Tag Archive for 'ps3'

Review: Mirror’s Edge

Wow, the Holidays have been crazy. I have now been able to successfully round out my collection of the current generation of systems, and now own all of them, consoles and handhelds. While I haven’t been writing feverishly, I have been getting through some games, and falling back on some old fail safes. I have been playing LittleBigPlanet on my PS3, Crush on my PSP, SSF2THR on my 360, and today I should be beating the New Super Mario Bros on my DS. I’ll admit though, a good amount of my time has been spent getting back into Defense of the Ancients with the TDA community. It’s great to have a large community where the competition bar is high enough to get a pretty good game whenever you feel like it. I just seem to be getting the luck of teaming up with everyone who is seemingly new to both the community and the game itself. :)

A few months back I beat Mirror’s Edge, here’s my take on it!

Overview

From Wikipedia:

Mirror’s Edge takes place in an unnamed city where a totalitarian regime monitors its citizens through invasive surveillance, tracking all forms of electronic communication in order to reduce crime and quell any challenge to its power. An upcoming mayoral election seeks to retain Mayor Callaghan in power to keep the government’s control on the city, though a new favored candidate Robert Pope promises to bring change. The Eurasian protagonist, Faith Connors, is a “Runner”, a person trained in parkour, to stay out of sight and to use rooftops and other means to help deliver physical messages between revolutionary groups within the city. Faith along with another Runner, Celeste, were both trained by Mercury who also provides radio support for the two.

Impressions

Not too long ago I played Assassin’s Creed and fell in love with a chunk of the game. It looked great, had a few choice design elements that I truly enjoyed (mainly, the “teleport” system for major cities), and I absolutely loved the movement. I had mentioned to friends that if there were a game where movement movement felt this fluid, and the major part of the game, I would snap it up instantly. Needless to say, Mirror’s Edge was that game for me. I had followed the bits of information that came down the stream counting down to its release, and I had preordered my copy months in advance. Needless to say, my experience with the game was fairly positive. I thoroughly enjoyed the movement system, went along with the story, and dealt with the fighting.

What makes this game important to me though, is it took something that we are so completely familiar with (the First Person genre) and turned it on its side. Rather than act like every other shooter out there, and be another Halo, or Counter Strike, or Call of Duty, or Far Cry, or Resistance (I could go on..), they made a First Person game revolve around tactical movement, and tried to create an open system (in terms of the paths you take, and moves you perform) for the player to decide how he or she progresses through each obstacle set. The game itself isn’t about mowing down tons of enemies, its about avoiding them. Mirror’s Edge doesn’t focus your attention to specific groups and NPCs within the game, but forces you to soak in as much of your landscape as possible to decide your next move. And in this day in age where shooters and rockers (while still good products in their own right) dominate – Mirror’s Edge succeeds at delivering a package that is perpendicular to current consumer expectations and offers a breath of fresh air to the industry. Sadly, in the current economic situation that we are in, people perceive risk at a much higher value, and a $60 game that doesn’t conform to a standard that the consumer might be looking for, the game’s sales are going to take a hit.

Issues (Possible Spoilers Ahead)

Shoddy story. The story was fairly shallow – yes, there was an arcing story, but it left much to be desired, less to be explained, and far more to be questioned about how exactly everything panned out at the end. The story seemed to end far too abruptly, as if the writers were implicitly cutting us short to either meet deadlines, or to scream “WE NEED SOME CONTENT FOR THE SEQUEL!”

Cutscenes. Rather than use the engine for cutscenes between levels, (and to mask loading time), DICE used animated movies to show the progression of the story. This concept slightly reminds me of the “Story Time” you can get with the princess in Super Mario Galaxy. While it’s not the same story that you’re currently progressing through (in the sense that the cutscenes are filling in narrative gaps) you are definitely breaking out of the beautiful world that Galaxy presents to you in order to follow a side story. Some people argued that with such a great engine and implementation that DICE did that the cutscenes should have just stayed ingame, but I’m inclined to enjoy the switching between story and gameplay as the mode progresses. With a game as intense and fast paced as Mirror’s Edge, an animated sequence can provide a rest to the gamer.

What I didn’t like about these animated shorts was that sometimes they seemed like they were rushed (production wise), or done in Flash with some awful tweening/repetition. Two ‘broken’ scenes off of the top of my head that I still remember: Faith running around the time she meets up with Celeste for the second time, and one time when Faith is walking back into the shadows. The perspective on this scene tween is all types of skewed, and too easily noticed from even my untrained eye.

Fighting System. Simply said, the fighting system in this game is pretty bad. It is incredibly easy to die – which is acceptable. Your a runner with no protection on whatsoever. Taking more than a few bullets and not dying would be too far a stretch of the imagination. The enemies placement can be frustrating at times, and downright infuriating towards the end of the game. My first run through of the game I was going for the “Pacifist” achievement, where you cannot shoot anyone. Towards the end of the game though, I was looking to put a bullet through my TV. I ended up resulting in taking quite a few near death leaps in the “circular” staircase level, and resorted to hiding in corners in the levels that had an absurd amount of enemies, and took out the baddies one by one until I had cleared enough of them out to make it to the next exit.

In Left4Dead’s commentary, they talk about how they automatically do some things for a player when they get near certain areas (they were talking about automatically ducking when walking towards a vent) so that the player focuses on the fear and survival and bigger picture of the whole situation, without having to worry about a simple game movement like ducking. In this sense, isn’t Mirror’s Edge about the movement? So why not make the fighting system be a little more forgiving? Rather than having multiple whiffs when you’re trying to kick someone in the balls, let the game have a larger acceptance of error, and auto-aiming those crotch shots / uppercuts to make things go a little more smoothly, and let the player focus on what’s important: getting the hell out of wherever you are.

Linearity. In retrospect, this game was a bit too linear for me. While you could definitely take the scenic route in certain areas, there was definitely a best route for everything. I think this was partly due to the fact that the only real goal Faith had throughout the entire game was simply to run. “Getting away” can be a fun thing to do, and it can easily be a good reason why the game was on the shorter side – you can only run away from so much before the idea starts to become boring. But when you have such an open setting such as the rooftops and indoors of a city, and my choices are to either jump over or slide under a pipe that is in my way, the magic of the game seems to slowly fade away.

Consider this though: make the game a little more open-worldish, a little more Half-Life 2. Since Faith is explicitly a courier, working for what the government considers criminals, there are a myriad of things that could have been added to the story more than simply delivering packages. Interacting with NPCs to find out more about her sister’s issues, dive deeper into the corrupted body that the government has become, rather than it just being some ominous, sentient machine that deploys foot-soldiers in the proper areas at the worst times. Faith could have missions in areas, help other runners accomplish their tasks. If this were so, Merc wouldn’t actually look like he is running an operation, rather than being a guy who keeps tabs on (from who we met ingame) three runners from his computer. With respect to Valve’s shooter, put a bit more emphasis on physics, and throw some puzzles into the mix. Why not make Faith rearrange the landscape to be able to make jumps? Kick down a sign to make a bridge, or move the construction vehicles to line it up with a proper jump. Just a few of these would have added to the variety that this game could offer, would easily work well in the first-person view, and would have added to the total gameplay time offered to the user.

One more note, there’s DLC coming out for Mirror’s Edge in January 2009. They completely weeded out everything that the game provided before, and went for an abstract, texture-less (minus some coloring) design of a bunch of downloadable levels. It simplifies the game down to the basic element – movement. Penny Arcade had said something like “this is the game style that we fell in love with when watching previews about Mirror’s Edge”, and I couldn’t agree more. Personally, I stand by this game, as the successes in what Mirror’s Edge achieves to do outweighs the shortcomings.

Entertainment Overload!

For any connected and half-interested gamer, this October and November are sheer torture for the community. It’s been a long time before we’ve had some good titles come out, and now there’s a AAA title coming out every other week. Fable 2, LittleBigPlanet, Left 4 Dead, Mirror’s Edge, Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts, the list goes on. I’m even interested in the Alone in the Dark release for the PS3: with some of the critical reviews that came out, they redesigned quite a few things for the release, and it will be interesting to see if the game’s reception turns around.

In the spirit of Halloween, I decided to re-play through Half Life 2. When I first bought it, I had gotten through a good portion of the game but I must have stopped and gotten focused on something else, as I didn’t remember *any* of the Citadel. Hopefully I can get through Episode 1 and 2 in the next few days, along with the BK:N&B demo with a friend.

Also, LittleBigPlanet is going to change the way we think about games. The game is a damn platform – the best description I’ve read thus far is: “a YouTube for games.”

Quality, or Lack Thereof

One thing that has continually frustrated me time and time again has been the output of design studios, game manufacturers within the past decade. There has been a steady decline of quality from all outlets, as games are pushed further, deadlines are cut, and developers (both hardware and software) are pushed to the brink of their respective physical, mental, and emotional limits. With a myriad of issues surfacing more and more each day, those limits are either beginning to be realized by consumers, and ignored by the offending companies.

From a hardware standpoint, there has been a massive speculation about Microsoft’s latest console, the Xbox 360. With varying reports saying that their latest console showing anywhere from 16% upwards to almost a 60% failure rate. When the Wii launched, it’s update service was bricking a small number of consoles. There were a few recalls/fixes for some major game accessories as well – Nintendo sent out a batch of straps and wiimote sleeves for added protection, and Rock Band’s guitars were suffering from issues with the whammy bar. I’m sure I’m missing a few on this list, and I am only going back a few years in terms of hardware issues.

I guess I should give some slack to the issues that have spawned up in the manufacturing process, as there will always be a small failure rate for any mass produced product. Bad CDs will be made, and defective consoles will get out there, and it will normally be a small majority (with the exception of the widespread issues with the 360) who have the bad luck and inconvenience to deal with the problem, and get a replacement.

However, I’m not so quick to hold my tongue on software releases, as there is a bit more involvement of putting together the game from start to finish, then declaring a product gold, and sending it out for mass duplication. From conception to gold, it’s all input: the development process, the investors, the studio, and your distributors.

For instance, I searched Kotaku for “bugs”, and “issues”, and I came up with a few recent games with some slightly annoying to fairly serious issues:

GTA IV (PS3)- Crashing/Freezing and multiplayer issues

Castle Crashers – Online play issues causing players to lose their entire save files

Bully: Scholarship Edition (360 Port) – Freezing Issues

Guitar Hero III (Wii) – Mono sound in a music game

The list goes (The Orange Box (PS3), Saints Row, Rainbow Six Vegas, Battlefield 2), and I only went back a few pages for each search to get a broad idea of what’s come up recently. Some of these issues are near unforgivable, so glaring that it would seem that any competitent programmer/tester should have been able to see the issue from a mile away, and have made note of it before this was released to the masses. When you look back, how many consoles had recalls, or huge defects, or games went out so buggy that they were unplayable? While it wasn’t something that I noted when I was that young, it seems like the rate of failure and growing issues post-release seems to be coalescing at an alarming speed.

Before I piss off any game studio employee that may be scouting this blog to check me out for employment, I don’t outright question the quality of the employees that are creating and testing these products. In one hand, the problem lies on the gaming community. Gaming as a socially accepted hobby has become much more mainstream than it was twenty years ago. The competition between genres, studios, and product sequels is so fierce as new features, upgraded graphics, larger environments, and hours upon hours of gameplay are crammed into the products that it is forseeable that losing sight of anything is not possible — but probable. And why is there such a frenzy for all these additions? Consumers flock to the shiny, new features that are released. Media tends to highlight games with something new to offer, rather than focus on simple design and elegant gameplay. Because of this, studios can’t ignore what is inevitably required of them, and the laundry list of things to add piles up fast. The involvement of people in one major game release jumps into the hundreds, development cycles jump into multiples of years, IP and projects change hands as publishers, producers, marketing and corporate execs clash heads over features, content, the release timetable. And none of this aids in speeding up the release of the game by any means.

All of this is beyond me, and far removed from my biggest issue that has been plauging the industry lately. When it comes to games released in the past five years, I have grown increasingly sick of companies using the internet as a crutch for their development cycle. It seems that games now have a release schedule that extends far beyond going gold, and the definition of “gold” is almost unquestionably turning into “beta”: A studio finishes a game to get as complete as they can, to get as close as they can to the wishes of their higher-up’s for both the feature set and the timetable requested. The game is then packaged and sold to millions in its released locations. The developers then field the mass of bugs and issues that come up with the game, and release a patch over the ‘net shortly thereafter to fix what has come up. With PC games, this is okay – you can’t expect a developer to be able to test every driver, every setup that exists out there. But consoles? Come on.

As much as I am giddy for LBP’s release – they are only going to be releasing the online “create” functionality down the road. While their marketing spin on it almost makes sense (give the gamers time to actually learn the tools before you go working with others), it doesn’t remove them from hitting the principle problem.

Don’t rely on the internet to release an unfinished, unpolished product. It’s your job to keep your feature set managable in the time that you require to finish it in, including proper time to thoroughly test the product.

Review: PixelJunk Monsters

PixelJunk Monsters

When I had originally picked up my PS3, I had a few plans for it – Blu-Ray Player, some games from the PSN, and a few games. Mainly, I sprung for the system in anticipation of the release of LittleBigPlanet, and knew there would be some other games that would come along and find their home on the console. Sadly, the few games that I would have been interested in, I already own on the 360 (Assassin’s Creed, Call of Duty 4). I’m considering Ratchet and Clank, and The Darkness, but I hadn’t heard enough about the game itself for me to jump on the game from the start.

From the time of my purchase, the PS3 had 194 games in its library. With the exceptions of cross-platform titles that I already owned, I wasn’t drooling at any games other than a few gems in the PSN’s store. (Echochrome, flOw, Everyday Shooter, Crash Bandicoot 1, and PixelJunk Monsters)

Overview

From Wikipedia

Gameplay in PixelJunk Monsters borrows similarities from various tower defense titles. The objective is to build defense towers along the enemies’ path to keep them from reaching a hut, or base. Several small creatures dwell at the base. For each enemy that survives the defense towers and reaches the hut, one creature is killed. If all creatures are wiped out, the level is failed.

Towers have distinct attributes, such as rapid fire, long range, air-focused, etc. Destroyed enemies usually drop coins and occasionally give gems, which then can be used to build and upgrade towers.

There are a total of 21 different levels (36 with the expansion pack) at 3 stages of difficulty. There are also 3 special stages that unlock unique abilities for the player character.

Overall Reaction

From Desktop Tower Defense, Gem Tower Defense (a custom map for Warcraft III), and a few others, I’ve always had a small place in my heart for tower defense games. They’re simple, fun, and easily can waste a good amount of time without much effort. Beating tougher levels from these games generally take a good amount of strategy, preparation, and trial and error before you can beat the final levels of the game.

So when I was browsing the PSN, looking to purchase some games that I could actually begin to make use of my PS3, I couldn’t resist the opportunity to try another tower defense game. While this game wasn’t the best tower defense I’ve ever played before, I do enjoy the re-playability of these games, and look forward to be able to eventually play through with someone who’s familiar to the genre.

Weaknesses (What I’d Change)

Earning your keep
This was the first TD game that I’ve played where you needed to actually earn your gold (used to upgrade/build more towers), by scrambling to pick it up. Not only did it have a timed-life before it disappeared, but it also could be lost if your character hit any of the incoming creatures. While this adds a bit of difficulty to the game, I don’t think its the type of difficulty that the game needs. The focus of the difficulty should be designing a defense that stops the onslaught of enemies, not avoiding them with your character. Other games have allowed placing towers with the mouse, or at least not having collision with your character be an issue.

Variable Money
Monsters drop both gold and (sometimes) jewels. Gold is used to build towers, where jewels are used to upgrade towers and unlock new towers past your three generic starting towers. However, there is no way to convert one into the other. That means if you really needed to unlock that special anti-air tower, and you are one jewel short but have mass amounts of gold, your only hope of winning the round are building a mass of lower grade towers, and hope for the best. The separation of these two elements add quite a bit of frustration to the pool, and I’m sure they really add to the strategy scenario that well.

Unlock this tower again and again and again…
After playing one level, you may have been able to save up and unlock for a specific tower, but you are back at square one again the next level. Even after you pass to the next level of play (medium, hard levels), you still only have your lame first three towers that you get to start off with, grinding again to get the towers you enjoy using unlocked again. I think at a very basic level, certain towers should be allowed to be unlocked as the difficulty of play increases (again, create difficulty with the actual point of the game, not the side-pieces that were added in for flavor), rather than having to start at square one every level. (Note: I think they did something to fix this complaint in the expansion pack, which I have yet to buy)

Useful towers?
Aside of the three main towers, I used the laser tower for anti-air, and the napalm tower for anti-ground. That’s all I really needed. There was one certain type of monster that was resistant to fire-based attacks, but they seemed to fall incredibly fast to just the regular arrow towers. So out of a total of something like 11 towers, I usually found myself using five of them, and a sixth when hard bosses came around (the mortar tower). If you’re going to offer a variety of towers, make them versatile enough to offer use to the players so that they can be included in the strategy. For instance, the ice tower should have either had a faster rate of fire, or been able to hit multiple enemies at once. (Normally you use the ice tower in TDs to slow down large amount of monsters while your other strong towers pound on them). After one frustrated game of unlocking the ice tower to only find out how pathetically useless it was, I never unlocked it again.

Sparse abilities (spoiler)
You get a total of three unlockable abilities throughout the game, one is running fast, one is remote mines, and one is a lightning tower. I don’t think I have had the chance to unlock the tower yet, but I have unlocked the other two. Using a remote mine costs a whooping 5 gems, which are better used in unlocking and upgrading towers, so I never once used it. The running fast was necessary, as the character originally moves MUCH too slow to be enjoyable, and I found myself holding the run button for the entire game after I had unlocked the ability. While this was a somewhat fresh idea to be able to unlock abilities, it seems the execution of what was unlockable, and what came out from it was ill-concieved. The running should have been inlcuded from the beginning, and if this were the way to unlock towers, I would be much more content – provided those towers stay unlocked at the start of a new game.

Underused “Special” Modes
There were a few modes where you had a ton of money, or you had all the towers unlocked, or you only fought one type of monster the entire game. These were gems, and probably some of my favorite levels, but these should have not been individualized levels, but “modes” that you could either select from, or unlock, so you could enjoy every level with these options.

Anti-Climatic Ending
First, the game let me “beat” it before I had beaten all the levels. I would understand if it allowed this before I had gotten rainbows (perfect games) on every level, but beating the “final” level was enough for the game to consider itself conquered. And after that? Absolutely nothing. No unlocks, no special modes, nothing. Boo.

I think this game has more to offer, and will prove to be a bit more fun with someone else playing along, and I look forward to the remote play once I get a PSP, but until then, I’ll play away with my gripes and deal with it. (Maybe the expansion will make some of these things slightly less annoying)

The next step in evolution?

A few months ago a friend and I were talking about the movie I Am Legend, and he was telling me the ending of book was far different from the movie. In the end of the book, the “zombie” leader explained to the protagonist that he not fighting a disease but was merely impeding the progress of evolution.

I’ve been thinking similarly along the lines of where console gaming has been taking the industry over the recent years, and wondering if we’re experiencing a similar response, are consoles the next step in gaming? Sure, there’s been a pretty defined split between the two throughout the past, with certain genres (most specifically FPS) generally being dominated in the PC market, while other genres would dominate the consoles (such as platformers, racing, sports, etc.). That line has become more and more split with the growing success of the consoles, and there aren’t many games for the PC that you can’t pickup for a console nowadays.

Three years ago, PricewaterhouseCoopers released a report predicting the rise in console success and the slowing of the success of the PC. I used some of this data to show the aggregate growth of online gaming as a whole for Zapdot’s business plan, hoping that they’d be wrong down the road. I was primarily a PC gamer then, and have my roots in gaming from the PC FPS (Rainbow 6, Quake 2&3, UT2K3, and CS and CS:S). Competitive gaming had bloomed on the PC platform, and has had some amazing appeal to network television through its success: from interviews to short segments, to full blown TV shows. Not surprisingly, PWC wasn’t off their marker three years down the road. While I haven’t had access to current numbers to correlate to their estimates, it goes without saying that console gaming is flourishing now, with thousands making the switch daily.

Wednesday’s Penny-Arcarde post made me revisit these thoughts, and they made some of the same arguments I’ve been barking at for awhile.

First and foremost, Computers have been always the best platform out there in terms of the technology that can be utilized for the games themselves. They have always looked better, provided more vast experiences in online play, and for awhile, put you in touch with a much larger community. The biggest selling point for me (and the deciding factor for most hardcore PC gamers) was the precision of input on the computers always trumped that of its console counterparts.

However, I’ve even found myself spending more time on consoles lately, and the answer as to why is pretty easy: comfort. I can sit down on my comfortable couch, and pick up a game for a few hours on my HD TV, enjoying surround sound if the system I’m in provides it. Moreover, the TV and surround system I’m using doesn’t have to be solely set aside for just a gaming system (or systems). With broadband I can just as easily play online with my friends as I could with my computer, with an interface that is centralized around the gaming experience

To get a similar experience on a computer, the price is higher, and includes more wires, more setup time, and potentially, a bit more of frustration and hassle. Tycho put it best, saying that someone who would prefer this simplicity doesn’t make them an idiot, it makes them pragmatic.

So take the PC Platform, and look at what made it better than the console system: online interaction, hardware, and input devices. These major issues are being addressed by Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo. Microsoft’s Xbox LIVE service is utterly amazing compared to what is out there right now. Integration with its games are near seamless, communication and community itself work very well, and with online collaborations like bungie.net to allow screenshot and movie sharing is a giant leap in the right direction. Sony had the right idea with the hardware, putting out the most powerful gaming console that the market has ever seen. This is effectively their biggest issue right now though, as it will take years for coders to even fathom the use of six cores to their benefit in game design. Regardless of this point, we’ve got the “power” concept that we are constantly revisiting in the PC segment being addressed and dealt with. Lastly, we come to the incredible precision that a mouse and keyboard provides to the user. I won’t go out and say that Nintendo has covered this angle, but they are pioneering the industry in the right direction. Nintendo had the melons to release a completely new form of input into games, and tear the industry away from the standard stick-button controller approach that it had been comfortably relying on for the past two decades. This input isn’t the best in the world for trying to convert PC gamers into a hardcore FPS shooter, but it’s a step in the right idea that we need to rethink the hardware we are giving gamers to interact with their virtual environments as they toil through them, and that we should take a direction that is not only fun, and simple but intuitive as well.

So I wouldn’t jump and say that PC Gaming is starting to see it’s demise, because the lines of what PC Gaming is has become more and more blurred, where the typical boundaries that defined PC Gaming has been adopted and translated into today’s modern day consoles. Furthermore, while a PC will be considerably more powerful than the latest console, console hardware specifications are catching up. I think (and certainly hope) that while games will still be available on the PC as time continues, we will start seeing a movement towards a better input system that potentially mimics or improves the PC’s dominating stance in this area, and a more unified console experience for gamers. As a whole, I think this generation is just the final step before we get to see the next evolution in games in how they’re delivered, played, and experienced by gamers.

But until then, I still need to decide if I want to buy Bioshock for the PC or my 360.