Here, in as few thoughts as possible, is why so many in gaming are having an odd backlash to GTA 5.
1.Unlike previous entries, 5 tears into the left wing perhaps even more so than the right this time around, and that makes people who can't laugh at themselves uncomfortable. Now, we are the coffee-shop-dwelling yoga practitioners they're poking fun at, and all of a sudden the joke's no longer funny. Interesting.
2.The gaming press "scene" has become stuck on the idea of games being a conversation. GTA is not a conversation. It doesn't care what you have to say. It is a statement. It doesn't care what it makes you feel about yourself. It doesn't care what other, similar games are doing/have done. It is it's own thing.
3.People who have grown up with the series are older now, and more sensitive than they were back then. We're not only seeing this in games, but film and tv as well. Too much violence makes people feel uneasy.
4.They throw around terms like misogyny, racism, and torture as negatives, forgetting that they're playing a game about terrible people doing terrible things. The game is what it is, and always has been. Some will say that's a problem, but I don't. I like that every few years Rockstar delivers how they view American society presently.
Friday, September 27, 2013
Saturday, July 27, 2013
Ol' Phil
I'm of a few different opinions on this one.
On the one hand, Phil's a genius in the worst sense possible. He truly is gifted in a "Beautiful Mind" kind of way, but with that comes a complete lack of social skills. He really doesn't understand how to deal with being in the public eye, and that fucks him over time and time again.
On the other hand, Marcus Beard, the journalist in question, can be kind of a blow-hard asshole. At times he's on the money, and I don't get a sense of "fuck you just because" from him, but he does carry this air of "I can say whatever I want cause I'm British and into soccer." Which is where the blow-hard aspect comes into play.
So, I totally understand a guy like Phil stepping up and kicking the guy in the nuts, but the nut-kicking in question was uncalled for, in relation to what Marcus actually said.
At the end of the day, Phil has tantrums in public because he doesn't know how not to. I only hope this tantrum doesn't stick, because it'd break my heart if Fez 2 really did get shelved for good.
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
Top 10 0f 2012, Day 4
7. Hotline Miami
Drugs and murder. An amalgamation of these things comprise the cold, black heart beating inside Hotline Miami.
A theme some have chosen to explore in games this year is questioning what we, as the player, do in games, and why. Out of all the titles that explore that theme, none rub it in your face while giving you the finger harder than Hotline Miami. It's puts it's harsh world view up to your taped-open eyeballs, and before you can even begin to understand what's happening, you're hooked. An amazing soundtrack. Responsive, fun, and repetitious twitch-game play. These are the tools Hotline Miami uses to get you addicted.
While the story is completely bat-shit crazy in a "what if Hunter S. Thompson, Quentin Tarantino, and Keiichiro Toyama made a video game?" kind of way, there is a logic to it, and if you let it, Hotline Miami will reveal itself to you over the handful of hours it takes to complete. All you really need to know going in is you're an instrument of death and destruction, and man, is your trigger-finger itchy. Who you're killing, why you're killing them, and if they even deserve it are all questions better left behind as you progress through the game.
More than anything, though, Hotline Miami hands-down wins soundtrack of the year. While not originally created for the game, the assembled collection of songs fit perfectly, and add to the experience of playing in a way that few other soundtracks do. You are death incarnate, and this is your playlist.
For what is an incredibly low price of admission, Hotline Miami offers players an experience entirely unlike anything else on this list, and anything in gaming as a whole. The fact that it is completely addictive and enjoyable is only the icing on this bloody cake.
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
Top Ten of 2012, Day 3
8. XCOM: Enemy Unknown
They struck hard and without warning one night, taking all of humanity by surprise. Aliens... ruthless killing machines with an unknown agenda. It falls on your shoulders as the head of XCOM to exterminate this extra-terrestrial threat, and save the world... or at least, what's left of it.
And with that, you're thrown into the deep end of XCOM: Enemy Unknown, a reinvention of the classic strategy series. Developed by Firaxis, of Civilization fame, Enemy Unknown remains true to the decades-old originals while at the same time bringing the series into the modern world of gaming. At it's core, the title is a turn-based strategy game where you lead a squad of alien-hunting soldiers out into the unknown of one randomly-generated map after the next. On top of that, there's a resource managment aspect to the game in the form of your headquarters, where between missions you must perform autopsies, research new weapons, train soldiers, and maintain peace with your many diplomatic relations.
Keeping these many plates spinning is difficult throughout the entire game, but as least a few hours in you manage to get a better handle and understanding of how they each function and relate to each other. It's at this point you realize that even if you master all the different elements that comprise Enemy Unknown, it will still always present a tough challenge. This is because Enemy Unknown is an asshole of a game. The stakes are high, and it stays that way from start to finish. The aliens are cold-blooded and ruthless, taking out members of your squad with no remorse or hesitation.
That Firaxis manages to make you feel a connection to what are essentially disposable members of your squad, despite the fact that none of them have any spoken lines or individual characteristics, is a testament to how solid the leveling system is. These men and women literally go through the ringer at your command, and seeing them level up, progressively becoming stronger and more powerful, brings a sense of pride and satisfaction. That they can so easily be ripped away from you seems almost cruel on the part of the developers.
Despite it's several bugs, glitches, and frame-rate issues, XCOM: Enemy Unknown is a smart, user-friendly, modern day RTS. Even if you're not a fan of the genre, it is still very much worth your time.
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Top Ten of 2012, Day 2
9. Dust: An Elysian Tail
If ever there was truth to the idea of a work being more than the sum of it's parts, you could find that in Dust: An Elysian Tail. Although, truth be told, the individual parts that comprise Dust are just as impressive as the collective whole. Even more so when you realize that each of those individual parts were mainly designed by one person.
The first game from Humble Hearts studio, which is in fact just first-time developer Dean Dodrill, Dust sets out to acomplish several goals, and achieves them all masterfully. At it's core, the game is a hack-and-slash adventure in the style of Vanillaware's output, but that's far from all. Dust is basically everything Dean likes about video games all rolled up into one- there's a Metroidvania element, rpg mechanics, a combo system, a crafting system... I could go on.
Story-wise, Dust plays with the biggest trope used in both anime and rpg's- the mysterious hero with amnesia- but does so without it feeling tired and stale. This is mostly done through the pure charm of the storytelling and character designs- the world of Dust, despite it's sometimes-heavy subject matter, is a warm one... a place you enjoy inhabiting.
The combat and exploration all feel buttery-smooth, fun, and enjoyable. The combo system keeps the numerous battles from ever growing boring or repetitive, and there's just enough collectables, upgrades, and side-quests to keep you curious and uncovering different parts of the map.
In a time when over-the-top violence seems to dominate the medium, a select few games are reminding us that a game doesn't need blood by the bucket to be enjoyable. Dust: An Elysian Tail is one of them, and it's one of the best of the year.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Top Ten of 2012, Day 1
10. Mass Effect 3
On the surface, ME3 is the ultimate refinement of everything we've come to love about the series, but digging into the meat of the beast, EA's influence over Bioware becomes readily apparent.
From a marketing campaign focusing on the "sexy" and "new user friendly" aspects of the title, to the bigger emphasis on combat and multiplayer, it's easy to spot where a higher up within the company piped in with a "Well, what if we added..." This isn't to say that a game should be judged by the behind the scenes antics of it's production, but if the end result is a bad taste left in your mouth, you have to call a spade a spade.
So, looking past all that, what's left?
Well, what we're given is a title that does its best to wrap up years worth of A plots and B plots (and C,D, and E plots for that matter). Sometimes it all comes off a bit too convenient and tidy, but overall the resolutions are satisfying. One area where the game is sorely lacking is with the supporting cast. Major players from part 2, whom you assumed would be with you until the end, are benched for just about the entire game, despite having vital roles previously. One has to wonder why new characters are being introduced this late in the story while other characters that you're already invested in are literally stand around a waiting room for the entire game, as if there's nothing better to do.
What the benching of these characters does, whether it was Bioware's intent or not, is it places the focus of the narrative more on Shepard than the cast. The problem with focusing on the one instead of the many is that Shepard him or herself is only as interesting as the company they keep. Sure, you can build a story up around your individual version of Shepard, but we've spent hours and hours with these crew members, and our attachment to them is just as deep, if not deeper, than our investment to Shepard. That they are absent, or only minor players at best in this grand finale, makes it a lesser tale.
Regarding the tale, I wish I could tell you why it begins the way that it does, but seeing as I didn't purchase the last piece of DLC for ME2, I was left totally in the dark, and completely confused. I had to play catch-up, both online, and within the narrative, just to get a basic grasp of what had happened in the time between parts 2 and 3. Again, you have to call a spade a spade, Bioware/EA.
Once you're off and running (for reals- you flee Earth), the game gets to telling its story, and does so mostly competently. Mass Effect 3 is a war movie with a controller. The wide-eyed spectacle of the first game, and the down and dirty black ops nature of the second are traded in for Saving Private Ryan in space. The tone and level design fit with what they're doing with the narrative, but this leads to several sections of the game that just feel repetitive (which, seeing as some of these levels were built for multiplayer, they are) and lacking when compared to the high notes of the first two games.
Where Mass Effect 3 shines is it's one on one moments, and character resolutions. When it's just Shepard and someone that he's forced to put in harms way, those conversations are pure gold, and remind you that when they bring their a-game, Bioware are second to none. These scenes can be gut-wrenching at times, and I wished there were more of them in the final product. As it stands, the bulk of the game has weight and depth, but most of that is undermined by how everything plays out in the end.
As for the games ending, and how we get there, that's a whole different conversation. The end of Mass Effect 3 breaks the series in several ways, and is compounded by the addition of the extended cut material. At least with the original ending, you could say it was a definitive poor ending. Now, it's just muddy and reactionary. I've heard the Leviathan DLC fleshes out what comes in the ending further, and sets you up to be more accepting of it, but honestly if that's the case, then it should have been in the game. Just like the From Ashes DLC.
Mass Effect 3 is a mostly-enjoyable conclusion to the trilogy, but it should have been better. It should have been game of the year. And it's not.
On the surface, ME3 is the ultimate refinement of everything we've come to love about the series, but digging into the meat of the beast, EA's influence over Bioware becomes readily apparent.
From a marketing campaign focusing on the "sexy" and "new user friendly" aspects of the title, to the bigger emphasis on combat and multiplayer, it's easy to spot where a higher up within the company piped in with a "Well, what if we added..." This isn't to say that a game should be judged by the behind the scenes antics of it's production, but if the end result is a bad taste left in your mouth, you have to call a spade a spade.
So, looking past all that, what's left?
Well, what we're given is a title that does its best to wrap up years worth of A plots and B plots (and C,D, and E plots for that matter). Sometimes it all comes off a bit too convenient and tidy, but overall the resolutions are satisfying. One area where the game is sorely lacking is with the supporting cast. Major players from part 2, whom you assumed would be with you until the end, are benched for just about the entire game, despite having vital roles previously. One has to wonder why new characters are being introduced this late in the story while other characters that you're already invested in are literally stand around a waiting room for the entire game, as if there's nothing better to do.
What the benching of these characters does, whether it was Bioware's intent or not, is it places the focus of the narrative more on Shepard than the cast. The problem with focusing on the one instead of the many is that Shepard him or herself is only as interesting as the company they keep. Sure, you can build a story up around your individual version of Shepard, but we've spent hours and hours with these crew members, and our attachment to them is just as deep, if not deeper, than our investment to Shepard. That they are absent, or only minor players at best in this grand finale, makes it a lesser tale.
Regarding the tale, I wish I could tell you why it begins the way that it does, but seeing as I didn't purchase the last piece of DLC for ME2, I was left totally in the dark, and completely confused. I had to play catch-up, both online, and within the narrative, just to get a basic grasp of what had happened in the time between parts 2 and 3. Again, you have to call a spade a spade, Bioware/EA.
Once you're off and running (for reals- you flee Earth), the game gets to telling its story, and does so mostly competently. Mass Effect 3 is a war movie with a controller. The wide-eyed spectacle of the first game, and the down and dirty black ops nature of the second are traded in for Saving Private Ryan in space. The tone and level design fit with what they're doing with the narrative, but this leads to several sections of the game that just feel repetitive (which, seeing as some of these levels were built for multiplayer, they are) and lacking when compared to the high notes of the first two games.
Where Mass Effect 3 shines is it's one on one moments, and character resolutions. When it's just Shepard and someone that he's forced to put in harms way, those conversations are pure gold, and remind you that when they bring their a-game, Bioware are second to none. These scenes can be gut-wrenching at times, and I wished there were more of them in the final product. As it stands, the bulk of the game has weight and depth, but most of that is undermined by how everything plays out in the end.
As for the games ending, and how we get there, that's a whole different conversation. The end of Mass Effect 3 breaks the series in several ways, and is compounded by the addition of the extended cut material. At least with the original ending, you could say it was a definitive poor ending. Now, it's just muddy and reactionary. I've heard the Leviathan DLC fleshes out what comes in the ending further, and sets you up to be more accepting of it, but honestly if that's the case, then it should have been in the game. Just like the From Ashes DLC.
Mass Effect 3 is a mostly-enjoyable conclusion to the trilogy, but it should have been better. It should have been game of the year. And it's not.
Sunday, August 5, 2012
Max Payne's Sunset
Max Payne 3 is far from a perfect game, but it's a memorable experience, and one that I'd say was needed for Max himself for several reasons.
First and foremost, the game keeps Max around and in people's minds. He's a character that should never be idle for too long in the landscape of gaming or pop culture. In an age where the gritty anti-hero has become passe, Max endures as both representation and caricature.
Second, and most importantly, part 3 evolves Max in a few key ways. Up until now, Max was a creature of New York. The folly of sequels is usually they end up being more of the same- setting characterization, etc. With Max no longer in the hands of his creators- Remedy- it would be easy for just any studio to make another one of those games. Luckily, Rockstar aren't just any studio. What Rockstar did with 3 is move Max forward. He's no longer a creature of New York- he's now an avenging angel. One that belongs to the whole world. He's a pulp hero who can be anywhere he's needed.
So regardless of whatever iffy choices you may feel Rockstar made in terms of gameplay, or story, or whatever, realize that Max is in a better place now than he has been since the credits on part 2 started rolling.
Criminals the world over had better watch out. And if you haven't played Max Payne 3 yet, I strongly suggest you change that. It's a dark, bleak, and worthwhile experience.
First and foremost, the game keeps Max around and in people's minds. He's a character that should never be idle for too long in the landscape of gaming or pop culture. In an age where the gritty anti-hero has become passe, Max endures as both representation and caricature.
Second, and most importantly, part 3 evolves Max in a few key ways. Up until now, Max was a creature of New York. The folly of sequels is usually they end up being more of the same- setting characterization, etc. With Max no longer in the hands of his creators- Remedy- it would be easy for just any studio to make another one of those games. Luckily, Rockstar aren't just any studio. What Rockstar did with 3 is move Max forward. He's no longer a creature of New York- he's now an avenging angel. One that belongs to the whole world. He's a pulp hero who can be anywhere he's needed.
So regardless of whatever iffy choices you may feel Rockstar made in terms of gameplay, or story, or whatever, realize that Max is in a better place now than he has been since the credits on part 2 started rolling.
Criminals the world over had better watch out. And if you haven't played Max Payne 3 yet, I strongly suggest you change that. It's a dark, bleak, and worthwhile experience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)