 |
|
Feb 9th, 2008 at 00:49:45 - Call of Duty 3 (360) |
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.
read comments (1)  - add a comment  - read this GameLog  |
|
Feb 8th, 2008 at 23:04:31 - Call of Duty 3 (360) |
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 edited 2 times. It was last edited on Feb 8th, 2008 at 23:05:44.
add a comment - read this GameLog |
|
Jan 25th, 2008 at 21:14:50 - Shadow of the Colossus (PS2) |
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 edited 1 time. It was last edited on Jan 25th, 2008 at 21:15:49.
read comments (1) - add a comment - read this GameLog |
|
Jan 23rd, 2008 at 23:56:50 - Shadow of the Colossus (PS2) |
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 edited 2 times. It was last edited on Jan 25th, 2008 at 20:32:41.
add a comment - read this GameLog |
|
|
 |
| ETA's GameLogs |
|
ETA has been with GameLog for 16 years, 7 months, and 27 days |
view feed xml
|
| Entries written to date: 10 |
|
