ETA's GameLog

Half Life 2: Episode 2 (360) - Wed, 05 Mar 2008 21:37:30

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 21:37:30 CST

GAMELOG #5 ENTRY # 2 GAMEPLAY After roughly an hour and a half more of gameplay, the action has finally started to pick up. I am, more or less getting to shoot things on a regular basis now. However, I still feel like the game is lacking that certain magic that makes a good game great. But before I get to that, I’d like to to just say that I really hate the sound in the game. In a game they is story driven and about character just as much as it is about shooting, you would think that they would have the option to just turn up the volume of character’s voices without turning up all the sound effects. But for whatever reason this feature is lacking. So I have the option of not hearing anything anyone is saying during a fire fight, turning my TV up and angering my neighbors because the have to heard gun shots blasting, keep the remote close by so I can rapidly turn the TV volume up or down, or turn on subtitles. All those option suck and really take you out of the gaming experiment this game offers. It wouldn’t even be so bad if this little problem only affect narrative comprehension, but more often then not other character give you hints or objectives during battles (stuff like “fix the elevator!” or “enemies coming from this tunnel!”, you know really important stuff you would like to hear about) and it can cause a great deal of frustration (and sometimes death) to miss these audio queues. And now back to that lacking magic…At this point I honestly feel like playing this game is more of chore than a rewarding experience. I think that it is a combination between the “same-old-same-old” levels, the disconnection from battles when you have AI controlled team mates, and the lack of consistent rewards for playing. I generally don’t feel exciting or, in same rare instances, interested while exploring new areas because they are all starting to look alike. A dank and dark cave/underground rail rod/subway is about all you get. In fairness I think that I am about to finally get some outdoors action, but I can only comment on what I have played so far. And so far I have become pretty bored with the repetitive nature of the level themes and atmosphere in the game thus far. The AI controlled team mates offer another layer of interaction and gameplay options, but they also limit and in same cases exclude you in battle. The prime example of this occurs when ever there is an epic battle and you have an AI controlled team mate. They are pretty much invincible and take no damage. They also have what I can only guess is an unlimited supply of ammo. So not only can they pretty much handle the entire epic battle by themselves, but in some cases they box you out from participating at all because they are crack shoots as well. This has actually been an issue with FPS a lot lately (at least for me), where it is easier to just let teammates do the fighting since you probably won’t do as well and it waste your own ammo. Lastly, and this is probably why it feels like a chore at this point, I feel rather unrewarded for my efforts thus far. I have gotten one little nugget of honest-to-goodness narrative development (within context to the series and not just plot development for this game) and that is pretty much it. No power-ups, no super powerful weapons, no stunning moments of disbelieve or epic battles (that my teammates didn’t steal from me). I don’t even get that much satisfaction from shooting things with heavy weapons (like shoot guns) because most of the enemies react as if I had just hit them with a spit ball until I unload two or more shoots into them. Then they just fall over in a most unsatisfying fashion. DIESNG: Half Life 2: Episode 2 is an amazingly designed game on pretty much ever level. However, as I have expressed above, great design doesn’t automatically mean it is a great game. Despite my issues with the audio design, it is still pretty impressive (it would be almost perfect if I could hear what the hell everyone was saying). I honestly can’t tell if there is much music in the game (I could but I would have to turn it back on and check), if there is it blends in almost seamlessly with the background. In addition every sound effect, whether it be a zombie charging you or the sound of a bug being squished under your feet, is spot on. The sound always sets the perfect mood and is almost as much of a character as any other “actor” in this game. Repetitive tone aside, the level design is also quite well done. I have never felt completely lost or disoriented while playing the game. Even though there is rarely any clear marker for the direction that you should be going in, you as a gamer always “know” which is the right way. The down side to this is that the level feel very linear, even though they are far less so than other FPS on the market today. They are open and there is a good variety to them, but you cannot help but shake the feeling that you are on a track and that leads to feeling contained and restricted on the part of the player. The way that the narrative is presented and advanced is also very well done from a design point of view (though you can tell from my previous entry that I am not always a fan of it). Rarely is the story ever advanced with a non-interactive cut-scene. Instead, other characters talk to you and each other to advance the story in real time via pretty scripted events. All of which are usually very well (voice) acted and staged for maximum dramatic effect. This aspect more than any of the other design choices in the game really brings the world they developers have created to life. Other nice design touches include the way that hints and objectives are given to you. It is always a good design choice to have as little HUD clutter, pop up box hints/objectives, and anything else that might remind you that you are playing a game on a screen as possible. Especially in a game that is striving to be intense and suspenseful such as this one. In the sense it is great that all of this information is delivered to you, by in game characters, in real time…if only I could hear them. Also worth taking note of is the pacing of the game. It is generally pretty spot on which action slowly escalating towards the climax, then slowly settling down again before hitting bottom. There are of course the occasional issues here and there, but they are rare at best.

Half Life 2: Episode 2 (360) - Tue, 04 Mar 2008 23:22:34

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 23:22:34 CST

GAMELOG #5 ENTRY #1 SUMMARY: Half Life 2: Episode 2 is a sci-fi themed first person shooter. The game continues the story of Gordon Freeman, the main character of the series, as he continues to battle evil alien/extra-dimensional forces who have taken over the world and imposed a fascist regime. GAMEPLAY: Right off the bat it is obvious that like the pervious Half Life titles, this one makes liberal use of cinematic and scripted events. Characters interact with you in a convincing fashion and the narrative in generally interesting (if a little convoluted and over dramatized). The game kicks off with a brief intro to the controls and is then followed by a long scripted event that catches you up on the story from the previous game and sets up the main goal for this game. Though I enjoy the story well enough I have never been a fan of these “interactive cut-scenes” that litter the game, especially in the episodic ones (this and episode one) since you already are playing a game much shorter than a “full” game would be. I actually get annoyed and frustrated with these parts of the game more than anything. It is not as relaxing or passive as watching a cut-scene, because I still have to move and navigate my character in order to advance the story or other player actions, and at the same time they are not nearly as fun as normal gameplay. The amount of restriction that is put on me, and the fact that I just feel like I am more or less on rails, is not the way to make me enjoy a FPS. If I am playing a FPS and my hands are on the control I expect to be on edge waiting to shoot something, or in the process of shooting something, not passively wondering around picking up things and flinging them with my gravity gun just to stay the least be amused. When the action does finally get going it is pretty good, but not great. After roughly an hour of gameplay there has been very little in terms of “oh my god!” action or suspense. And quite frankly if a FPS (especially one that was made famous for the mood it set and they way it presented itself) isn’t delivering action or suspense at steady intervals then what is the point? I have also not encountered any puzzle elements yet that would have added some challenge to the game. Instead I am “treated” to little nuggets of action in between long “interactive cut-scenes”. This is not to say that the game is bad; it is actually very, very good from a design point of view and I am very interested (and invested since I have been playing these games for years now) in the continuation of the story. But I just feel like this game should offer more in terms of gameplay and fun at this point. I mean how many shooters does it take more than an hour into to really get the action going? When action does finally arrive however, I can’t help but feel a strange sense of deja-vu. Like I have played the same thing many times before. Maybe I can only be amused by the same tricks and repetitive looking scenery for so long. I was excited to see that the game looked like it was going to take place outside more (a nice departure from the usual dank cave, warehouse, or subway) but so far it has been more of the same in terms of landscape. Hopefully after another hour or so things will pick up, because as of right now it has been a pretty average gameplay expereice. (This entry has been edited1 time. It was last edited on Wed, 05 Mar 2008 21:38:02.)

Katamari Damacy (PS2) - Sat, 16 Feb 2008 18:47:24

Sat, 16 Feb 2008 18:47:24 CST

GAMELOG 4 ENRTY #2 GAMEPLAY: After a little bit over another hour and a half with Katamari Damacy (KD) some of the issues that bother me less in the first hour are starting to bother me a lot more. The controls are really starting to get on my nerves, especially when the ball gets bigger (and to a lesser extent when it is smaller). They seem a little unresponsive, with cost you precious seconds, and moving the camera around it a pain. You don’t have direct control over it, instead you have to move your character and the camera adjusts in response. The confusing and very non-intuitive controls don’t exactly make this an easy task (some movement is done by using one, either the left or right it doesn’t matter, and some is done by pressing both in the same or opposite direction and push up move you left and down moves you right…easy right?). Speaking of the camera, it gets the way a good amount when the ball gets to relatively large size. Aside from it being hard to see what is in front of you (making it hard to avoid hazards that will knock objects off your ball and cost you time) it often gets caught inside a building or behind a wall, so you are left rolling around blindly until it adjusts itself. Very frustrating to say the least. Inconstancies in the game world are also starting to make me frustrated. Why can I pick up a penguin but not a barrel that is clearly smaller than the penguin? Since mass seems to have nothing to do with gameplay (and if it does why is there only an indicator that measures the size of the ball and not its mass?) I don’t understand what is the problem. With that said the game is still very fun. I am really starting to get into now that I start with a large ball in each level and I can now roll up really big things (like people, benches, fences, vending machines, etc). Interestingly enough some of the levels seem to have an almost racing like feel to them, which I find pretty fun. Getting the ball up to high speeds and plowing through a bunch of objects (while picking them up of course) while avoiding obstacles that would cost you time and knock objects off the ball is really fun. The game is also still very rewarding in terms of pure gameplay (of course the cut scenes and dialog are still horrible) but I have stumbled upon something that has actually decreased my enjoyment of the game somewhat. After having to repeat a level a few times I realized that the goal to this game pretty much boils down to memorizing the “best path” in a level (i.e, figure out where to go to pick up small stuff for your ball then get it to a certain size, then move on to the area with the next biggest stuff, and so on). I guess its nothing major, but once I realized this it did affect my enjoyment of the game quite a bit. Still a fun game, but not as fun as before when I was just cruising around and picking things up having a blast getting my ball bigger and bigger. DESIGN: KD is a very unique gameplay experience and has an equally unique set of design characteristics. I’ll start with the superficial stuff, the visual look and the sound. The in game music and sound effects are nothing special, nor are they bad, They do fit the game quite well however. The half-pop-half-elevator music sound track fits the tone of the game perfectly; it is quirky, lighthearted, and fun. Also, it does a good job of blending into the background of the game and keeping the gameplay relaxing and never too tense. The visuals also set a clear tone for the game. Its is not suppose to be a “serious” game at all. Judging from the art style I would say that it is not even suppose to make much sense. The cartoony visuals are an excellent fit for a game that clearly doesn’t take itself too seriously. It is interesting to note, that even thought the core gameplay mechanic is so fun, I don’t think that it would work with any other visual style quite as well. I can’t picture this game being half as fun if it was photo-realistic or had some kind of dark/grimy art direction that took itself too seriously. As mention in my first gamelog, this game isn’t about story, or character or plot it is all about the core gameplay mechanic of rolling you ball around and adding to it. The entire game is naturally build around this mechanic and almost all aspects of the game are executed nearly flawlessly. Simply put, all the levels (which in turn constitute the entire game) that I have played so far as excellent and very well though out. Every time a level starts there are sections that you cannot access because your ball is too small. So you roll around collecting what you need to get it bigger. But once your ball is a certain size areas of the game that were once easily accessible to you before now become difficult to navigate or impossible to get into because of the size of your ball. For example, navigating you ball around a tight area like a little alley isn’t too hard until it is the size of a small house. Then it becomes almost impossible and you lose of lot of time having to do it. So as one the challenge of getting your ball bigger gets easier (the bigger it is the easier it is to pick up other large things) the challenge of navigating your ball through the environment gets harder. This trade off promotes strategy (or memorizing the best path if you have played the level before) and replay since you always want to beat your best time. This inverse relationship is also where most of the challenge in the game comes from. And despite it sounding deceptively simple, it is quite frustrating and requires a lot of coordination and in advance planning. The reward system is also very satisfying and again is derived directly from the gameplay. To be more precise, the reward system IS the gameplay. Other than the time restriction (beating your best) and the arbitrary “collection” (a little gallery of the items you have collected) there is no other reward except for the satisfaction you get from making your ball bigger and bigger and being able to roll up larger and larger items. It is extremely satisfying to roll up cows, cars, people, street signs, and other large items that we in life generally perceive as being “bigger” than us and can’t directly manipulate in real life. It is very fun to get to treat these things as toys that you can manipulate and collect.

Katamari Damacy (PS2) - Fri, 15 Feb 2008 23:11:37

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 23:11:37 CST

GAMELOG 4 ENTRY #1 SUMMARY: Katamari Damacy (KD) can best be described as puzzle game (though I wouldn’t say it fits into any genre very well). The object is to roll a ball around an environment, picking up objects that are small enough to get stuck to the ball along the way. The goal is to get the ball bigger and bigger, by gathering larger and larger items, until its diameter is bigger than a certain preset lower bound (given to the player at the begging of the level). The puzzle aspect comes from the fact that you have a time limit to complete your goal and you much pick the best “path” to win (or beat your best time). GAMEPLAY: The first hurdle for me to get into this game came in the form of the controls. They are fine once you get use to them, but they are not that intuitive nor the best set up that I think could have been used in a game like this. The controls, at first and to a lesser degree still do, feel more like a hindrance to gameplay rather than an efficient way to communicate with the action on the screen. The second hurdle was the story and dialog. While some of the random cut-scenes that advance the paper thin narrative are slightly amusing, the dialog that you have to have with this “space king” (your father and the guy that gives you your time limits, ball size, and tips) is mind numbing and dumb. I cringe every time I am forced to go through them (luckily I found out that most, but not all, are skip-able) and they break up the fun way too much. The fact that I have to sit through bad puns and some boring cut scene of a “star being placed back in the sky” (which is the basically a synopsis of the paper thin narrative I mentioned earlier) is a major downer on my fun factor. But, lets be honest, the story and the dialog are just window dressing. This game is about one thing: the core gameplay mechanic. And that is where this game truly shines. The core gameplay mechanic is of course the rolling of the ball and getting things to stick to it. This simple little action offers a ton of fun, strategy and rewards. When you start out the ball is pretty small, so you can’t pick up much (maybe some thumb tacks or dice) and are pretty limited in your actions and it can be a little frustrating how little of the world that you can interact with (i.e., pick up). The main goal at this point in the game is to collect as much little stuff as possible while avoiding large hazards (like cats, people, and toy cars all of which knock items off your ball and make it smaller) all the while upgrading your balls size to allow you to pick up larger and larger items. However, once you get a decent size ball going the game is insanely fun and the world becomes your oyster. All those things that were once hazards that were to be avoided (chairs, cats, TVs, toy cars, etc) are now fodder to make your ball bigger. There is something very satisfying to me about being kicked around by a cat one minute and having it run in hear of my massive ball only to be sucked up by it a minute latter. Getting revenge: always a fun gameplay element in my book. And in generally I feel very rewarded when I am able to capture bigger and bigger items in my ball that started out life no bigger than a baseball. In fact, I am compelled while playing to see how much more stuff I can get stuck to my ball. That is I want to keep playing just to see what I can roll up next. In my last level before calling it quits to right this up I finally got it big enough to roll up a person, and I know that its only going to get bigger and better from here on out. Aside from actually making me want to play more as I get deeper and deeper into the game, I also find myself “in the zone” when playing KD (which is always huge plus and a sign of a great game in my book). As the ball grows you lose yourself more and more in the game as you plow through a house (or whatever the level might be) and just become “one with the game”. This a truly great feeling, and KD is a truly great game with a novel premise and great gameplay.

Call of Duty 3 (360) - Sat, 09 Feb 2008 00:49:45

Sat, 09 Feb 2008 00:49:45 CST

ENTRY #2 GAMEPLAY: After another hour of gameplay I have just remembered something I probably should have recalled before I started to play this game: I don’t like WWII games. I don’t like the guns, I don’t like the atmosphere, I generally don’t like the stories, and in general I don’t like much about them (which is not to say I haven’t like a few like “Brother’s in Arms” for example). Unfortunately, CoD3 is no exception to this rule. The underpowered “authentic” weapons do not make for an enjoyable experience and the war-torn fields, barns, churches, and battered European cities of WWII games make for pretty uninteresting level design to me. CoD3 features all of these and doesn’t pull them off particularly good or particularly bad. It falls right in the sweet spot of average. At least the action has picked up in the second hour of playing, but not to the point where I feel this game is a must play. The wide-open areas of the game are now a little more focused and I feel like I have a little more control over what is happening in these sections of the game, but not to the point that I like in my FPS games. These areas of the game still suffer from some major drawbacks, which is a shame because these could (and should) be the best and most tension filled parts of the game. I find the fact that my squad is pretty much oblivious to my actions to be pretty annoying. They just go about their business (shooting whoever is within range) like I am not there. In most cases I can just hang out in the back of the lines, wait for most of the area to be cleared then finish up the battle and move forward so the game can be advanced (since your squad usually requires you to make the first move forward in order to progress…which is odd since they pay no attention to you otherwise). There are also very few ways to approach these wide-open levels. The game doesn’t reward you or make it appealing to flank for example, so you are pretty much forced to play these big, wide open areas in a pretty linear and predetermined fashion. When you aren’t in an all out fire fight, you are pretty much back to the same old same old follow the clearly marked trench/road/corridor/river to your next wave of enemies or objective. Its not particularly bad, but certainly not that original or interesting enough to keep me coming back to this game for more. In fact, nothing in this game really makes me want to “come back for more”. The rewards system in the game seems to need to get a serious kick in the butt. Like I said above, in most cases you are not reward (and usually punished with a quick death) for trying to do anything outside of follows the linear path to your goal. You there isn’t any health or much concern out ammo I’ve encountered so far so no rewards there, there is no real power-ups or specials to speak of, I don’t get anything “cool” (like nice dramatic explosions for a well placed grenade) so there isn’t much glory to be had for me either. Overall, the lack of rewards and linear gameplay put a damper on things for me. If I recall correctly this game was pretty well received when it came out. I’m not sure if it is a case of a game that didn’t stand the test of time or if people were just desperate for a next-gen FPS, but I definitely don’t see what is so special about it. DESIGN: Despite its more or less lack luster gameplay and fun factor, CoD3 does have some very nice design elements. The most obvious one (and the one that has the most effect on gameplay) is the fact that you have to aim down the irons of your gun to get an accurate shot rather than just point with the cross hairs. This minor, but very important, design choice really adds a level of skill and complexity to an otherwise standard affair game. It’s a limiting factor, in that your view is pretty obstructed (except for what is in your irons) and your movement is more limited, but it adds a layer of skill and an element of emersion to the game (making the player that much more connected with their faceless in-game counter part). Another nice design touch is the role that your AI controlled squad mates play in the game. Aside from adding to the tone of the game they serve multiple functions that would normally require a HUD or other element that would separate the player from the game world by one more degree. Yes, there is a mini-map and a way to check your objectives from the menu, but there isn’t much need for either of these as your squad mates provide most of the in game hints and objectives you need. Squad mates will issues orders, give you hints (like shouting “use the tank for cover!” at the beginning of level where you will be torn to pieces if you don’t), lead you to your next objective (either by taking point or calling for you assistance), and generally act as your in game tutorial when needed. As mentioned above, the level design is pretty linear. This did make the game less enjoyable for me, but from a design point of view there are impressive. The world feels and looks big, but you never really feel lost or disoriented. Always knowing (or at least having a good idea) of what you are suppose to do next in a level is always a plus when it comes to level design in my book. Unfortunately where the game falls down is on the challenge and rewards design aspects (as mentioned above). I, as a player, feel so disconnected from the action at some points in the game that most of the meaningful play, and thus challenge, are sucked right out of the game. The fact that I rarely feel rewarded for my efforts (I don’t consider progressing the game and getting pretty “ho-hum” cut-scenes much of a reward) pretty much killed the fun for me. The rewards (and cool parts of the game) are spread too thin and don’t work hard enough to keep my attention. And all the other good points in the design cannot make up for this huge flaw.

Call of Duty 3 (360) - Fri, 08 Feb 2008 23:04:31

Fri, 08 Feb 2008 23:04:31 CST

ENTRY #1 SUMMARY: Call of Duty 3 is a first person shooter set in World War II. You take control of a solider whose unit participates in many historical (and not so well known) battles from WWII. As in most FPS games the goal is to kill all enemies that stand between you and your game progress. GAMEPLAY: After spending about an hour or so with Call of Duty 3 (CoD3) and getting past the introduction mission and the first real mission, I feel like I have a pretty good handle on what this game has to offer. The game follows a pretty formulaic FPS standard. You march down a map in a very linear fashion (even though the levels appear to be quite big, you have very little options on where to go) completing objectives and killing enemy solders along the way. I appreciate the fact that the intuitive level design never really leaves you wondering where to go, but at the same time it takes a good deal of the drama and tension out of the game. Occasionally you encounter sections of levels that are very wide open and chaotic as wave after wave of enemies plummet you and your squad mates in a very movie like fashion. These scenes could be very dramatic and tense but instead because they are so chaotic and large I end up feeling very disconnected from the action and not the least bit on the edge of my seat. It seems like I have very little control over the flow of battle (or gameplay) in these parts of the game. This may be intentional on the part of the designers to make you feel like the war is outside of your hands or something like that, but is definitely not something that I find particularly fun in a FPS. In fact it is often easier to just sit back in these situations and let the entire platoon of AI controlled soldiers do their thing. As far as ascetics go the game does go for a very movie-esqu and realistic tone. There are some movie type cut-scenes, which advance a narrative, but quite frankly I’m not that interested in it (they seem kind of cliché to me) and I feel like it just breaks up the action way too much. The realism of the game isn’t really helped by the gameplay much either. Weapons feel like they do too little damage, almost like they are toys, and the action never really feels quite right to me. Overall, I see this game shaping up as a very run of the mill FPS experience. The game tries to be very “epic” with wide open and bloody battles at times, but I have played games that have seemed much more epic without trying half as hard. (This entry has been edited2 times. It was last edited on Fri, 08 Feb 2008 23:05:44.)

Shadow of the Colossus (PS2) - Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:14:50

Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:14:50 CST

Entry #2: GAMEPLAY: After spending yet another hour with SotC I must say that the games flaws are definitely out shining everything it does right at this point. The navigation is simply horrible, and I am not just talking about the “navigate by sword” feature (which is horrible too mind you). The combination of constantly fighting the camera and a bleak, more or less featureless landscape make finding where I am suppose to go a burden. The map (access via the pause menu) might as well just not be there because it provides no help at all Once I do eventually find where I am suppose to go things don’t get much easier. What I am supposed to do and how I am supposed to do it is never very clear in this game. And I am not sure if that is intentional or not? Coming to a giant swamp with a big “tower” looking thing with some obvious ramps in the middle scream “climb me!”. So naturally you do, but once at the top you have to navigate a series of jumps are not very obvious. The slow, slightly unresponsive controls and god awful camera don’t help making this pin point jumps any easier. Once you finally do get to a boss/level (since they are pretty much one in the same in this game) the fun finally starts. But in my little over one hour of play I only got the chance to have one fight! The rest of that time was spent trying to find my way and doing other tasks that made me want to turn the game off and not even bother with it. The battle itself was fun once you figured out how to climb the monster. The crypt hints are never any help in these battles. I guess I was suppose to figure out that “The armor he is wearing looks weak…” means that I am supposed to get the monster to take a swing at me while I stand on this little stone circle and move out of the way which results in him hitting the stone, breaking his armor and allowing me to climb up to his weak points to kill him…Its so obvious right? I don’t know why it took me 15 minutes and a crap load of luck? Why am I going you boring details like this instead of discussing the game play? Well because over 1 hours of gameplay in this game is equivalent to one boss fight and a lot of wondering around. Not much interesting to report about I guess. I suppose I could have played for another hour. But quite frankly, I don’t think I want to continue play this game any longer. DESIGN: This game is one odd duck. This actually fights with the colossi are great. But everything else rangers from tolerable to awful. I’ll start with the colossi battles. Simple put, whoever came up with the type of gameplay design was a genius. No levels, well not in a traditional sense, instead each level in a giant monster that is you must platform hop on. This opens up a lot of gameplay possibilities. How many other games offer dynamic and constantly changing levels? Even the design of each boss is exactly pulled off. Each one offers a few different ways to navigate them each of which has their own advantages. For example, in one battle you can climb up the front or back of a colossus. The front gets you to its kill point quicker but is harder to navigate and hang on while the back is pretty easy to climb and avoid being thrown off, but then you have to get to the kill point in a round about way. However, despite their technical greatness (in both innovation and originality) they wear out their welcome quickly because of the games other major flaws and are not enough to hold this game up on their own. Basically, the game falls down when it comes to design is everywhere else. Lets start with the most superficial part of the experience: The music. Simply put, its terrible. It does a nice job of dramatizing battles, but it becomes annoying very quickly. The fact that it repeats so much and a boss battle can take about 30 minutes to complete means it wears out its welcome quickly. Moving on to the visuals, they are bland and unappealing. The landscape looks boring and plain and while the art style is not bad it is nothing unique or special if feel (though the monsters do look nice). I know I keep harping on it, but the camera is the single worst design element in the game. Its hard to tell if it is just badly programmed or if the designers intentionally made it so it focuses on what they thought you should be looking at at any given moment. Its almost like they wanted to have a fixed camera, but at the last minute changed this minds and gave control to the player. Inconsistencies in what you can and cannot climb on are also a major drag. Why I can’t just hop on a colossi’s foot and start climbing is beyond me since it looks like it is the same texture and surface as other areas that I can climb on. In fact, that fact that you have to usually wait for some kind of “action” on the part of the boss in order to start climbing it is one of the biggest draw backs to the battles. These monsters move slow, and if you have to wait for it to swing at you with a giant sword or rear up on its hind legs to get in into a position for climbing is just bad design. It makes battles longer and more frustrating than they have to be and to me seems like a mechanism to add challenge to the game in an underhand manner. Instead of, for example, by designing more complicated or well thought out levels/bosses the designers just decided they could extended the battles by making you wait anywhere from 30 seconds to 2 minutes to get another shot at it. On closing, I’d like to say that the controls are stiff and unresponsive (which again I don’t know if that was intentional or not), the horse controls like a tanks (and for some reason pushing forward doesn’t make it move forward, you have to hold down X) and gets in your way during battle, and the “fetch quest/go to x and do y” structure of the game is not that appealing to me. Overall, ever element in this game’s design seems to work against it or adds a layer of challenge as lazily and inefficiently as possible (i.e., to extend the life or increase difficulty without having to put too much thought into it). (This entry has been edited1 time. It was last edited on Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:15:49.)

Shadow of the Colossus (PS2) - Wed, 23 Jan 2008 23:56:50

Wed, 23 Jan 2008 23:56:50 CST

Entry #1 SUMMARY: Shadow of the Colossus is a third person action-adventure game set in a fantasy world full of giant monsters (colossi). The goal is to hunt down and kill these monsters per some unseen mystical beings orders in exchange for returning you friend (or girlfriend or maybe wife…I didn’t watch the intro movie or read the manual) from the dead. The catch is that these colossi are giant, easily the size of a three or four story building, and you must climb them, while they lumber around and attempt to shake you off, in order to slay them. GAMEPLAY: After a little over an hour of playing the game and two colossi later, I can honestly say this game is one hell of a mixed bag. I’ll start with the bad. The camera, right off the bat is very frustrating to control and putting a major damper on the fun of the game. Having to constantly fight the camera to get it into the position that I want is single handily making one of the most unique gameplay experiences I’ve had in recent memory somewhat of a grind. In the game you also get a horse to help you navigate the large (but pretty barren) landscape. I use the term “horse” loosely here as trying to maneuver the animal is tantamount to driving a tank. The controls are so stiff and feel so unresponsive that if it weren’t for the fact that it would take three or four times as long to run across a field without it, it wouldn’t even bother with it. Add to the fact that it is constantly getting in my way during battle and it is easily the worst character in the game (despite its lack of lines or personality, I still hate it). You are also not given any form of HUD or maker points. Instead you are forced to “navigate by sword” which is a fun and easy as it sounds…not at all. I guess they did it to minimize the HUD, but since you have a life bar, “hang on bar”, and what weapon you are using icon I don’t see why a little mini-map would have been such an issue. With that said, I do appreciate the fact that the HUD is keep to a minimum as it does immerse you more in the game world. And what a world it is. Those problems above aside this game is pretty extraordinary. There aren’t any real “level” to speak of. The levels are the boss battles (or rather the bosses themselves). And the game is nothing but a barrage off boss battles. So how can you make boss battle after boss battle fun? Simple, make the bosses the size of buildings, require that you pint size hero climb them while they try to shake you off and stomp/crush you to death only to deal death blow after death blow with you sword to their “weak spots”. The battles are nothing short of epic. After you take down one of the colossi you really feel like you have accomplished something. The fluid climbing and “hanging on” animations help throw you into the game as well. You feel like at any second you could be tosses from these monsters. It’s a little hard to describe the genius of making the bosses into one giant level, let alone the how seamlessly it is pulled off. As for other aspects like the story or characters…well quite frankly I have no idea who they are, why they I should care about them, or why I’m bring these monsters down. All I do know is that despite its flaws this game is beyond a doubt an amazing experience that I will definitely want to see through until the end. (This entry has been edited2 times. It was last edited on Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:32:41.)

Prince of Persia: The Sand of Time (PS2) - Sun, 13 Jan 2008 19:31:57

Sun, 13 Jan 2008 19:31:57 CST

Entry #2 GAMEPLAY: After taking a day long break and coming back to play this game again I feel its not the easiest thing to pick up an play again. In any given level its not to clear where you are suppose to be going, so if you don’t remember what you were doing and which direction you were progressing in the last time you played the game (like I me) you spend a little while wondering around trying to figure out where to go next. But once things get rolling along it’s a nice experience once again. Having spent more time with the game, I can safely say that the combat is starting to wear on me. Not to the point where I want to quite playing the game, but it definitely feels like a chore more than an enjoyable experience. It is what I will call “skilled” button mashing (meaning it requires some timing and skill to avoid death), but it is still button mashing nonetheless and it begins to wear out its welcome rather quickly. Repetitiveness aside, it does still look pretty cool but I can’t imagine that carrying the combat for the rest of the game. The story in the game is nothing particularly special either. It does provide you and your character with your motivation from hacking down all these enemies and solving all these puzzles, but its not very engrossing. I can also appreciate the fact that the game wants to be cinematic, but the constant barrage of cut-scenes after every little thing (after every battle you are greeted with an unskipable cut scene of you holstering you weapons for example) actually breaks up my gameplay experience instead of enhancing it. There are occasions where they do actually enhance the experience however. The main one being the short cut-scene following every save point that shows you what you will be doing in the “future”. These scenes keep with the games theme of time and give you nice little hints about what you should be doing in any particular level with an annoying HUD display or pop up message that would ruin the atmosphere. DESIGN: SoT is actually an odd mix of very good design choice and some that makes me ask “what were they thinking”. Thankfully, there are more of that former than the latter. The level design with respect to platforming is superb. All the levels I have played have had a natural progression in regards to where I should be jumping/climbing/running to next. Each level is also very well “timed”, that is you characters ability to run on walls runs out at just the right moment that you need to jump off a wall onto a near by platform for example. Everything flows very nicely in each level. The same cannot be said for the actual navigation and progression (i.e., “where do I go/what do I do next?”). Once the platforming is done and you have to get to the next area, the way is not very well indicated. Unlike when platforming, the level design doesn’t do a very good job of seamlessly “telling” me where I should be going to next through the layout of the level (as you find games with excellent level design). I often found myself stuck because I was not clear that I had to push a bookcase out of the way to access a door way or I would miss a switch to open a door because it was not clearly marked. No visual or audio clues were given so I simply had to wonder around until a tip popped up telling me what to do when I finally got close enough to an object (as is the case with the bookcase) or I died and was respawned at the location of a key item or switch. Maybe to help get around the limitation there is a cool little design concept that shows you your “future” (which is basically a little tutorial that shows you how you are suppose to get things done), but you are only shown key actions and often those are just how you should navigate the platforming which doesn’t need to be explained as it is very well designed. As mentioned above, the game is very cinematic and cut-scenes do add to the game’s atmosphere and presentation. But the fact that they happen so frequent and in some cases seem out of place is more of a hindrance then a plus to gameplay (see above for more of my feelings about that). I don’t know if so many were included because of technical limitations (that is it is nice to see a cut-scene than a load screen) or because they wanted your character to look like a bad ass and the game to feel like a movie, but either way they are for the most part a major minus. Some of the nicer, little design touches include getting hints from in game characters rather than from pop up text boxes (like during a puzzle a NPC would basically yell that you were doing it wrong or to “Think about what you are going” if you were going about collecting a series of pillars in the wrong order for example), the ability to regain health by drinking water from fountains or lakes (rather than just collecting hearts or turkeys or magic red orbs), and the use of the rewind time feature to give you character extra lives without having to have a little icon of your head with a “times n-number of lives” next to it (like on a Mario game for example). (This entry has been edited3 times. It was last edited on Thu, 17 Jan 2008 01:04:06.)

Prince of Persia: The Sand of Time (PS2) - Sun, 13 Jan 2008 01:42:36

Sun, 13 Jan 2008 01:42:36 CST

Entry #1 SUMMARY: Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time is a single player third person action game in which your character, “the Prince”, posses the ability to pause and rewind time. The gameplay focuses on hand-to-hand combat and platforming as your character navigates a 3D environment battling enemies and advancing the narrative along the way. The time control aspects comes into play in both combat, allowing you to gain an edge over enemies, and in the platforming, allowing you to correct fatal mistakes like falling to your death. GAMEPLAY: After spending about an hour with the Sands of Time, I feel that this game should be judged on two separate criteria: as a platforming experience and as an action experience. I’ll start with the latter. As an action game, SoT is pretty standard fare. While from the get go you feel like a powerful warrior thanks to a nice set of combos and the ability to perform feats of acrobatic skills during combat with ease, it is a pretty standard button masher. Even though the moves I am pulling off look pretty cool, the fact that I’m more or less button mashing makes me feel disconnected from the action on the screen. I am also a big fan of making “hits” (weather in a fighting game, an action game, or even a football game) really look like they hurt. In SoT I feel like I’m giving the enemies little loves tapes until they hit the ground and I finish them off. Overall, if this was just a standard action game it would rate average at best. However, where the game really shines for me is in the platforming. Your character posses the ability to run across vertical walls, jump from wall to wall, swing on polls, and perform various other circus style tricks. All of which come into play in any given level multiple times. There is nothing like running across a wall then leaping onto a pillar hanging in mid air, followed by several more jumps to hanging pillars and navigating a series of flag polls to your final destination. It not only plays well, but it also looks good. Very good actually, which is important for drawing me more into the game. When you navigate a level well, making seamless jumps and dismounts, you truly feel like a bad ass. I actually want to continue playing to get to more complicated levels. But why haven’t I touched on the time controlling aspects you ask? Well as the moment they haven’t proved that useful in either combat or platforming a seem like a clever way to give you character “extra lives” via the rewind feature (if I fall to my death while platforming I can just rewind and get a second chance. But I have a feeling that they will come into play with puzzles and what not later. (This entry has been edited6 times. It was last edited on Sun, 13 Jan 2008 19:36:12.)