ForceBoy: Unleashed

Who throws TIEs around like frisbess but has a tough time with stun baton guy who appears to be ex-Air traffic control with palsy (this could also explain the real story behind bringing down the stardestroyer).

They could have used the tech to make another Jedi Knight game with actual lightsaber system that inspired dueling like the films and a story that feels less forced (no pun). That also would have been mutliplayer friendly as were past Jedi Knight games.

Yeah, a Jedi/Sith lightsaber confrontation on a Bespin bridge style map, ending in an armless Jedi (your buddy) corpse, being force flung across the miles deep shaft, slamming into the other Jedi (buddy #2) knocking him down the shaft, leaving the Holocron (CTF flag) on the bridge, only the Sith (you) get sniped by the bounty hunter class (fuck, make this a bot, doesn't matter) with a disrupter before you can return the "flag"...yeah, no one wanted that...

We needed another game that tells us to  "HIT B-B-B-B-B-B-B!!!".

Posted by Rhysode @ 4:51 pm EDT | Permalink | 2 Comments

How much for a good review score?

Gamespot made it fairly clear, that if you buy enough banner ads, you deserve a good review score.

Firing one of their reviewers for bombing Kane and Lynch is a little suspicious. I didn't agree with all of the reviews the fired employee did in the past, but you could tell he wrote as he felt, without bias. I didn't think Gears of War was that mind blowing. Many didn't think Twlight Princess deserved anything less than a perfect score even though he rated it very good. Thats not the point. The point is the guy reviewed what he thought about the game and backed it up with intricate detail. He wouldn't have held the job for so long if he didn't.

It is your opinion if a site is good for reviews or not. Personally I go right to gamerankings as its a user-updated list of all reviews on any given game, pick a few site reviews(at random sometimes) then read what they say. Not focusing on score really but trying to gather a feel for the game. 1 review doesn't help enough. Metacritic leaves some reviews out it seems. Again, its not about trusting one site...its about a gamer getting fired because he bombed a game by a major advertisement space buyer.

I could see if they just brought the guy on a few weeks ago too contribute and they let him go because he didn't have the stuff. Not the case. Guy was there for years.

Nothing suprising and it happens in all forms of media. Authors were selling out much sooner than developers. Now you can expect a good review with enough money spent. Its just sad to see this kind of thing now sinking its claws into gaming. As it seemed to be lacking before when the business was smaller. Its just the way it goes with any form of media I guess.

I've spoken to a few gamers in person, they played K&L and had nothing good to say.

 

Posted by Rhysode @ 5:58 pm EDT | Permalink | 0 Comments

80 Pixel Halo 3 Issue

Im a little tired of this subject too, just want to put my final thoughts and overall view in my blog. To be honest, I haven't blogged as consistantly as I used to, I've also been able to vent on such issues while working so repeating them is not that desirable. This is more of a rant about miss-directed criticism.

Main point - The original post about this was from the B3D forums. Beyond 3D is a place were people go to discuss 3D gaming in extreme technical detail. The actual thread also included other games. So some gaming news sites (who probably have a vague understanding of talk at B3D at best) chose to "blow the whistle" and people at B3D get dissed. Now how is it that this discussion is met with such hostility? Childish remarks about tin foil hats and toenail clippings...those people at B3D have a hobby and as far as I saw they kept it to themselves. Other people go to them for info.

To the people are going to whine about people who they perceive as whining because Halo is teh greatest game evar, Its just as easy to turn around and say the damage control crowd just doesn't like it when someone faults their favorite game about something they dont want to take the time to understand.

In my view, this has much less to do about Halo 3 than it does the X360 and advertising vs the product you actually get. B3D debunks a lot of bullshit marketing hype. In this case when games are upscaling and when its in native res, how it does it, etc, etc. Basically showing some people what is what so you can cut through the marketing bullshit by the big companys and understand it what you are actually getting. B3D has an ongoing thread on console upscaling for the simple reason - the companys don't give out tech details, they hide them, so it leaves it up to the public to speculate and dissect.

Many people complained about an excess of jagged edges on objects and a mediocre framerate from day 1. Its not like every Halo graphical complaint came from the upscaling issue. Average people were not able to say, the reason for this is A,B, and C which took much more industrious people at B3D a while to prove...Halo 3 has technical flaws in the graphics area that are not in-line with MS's claims they use when marketing their products to people.

MS promised 720p widescreen and 4xAA on every game at launch. They did not do as they said. Later, MSGS hinted Halo 3 will be in true 1080p. It was not. Is it still a great game? Yes. It it flawless? No. Things get done when people protest. If there was no drive to some level of perfection there would be no advancement in anything. Games would continue to use the same standard - mediocrity in certain areas. People think these are minor are also some of the people that claim the framerate is rock solid. Well, when COD4 is out at 60fps you'll probably see a reason (maybe small) that people will prefer its multiplayer.

http://www.beyond3d.com/

 

Posted by Rhysode @ 6:10 pm EDT | Permalink | 2 Comments

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

Where do I begin? This game has been getting reviews ranging from 58/100 to 93/100. As usual, the gaming community is split between "sucks" and "awesome". No middle ground for the gamers but major sites like IGN, Gamespot, and EuroGamer scored it in the 80% range. Out of 52 reviews only 6 scored it below 80/100.

I was hoping this game was just "good". Fearing a complete mess I was suprised with a great experiance. I was thinking, how the hell could a gamer not like this one?

Here are some issues I think some people had with it...

1) Realistic aiming, No aim assist

This is also scaled by weapon quality. Right-clicking to aim and use ironsights or a mounted scope is the only way to get hits at a distance. So Call of Duty really pushed this on people but there was a little aim-assist. There is none here. If your target is 25m out and you crouch low, line the ironsights on his chest and you will likely score a few hits...with a shitty weapon. Later in the game with better weapons its zoom, squeeze off a burst at the head or zoom and aim at the chest and single-shot rounds up the body and they drop. Later in the game, alot of enemies are heavily armored.

I looked back on the few times I fired a real gun. A milk jug not very far away can be missed easily using ironsights. Once you get a feel for the shooting in stalker its alot of fun. I enjoyed it. Too many games are about lining up pixels (as CliffyB said, hes right about that). How quickly can I twitch and know I'm going to take someone down. Is that the case in RL? What if the player is not a super soldier? Stalker throws you in a very harsh world with nothing but a PDA in hand (which ties into point #2). So as I remember the few times I shot a rifle with iron-sights, this game feels more like that than any other.

2) It is Difficult

Novice, Stalker, Difficult, and Expert...or something like that. Even on stalker (normal?) you can be dusted rather quickly. Especially if you stick your nose where it doesn't belong. Guerilla tactics are important when attacking larger groups. Add to that no quicksave and forgetting to save often will result in annoyance. Just going to the menu and saving alot takes some people out of the experiance. It didn't hamper my experiance much.If it ever gets ported console gamers are already used to auto-checkpoint saves and going to the menu to save. Otherwise, play smart and its less difficult though more rewarding.

3) Story/Quest Direction

Too much open-ended play can result in confusion and alot of screw ups. I like that style of play but traveling on foot is a task at times. Getting jerked around trying to get all the quests can hurt your first play through the game. Until you know how things work. Basically, you are given a main quest, which you should then populate your PDA with sidequests from that same area. You don't know this though, I just figured that was the best way to play after my 1st game. Questgivers don't tell you (most of the time) where a quest is. If you take it (all sidejobs are on a 1-day timer) and its on the other end of the map, the timer can run out while you are caught up in other things and you fail it. Then you can't do it again. If you don't do certain quests it affects the quality of your game ending (this is only the case with 2). It is (in those 2 times)left entirely up to the player to discover the various aspects of the main plot...which can be viewed as good or bad.

Sidequests and their timers is another issue. That system is a major flaw and does nothing to improve the experiance. But, its the best story I've played in a while. If you manage this correclty it only makes the experiance better. The game is not a 1-time singleplayer throw away then go all MP either. So you may find yourself wanting to start a second game...how often does that happen nowadays. Not much with myself.

4) Bugs

Although its way better since the 1st patch there are a few bugs. The 1st patch killed gamesaves. Whoever bought this day 1 with no patch was treated with the chance of corrupted saves.

-------------------------

Its one of the best games I've played in a while. I know this blog reads too much like, "well, heres why stalker sucks" and maybe I convinced someone not to buy. I just was thinking of the possible reasons why people do not like this game or just stopped playing it, which seems like a waste. I thought I'd write about it here. For every issue I found there where 5 things that were really cool. Although its not a perfect game, if you're a serious gamer with a PC and like RPG elements in games you should play this one.

--------------------------

Played on AMD 3700+, 1GB PC3200, 7600GT. 1440x900, HDR on objects, view distance 30%, textures 10%, everything else 0% or off. Was getting 25-40fps pn low settings and it didn't bother me at all.

Posted by Rhysode @ 6:10 pm EDT | Permalink | 0 Comments

PC Gaming Mythos from Non-PC Gamers

I see alot of false statements about PC gaming that people seem to state so confidently as fact. To think some people miss out on a possible great new experiance because of someones misinformation, half-truths, un-truths, or just plain nonsense, is unacceptable. I've corrected peoples statements on here before with no rebuttal. And sometimes only to see them show up later and say the same thing they said before.

Yes, some people take your advice as light on facts as it is. Even your friends who you wouldn't see on XBL as much if they had a gaming PC...maybe. We both have our motives for our opinions on this but lets atleast keep it truthful. There are reasons some people should not PC game, so I won't be biased or untruthful.

"You need to upgrade every 6 months." Or any statement that makes in seem that uopgrading every 6 months is mandatory.

That is only true if you must have the best and latest gear. If you must play every new game at highest possible settings and you will accept nothing less. So some gave up totally on PC gaming because they tried to do this. They would rather walk if they can't drive the Ferrari.

"Its way too much of a hassle."

This statement is true for the person who doesn't know much about computers and/or has no time or want to get involved. Works hard, only wants to buy the box and forget. Throw a disk in and play. Can't argue with that. The arguement of convenience and ease of use for being a console-only gamer, its a fair one. Its completely understandable and a very good reason to buy a console and stick with it.

"I don't have the 2 grand for a gaming PC." (Or the money arguement in general.)

If you have a PC already and it has a PCI-X or AGP expansion slot, you are possibly just 150$ away from playing 90% of the PC games out there on pretty high settings. Keeping in mind the many other things you can do on a PC which is why you have one in the first place. The amount of money you save and performance you get on a budget is directly linked to how much you know. The most expensive solution would be buying anything from a big PC company, say Dell.

If people see the PC game videos, they see the games and read about them and get curious and pretty excitied. They should ask someone who does it currently. This is where the AntiI-PC Brigade comes in and tells Dear Dr. Phil, MY PC ABUSED ME stories. Or just elbow their way in and say "But, but....to play it in ultra settings on vista with a hooker on your lap...it will cost this much!" *shows with hands like the 'big' fish he caught as a toddler*

If you need legal help, are you going to listen to a guy who gave up on the BAR exam and talks about law at the local social club? No, you're going to listen to the practicing lawyer who is up on the latest. If you're curious about PC gaming, listen to the people that are active PC gamers.

If you want to state the money arguement, say, "PC gaming is too expensive if you have to have all the best stuff and all the latest on Ultra settings." If you want to begin PC gaming tomorrow and buy a system off the internet and is gaming ready, its going to be $625 on the low-end. Alot of people don't want to drop that kind of money. But you have to consider what else it can do. Lets say you dropped dough on a HDTV for your 360. if you want to play it your way I can say the 360 was $900 - $2000 with the TV. But we all know there is alot more you can do with that TV which makes it worth it.

- The Mac Arguement

This is not about OSX vs Vista. Its about gaming. As a gaming machine, you really can't recommend a Mac UNLESS you already need/have it for other means. Then we are probably talking about a videocard upgrade (maybe) and the ability to boot into windows to play all games. Not a whole lot. (Virtual machine will not do. Unless you only run older games that have smaller requirements.)

In other words if someone wants to get into PC gaming and PC gaming only. You get...a PC. Hell, I really don't care about Vista, I will get it for the DX10 later this year. Some people will come and say you've bowed down to the corporate machine...."you couldn't hold out!". Well, you go get stoned somewhere....I'll play Crysis.

-------------------------------

If you are going to make a comment, please read the entire blog. If you don't want to read it all I would rather have you ignore it completely.

Thanks

 

Posted by Rhysode @ 3:34 pm EDT | Permalink | 5 Comments