
Braid
Audio Surf

This category is purely a sponsored award, meaning it's basically useless. I'm all for representing more indie games, but I know Audiosurf wasn't "fueled by Mountain Dew". Next.

Best Original Score
Fallout 3
Spore
Metal Gear Solid 4
LittleBigPlanet

I think this is kind of funny because the music in Spore was either nonexistent or mostly ambiance.

Best PC Game
Spore
Crysis Warhead
Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning
Left 4 Dead

So I guess this is only "best PC EXCLUSIVE game"? There's no Fallout 3 on there (a nominee for Game of the Year). Oh wait, Left 4 Dead isn't PC exclusive. So I guess it's just kind of a lame category?

Best PS3 Game
Metal Gear Solid 4
Resistance 2
LittleBigPlanet
Grant Theft Auto IV

Best Xbox 360 Game
Fable II
Gears of War 2
Grand Theft Auto IV
Fallout 3

Note the discrepency? Once again, Fallout 3 is the odd one out, for some reason. It's a nominee on the 360 but not on the PS3? If you were listening to this stupid nominee list, you'd think Fallout 3 never even came out for PS3 or PC. I haven't even played the game (yet) and can't speak to how good it is, but this is just a weird discrepancy. Seems the 360 is being treated a bit differently, doesn't it? Any game that is a nominee for game of the year (as you'll see in a moment) should be a nominee for each platform it's actually released on, shouldn't it?

Best Graphics
Gears of War 2
Fallout 3
LittleBigPlanet
Metal Gear Solid 4

This category represents what is wrong with the gaming industry. This category should not exist. Graphics don't matter. Also, Crysis Warhead looks far better than any of these games, but god forbid they put a PC exclusive into a list with mixed console games.

Game of the Year
Grand Theft Auto IV
LittleBigPlanet
Fallout 3
Metal Gear Solid 4
Gears of War 2

No Smash Bros. Brawl? I didn't mention it but it was on the list for best Wii game. Why isn't it on the list for best overall game? Where's Spore, or Left 4 Dead? Or Crysis Warhead? Also, Far Cry 2 is on the nominee list for best shooter. Where is it compared to these other shooters on the GOTY list? It's potentially a better shooter than GoW2, but it's not GOTY material? How does that make any sense?

The whole thing is just ridiculous.

Monday, October 20, 2008

What Half-Life 2 can Teach us About Game Design


Half-Life 2, as well as its episodic sequels Episode 1 and Episode 2, are as close to perfection as any game has ever gotten. If any game deserves a 10/10 score, these games do. In designing the games, Valve made every right decision it is possible to make. Basically, I LOVE HALF-LIFE 2. What's so good about it, though? What makes Valve such a master of the art of game design? Why, if you haven't played Half-Life 2 yet, are you still reading this?! GO PLAY IT!

Half-Life 2 is so amazing because it adheres perfectly to the Golden Rules of Game Design. Let's run through them, and see examples of when they work and when they don't.

Rule 1: Never Screw the Player
This one is first because it's the foundation of a solid gaming experience. Simply put, this rule means that the player should have a way to deal with any possible situation in the game. A player should never be in a situation where they are simply trapped and must re-load the level. A player should never be in a situation where they are attacked by an enemy and have no possible way to defend themselves. Basically, the player shouldn't feel like the game is unfair.

Good Examples:
If you do this one right, the player probably won't even notice. Take, for example, the practice of giving the player a backup melee weapon or melee attack. If the player is snuck up on, or runs out of ammo, they still need to be able to defend themselves. Another example found often in HL2: often there will be enemies that require certain weapons to deal with. Hunter-choppers require rockets; turrets often require grenades or antlion minions, and so forth. Valve makes sure to place crates with infinitely replenishing ammo for those specific weapons in just the right spot. This ensures you're never screwed when you reach a hunter-chopper, because you always have the ammo to deal with it.



Bad Examples:
Any time you died or got stuck in a game and felt it was just unfair, that's probably an example of a game that didn't follow this rule. Here's one off the top of my head: Killer 7. As you walk through the game on a predefined rail path, if an enemy appears, you need to switch to your gun and then shoot it in a weak spot. You can only move forward or turn around and walk in straight lines. You have no control over when you reload your gun, and enemies also tend to pop out at you in close proximity. If this happens, and you need to reload, you're simply screwed. You have no way to defend yourself properly. Another recent example is a fan-made expansion for Portal called Portal: Prelude. The opening level starts you in a small room, similar to the opening of the full game. When the portal automatically opens, allowing you to leave, you are greeted on the other side of that portal with several turrets shooting at you directly behind you. There's really not much you can do about it, and it's almost a certainty you'll die the first time you play that level. That's unfair, and it breaks the first Golden Rule.

Rule 2: Generally Follow the Pacing Steps
This rule is a little different, but it's just as fundamental as rule 1. Every good game follows this (along with all the Golden Rules) as a very general guideline to game pacing. First, most games are split into different sections. Sometimes they are split by setting, sometimes by gameplay, and sometimes they are only split by the Pacing Steps, but they all have to be split or they become repetitive. For a given section, the Pacing Steps are as follows:

A: The Establishment Step - Present the new setting, gameplay element (item, enemy, obstacle, etc.), or in some cases the game world itself, in a safe and clear way so the player sees what they'll be in for in this section of the game. Example: When you receive the gravity gun in HL2, you are presented with a small area full of objects to play around with, and Alyx gives you a small tutorial. Another example: In Episode 1, when you first see a Zombine (Combine Zombie), it is safely behind a window. You observe it grab a grenade and run at you, exploding itself. This reveals the new enemy safely, without explicitly telling you how to deal with it.



B: Basic Application Step - Here is where you have to actually deal with what was "established" in step A. You need to apply the new gameplay element, or deal with the new obstacle, or use the new item in a real situation, usually involving some element of danger (but nothing too hard yet). Example: After you get the gravity gun and play around with it, you're forced to detour into the zombie-infested village of Ravenholm. In this village, you're encouraged (not forced) to use the gravity gun to take down zombies in creative ways, including launching buzz saws to cut them in half. (bonus example! the buzz saw is introduced according to these steps too; you first see it stuck into the dismembered body of a dead zombie, hinting at its purpose - Establishment Step!)

C: Advanced Application Step - Now that you've dealt with the basic application of the new gameplay element or setting, it's time to get more complex. This step will usually demand that you use what you've just learned in concert with previous skills. This is where the game should get challenging. Some games follow the first 2 steps but fail at this one. Such games are commonly known as "not very deep." Example: When you're introduced to the buggy in HL2, you're forced to utilize the gravity gun to flip it over in order to progress. This step often lasts for an entire game, or overlaps later sections of the game. The gravity gun has new uses throughout the game, such as when you encounter turrets and must use the gravity gun to take them out. That's technically a new section, the turret section, but it includes a new advanced use of the gravity gun in dealing with the turrets.



After step C, a new section will begin for the next new gameplay element, unless of course you've reached the end of the game, or the entire game is made up of one large section. Many times these Pacing Steps aren't followed in a really cut-and-dry way, but any good game does follow them in some degree. If a game is based on only one major gameplay element (for example, Katamari Damacy), the entire game often serves as a section, but the 3 steps are still followed. When a game properly follows these steps, the pacing ought to feel good. The game will feel fresh at each section, and you'll constantly be challenged with new gameplay elements and settings.

Rule 3: Everything Should Feel Natural
This is a big one, and it deals with the little details in a game. In this case, "natural" might mean "consistent," or it might mean "realistic," but things shouldn't feel disjointed. It's hard to describe examples of this, because it really is the sum of details that make up the natural feel of a game. There are, however, examples of games that don't follow this rule. Some RPGs or adventure games, in which you encounter invisible walls, or small steps that you can't jump onto, take you out of the game. They remind you that it is, in fact, just a game, and it doesn't feel "natural." In HL2, every boundary in the game is defined by walls that clearly make sense in the context of the game world. If you reach a spot where Valve doesn't want you backtracking, you'll be forced to jump down a small cliff which will be impossible to jump back up. That feels natural and plausible. The environment is forcing you to keep moving forward, not anything arbitrary.

If a game follows these rules, it will be GOOD. If you can think of a bad game, chances are it breaks one or more of these rules, in some way.

Thursday, September 11, 2008

SPORE!

Don't listen to what the reviewers are saying, or the idiots on the internet. Spore is amazing. Every part of it is awesome. Evolving your creatures and society is incredible. Everything is great.

Without further ado, here are some animated GIFs that the game AUTOMATICALLY made (I didn't even know they existed until I was looking around my spore directory). These animations show some of the creation process that went into the different stages of my creature.

First, here's me, creating a Sandworm from scratch:


And here is the creation of my space ship, the Arturan Mega-Platypus, from scratch:


And now, a selection of important evolutions of my creature (there were more, this is just a small selection):




Here you can see how radically my creature changes through its evolution. You can watch as I add legs to my small creature. After that you can see me add arms. Then I add another set of arms, which eventually turns into a set of weapons. The mouth and overall bodily structure also changes quite a bit. I made most of those changes in order to give my creature better stats and help it survive better. When something didn't work right, I removed it. When something worked well, I did more of it. The player of the game is playing the role of Natural Selection. It's awesome and educational!

Also, I want to mention that there are some people who actually think Spore is "evil" because it "promotes evolution." I have one response. Spore "promotes evolution" the same way Super Mario "promotes gravity." Thank you, that is all.