Worth Reading: 11/09/12

If all goes according to plan, I’ll pull the trigger on ordering parts for my computer over the weekend, and finally put into motion an idea I’ve been kicking around for a couple of years now. It’s been so, so long since I’ve built a PC, though, so I’ve forgotten...everything. I’ve heard your requests, too, and we’ll probably film putting it together and bringing it to life. Nothing can go wrong with that, right?

As mentioned in the last episode of Spookin’ With Scoops, where we played the first hour or so of System Shock 2, that feature will take a rest until the PC comes together, which means it probably won’t come back until after Thanksgiving. Even with a powerful PC, that doesn’t mean we’ll leave behind a return to Lone Survivor, System Shock 2, or even Friday the 13th and Clock Tower for SNES. It will, however, mean closing out episodes with Slender won’t look like a total trainwreck.

A few weeks away from horror will do my heart some good, too. You can only take so much.

Hey, You Should Play This

• Save the Day by Denki (Browser / Free) -- www.turbulenz.com/games/save-the-day/play

It’s early days for browser games, but Save the Day, a fast-paced action game in which players fly a helicopter and save people from imminent disaster, make a solid case for what’s possible when competent developers are in the drivers seat. It doesn’t have to be all exploitative free-to-play games that are more about wasting time than they are about learning and enjoying game mechanics. Let’s also remember Supergiant Games managed to port Bastion to Chrome’s app store on HTML5. It’ll be some time before we’re seeing a game like Bastion made from the ground up for a browser, but the potential audience is enormous, and it’s only a matter of time before someone makes a killing.

There are also two other games I’m going to link to below, and I’ll say nothing more about them.

• I Don't Know What To Call This But Just Click It, Okay? (Browser / Free) -- detarou.web.fc2.com/game/ohayo.html
• Reel Railway (Browser / Free) -- www.realrailway.com/en/

And You Should Read These, Too

• "Halo 4 is half the game it should be" by Tom Chick for Quarter to Three

What do you want from your reviews? Do you want someone to reaffirm your preconceived notions about a game, or do you want to be challenged, and look at a game in a new light? Tom Chick’s review of Halo 4 would probably do a better job of accomplishing the latter if a score wasn’t attached, but the score is what made his review a lightning rod. Chick is used to being the industry’s punching bag, and publishing contradictory opinions is nothing new. I haven’t yet played Halo 4, so I can’t say whether or not I agree with his conclusions about the latest entry, but it’s a well articulated argument, and definitely an outlier from the general consensus. Does that make it wrong? (Hint: no.)

This is Halo 4. A shiny old dog without any new tricks. I got more out of the Halo 1 remake, which at least had the appeal of nostalgia. Playing through an updated version of the original Halo was at times tired or tedious. But it was also a reminder of the raw genius that launched the series. There is none of that in Halo 4, which is a drawn-out retread without any fresh perspective or energy, and furthermore missing a lot of what I need to pull me through a Halo game. Halo 4 demonstrates that if there’s one thing worse than more of the same, it’s less of the same.

• "How Ubisoft kept the lid on Assassin's Creed III's biggest spoiler" by Kyle Orland for Ars Technica

Games have trouble keeping secrets these days, and whatever you think of Assassin’s Creed III, it’s admirable the company was able to keep a lid on a particularly cool twist that comes early in the game. If you haven’t played Assassin’s Creed III, you should not click this link, but if you have, Ars Technica has talked to Ubisoft about the process of keeping a secret over a three-year development cycle and huge amounts of marketing. Not easy!

May says he didn't even discuss the big reveal with his closest friends or family—he just "couldn't take the risk." While he could talk about [CENSORED] with other members of the development team, that didn't really relieve the stress. "All we would end up doing was riling ourselves up. We were on thisthing, and we were all having the same fears and anxious nervous anticipation. That didn't make it any easier."

If You Click It, It Will Play

I Don’t Know About This Kickstarter Thing, But These Projects Seem Pretty Cool

• Elite is the latest classic trying to come back. Would be nice if they showed, uh, anything about it.
• We need more physical spaces to show off video games. L.A. Game Space could be terrific.
• Wait, is Distance a spiritual successor to San Francisco Rush?

The Latest Assassin's Creed is Out, And There Are Mixed Opinions

• John Teti of Gameological can't muster many good things to say about Assassin's Creed III.
• Despite Kotaku running a positive review from another writer, Kirk Hamilton is disillusioned.

Valve Just Launched Greenlight, So Here’s Some Games That Don’t Look Terrible

• Dark Rain looks awfully early, but an open world horror game with a day/night cycle? Yes.
• Draw a Stickman has players getting involved by actually drawing objects into the world.
• Sapience is a modern attempt to create a DOOM-style sci-fi RPG. Those are golden words.

Oh, And This Other Stuff

• An interesting analysis of why GoldenEye 007 should have been a colossal failure.
• Polygon does a deep dive on the creation of the Skylanders games at Toys For Bob.
• Brendan Keogh is writing an entire book of critical analysis about Spec Ops: The Line.
• A developer talks about Nintendo's approach to encourages indies towards Wii U.
• My former boss, Stephen Totilo, uses Kotaku to provide a deep analysis of modern games journalism.
• A designer argues for easier achievements when thinking of a wider audience.
• The success and influence of Canabalt has escaped even its creator.
• Spelunky designer Derek Yu has created his interpretation of Battletoads...and it's fucking awesome.
• Obama and Romney supporters go into battle in Medieval II.
• A collection of pixelated t-shirts representing different states. Wish Illinois wasn't sold out in my size.
• An interesting analysis of the huge decisions facing Sony with its next machine.

Tricky Scoops. Bringing the Scoops.

That Halo review is beautiful.

That review is terrible because it does nothing but compare the game to other media. There is no critiquing of the game on it's own merits. I'm sorry if you disagree, but I think Jeff did a much better job weighing what he felt was a letdown and what was solid about the game. Tom's review is only based on the narrative, not on the gameplay or the mechanics. For this reason I feel his review a colossal failure and bigger letdown than the game itself. I don't care if he thinks it's a 1/5 game, just don't spend a whole paragraph telling me you don't like it because it looks too much like Tron.

Fuck yeahhhh Distance!! That game looks sick. I'm all for a return to the Rush 2049 days.

Im hooked on Halo, I played Reach for a Sad Amount Of Time and 4 is just more Halo + some. There are some things that bother me, but the great thing about this is 343 like bungie collects Data like crazy and can fix weapon strength and add more playlist and remove them. Like Reach ill probably be playing this for a long time. This story was kind of crazy but as a relatively up to Halo Lore dude it sets up some things but leaves other thing in the dust. Hopefully they revamp completely for next gen halo.

Sapience's video takes some definite inspiration from the video that plays in Super Metroid if you let it sit there at the title screen. I love Super Metroid, and your description of Sapience already had me interested, so now I'm pretty damn interested in it.

Case in point:

Cortana gets bitchy and insecure. She blames her mood swings on rampancy. That’s apparently a thing. Rampancy. An AI thing. It was better when Shodan and GlaDOS did it. Also, AIs have a lifespan, like replicants. Didn’t you know that? In case you didn’t, Halo 4 is telling you now. By the way, Halo 4 says, AIs have a life span.

Tom knows literally nothing about the series! Rampancy has a been a huge part of Halo since day 1. Bungie has always made that clear. It was part of Halo before Halo even existed -_________- oh Tom.

I found Tom's review fairly poor. It touched upon the reasons I knew from announcement I wasn't going to buy it, but it did so without passion or polish. I felt more vehemence than honest and personal analysis.

As always man, some good reading.... Thanks...

@patrickklepek The content of QTR's review was fine, but do you really think the game deserves a 1/5, a 20/100, etc. from anyone? Wouldn't a one of five basically mean the game is broken and unplayable? Furthermore, QTR is on metacritic, and whatever anyone's stance is on the site, there's a precedent for docking developer bonuses if the aggregate score is below a certain level. I think this is a serious issue, and I think that that slapping a completely serviceable game with a 20% score that's aggregated on the site is just a dick move. I doubt Microsoft will have any issues with 343i since the game is selling like hotcakes, but I think Mr. Chick was being a bit of a dick with the numerical score. His written arguments hold water, but that score is silly.

Love this feature Patrick, thanks for this.

Ya I appreciated Tom Chicks Review for what it is too. It's actually nice to see someone with a dissenting opinion, shame it's apparently not allowed.

@theanticitizen said:

Case in point:

Cortana gets bitchy and insecure. She blames her mood swings on rampancy. That’s apparently a thing. Rampancy. An AI thing. It was better when Shodan and GlaDOS did it. Also, AIs have a lifespan, like replicants. Didn’t you know that? In case you didn’t, Halo 4 is telling you now. By the way, Halo 4 says, AIs have a life span.

Tom knows literally nothing about the series! Rampancy has a been a huge part of Halo since day 1. Bungie has always made that clear. It was part of Halo before Halo even existed -_________- oh Tom.

Actually, rampancy was a concept in Marathon. Yes, the original. For that matter, the backbone of that series' story was the idea of an AI going rampant.

@patrickklepek : Speaking of Marathon, would that be a good game for Spookin' with Scoops? It's very much an atmospheric shooter that somewhat competed with System Shock 1 back in the day, though I don't know how scary it was considered then and it isn't really scary now. It's also free.

@patrickklepek said:

Halo 4 demonstrates that if there’s one thing worse than more of the same, it’s less of the same.

*GROOOAAAAAAN*

F* YEAH SINISTAR!!

Love the AC3 articles...hated Connor loved Haytham

I don't know what Europa is but it has a serious System Shock 2 vibe. On my radar !

That Halo 4 review is terrible, it's definitely there for page views. Even if you believe it to be more of the same or just not the type of game you personally enjoy, you have to step back and see the game for what it is and it's an incredibly well made game.

@murisan said:

@patrickklepek The content of QTR's review was fine, but do you really think the game deserves a 1/5, a 20/100, etc. from anyone? Wouldn't a one of five basically mean the game is broken and unplayable? Furthermore, QTR is on metacritic, and whatever anyone's stance is on the site, there's a precedent for docking developer bonuses if the aggregate score is below a certain level. I think this is a serious issue, and I think that that slapping a completely serviceable game with a 20% score that's aggregated on the site is just a dick move. I doubt Microsoft will have any issues with 343i since the game is selling like hotcakes, but I think Mr. Chick was being a bit of a dick with the numerical score. His written arguments hold water, but that score is silly.

agreed, sure halo 4 has faults (really needed more exposition imo)

,but goddamm its not a 1/5, and id hate for this to dock their metacritic and possibly make 343 lose a bonus for the game that they worked years on and IS a quality product,

That Kotaku article on AC3 seems to point out a lot of things that have always existed with AC but are only now considered problems.

I don't normally get involved in these things. But I really don't think that review was written very well. From a rhetorical standpoint. He used "furthermore" to many times, and very close together.

EDIT: Oh, and something. I feel like if someone was telling this to me, I would think they were an asshole.

It would be nice if there was some room the disagree with that review without immediately being accused of being a blind fool drowning in confirmation bias.

Ah, I was hoping the Uncharted: Golden Abyss postmortem at Gamasutra would have made it in. It's very interesting read.

@mrfluke said:

@murisan said:

@patrickklepek The content of QTR's review was fine, but do you really think the game deserves a 1/5, a 20/100, etc. from anyone? Wouldn't a one of five basically mean the game is broken and unplayable? Furthermore, QTR is on metacritic, and whatever anyone's stance is on the site, there's a precedent for docking developer bonuses if the aggregate score is below a certain level. I think this is a serious issue, and I think that that slapping a completely serviceable game with a 20% score that's aggregated on the site is just a dick move. I doubt Microsoft will have any issues with 343i since the game is selling like hotcakes, but I think Mr. Chick was being a bit of a dick with the numerical score. His written arguments hold water, but that score is silly.

agreed, sure halo 4 has faults (really needed more exposition imo)

,but goddamm its not a 1/5, and id hate for this to dock their metacritic and possibly make 343 lose a bonus for the game that they worked years on and IS a quality product,

one review is not going to dock it that heavily get real.

and 343 is owned by microsoft so I doubt the bonus thing is accurate; the bonus thing was only involved with new vegas because Obsidian was not owned by Bethesda.

It's funny how Totilo wrote that in-depth editorial on games journalism when Kotaku, the site he currently runs, is a shit show in terms of overall journalistic standards and integrity and employs some of the absolute worst journalists/columnists whose pieces I have ever had the displeasure of reading.

I'll eventually chunk this out as usual, but I'm surprised you're actually excited for that Dark Rain thing.

"There's graphics and undeads, and it's, like, totally open and stuff!"

I still said 'yes' to it, but only because that looks better than half of the trash on Greenlight. Looks half decent, visually, as well.

@believer258: Oh yeah, I forgot about Marathon's AI rampancy. More proof that Chick doesn't know what he's talking about

"An interesting analysis of the huge decisions facing Sony with its next machine."

This was an interesting read, but I think it's completely ignores everything that Sony did right this generation:

Blu ray won the format war, and this was largely due to the PS3 the same way that DVD was ushered in by the PS2; Blu ray will dominate the next gen, if Xbox ignores this... I honestly don't see how they can, and those licensing fees will be a huge win for Sony.

Sony managed to hold onto and increase the profile of most of their first party developers while Xbox lost most of their platform exclusives. There doesn't seem to be anything to look forward to exclusively on the next xbox the same way as when xbox had BioWare, Rare, Ltd. , Bungie going into last gen.

Maligning PS+ is silly, while it was too little too late for this console cycle, I don't think their is a single gamer out there that hasn't taken notice of it and writing off as a non factor for player's next console choice is completely blind.

Xbox didn't do anything to win the last gen, Sony gave it away; I wouldn't count on that happening again.

I completely agree with Tom Chick, everything I've seen heard and read about Halo 4 seems exactly as he described, just the same old Halo gameplay with barely a hint of anything new or worthwhile, a game so safe and paint by numbers I too would give it a 1/5 as it rightfully deserves.

Acquire PC, play The Void. Incredibly atmospheric, tense, and strange.

@murisan: It all depends. GB reviews are written for the readers. Gertmann didn't really like MW3 yet he still reviewed it as 4/5. Chick's reviews are all 100% his opinion, one that doesn't give a fuck about other people and the norm. (I do find it dumb that a well polished game 'should' score 'something'. Reserving the lower end of the spectrum just for literally broken games is pretty silly. If Halo 4 is beautiful super polished, plays well, and you hate it, you should be able to give it a 1/10 or w/e, no?)

It is odd that it's on metacritic though. but /we.

@chickdigger802 said:

@murisan: It all depends. GB reviews are written for the readers. Gertmann didn't really like MW3 yet he still reviewed it as 4/5. Chick's reviews are all 100% his opinion, one that doesn't give a fuck about other people and the norm. (I do find it dumb that a well polished game 'should' score 'something'. Reserving the lower end of the spectrum just for literally broken games is pretty silly. If Halo 4 is beautiful super polished, plays well, and you hate it, you should be able to give it a 1/10 or w/e, no?)

It is odd that it's on metacritic though. but /we.

What are talking about? Jeff has repeatedly stated reviews are solely their opinion based on their taste. Its like that so you can make decisions based on how your tastes relate to theirs. And he did like MW3, THATS WHY HE GAVE IT 4 STARS.

It’s a narrative paper, rock, scissors in which orcs beat love, love beats nukes, and nukes beat orcs.

All right, Chick. I lol'd.

I agree with Chick in that a game shouldn't automatically earn a minimum score because it's a functional piece of software or a lot of work went into it. He's scoring his honest experience with the game. This industry needs more outlier reviews beyond the 7-9 scale that offer valid criticism instead of there being a total echo chamber.

The comments on his site reveal the true problem - people (though it's most likely little kids) feeling the need to lash out offensively because they don't share the same opinion or want to be validated with their purchase. I'm a fan of the Halo series, but those people make me wish I had nothing in common with them.

@theanticitizen: how does what he wrote mean he knows nothing about Halo? He's making fun of how the story in 4 beats you over the head with the concept.

@Hailinel said:

It's funny how Totilo wrote that in-depth editorial on games journalism when Kotaku, the site he currently runs, is a shit show in terms of overall journalistic standards and integrity and employs some of the absolute worst journalists/columnists whose pieces I have ever had the displeasure of reading.

Agree 100%. It baffles me why any credible news site, developer or publisher even give those clowns the time of day.

What a piece of shit review by that Chick fellow. And he has the audacity to give it some kind of objective veneer, pathetic.

The real problem with games journalism is apparently gross incompetence. Dunno why it made it to Worth Reading, this site is light years above that tripe.

I can only describe Sinistar's scream as the sound of an infinite number of galaxies simultaneously being destroyed.

what kind of journalist or reviewer gives an extremely low score to a game simply because it didnt revolutionize the genre? the fuck kinda logic is that?

halo 4 is a sequel. its SUPPOSED to be like the earlier ones....thats what sequels are. "i liked that, i'd like more please".

giving a game a bad score because you think its BAD is fine. giving it a bad score cus it didnt redefine the genre or abandon its roots is insane.

ah well whatever, if the guy wants to troll to get page views, so be it. i just dont care about his opinion and will be sure not to take him seriously ever.

Tom Chick also claimed Deus Ex was "only 90% bad." He's a contrarian, and one I have never found challenging like Patrick hinted. Remember kids, opinions are scary.

Tom Chick's reviews are interesting. They are pure opinion (which might be the case for other sites), but Tom reviews games that he usually hates. It seems a bit odd, but Tom will write a review for pretty much every major release without any regard disliking that type of game in general.

Which is a bit like a movie review thing. Although I kind of think that sort of thing is pointlesss - maybe it brings in another viewpoint. But if you already hate Halo I'm not sure you need a review written by someone who also hates the series to decide if you want to purchase it.

Tom Chick has usually been the outlier and more often than not usually shares the opposite opinion.

@King9999 said:

@Hailinel said:

It's funny how Totilo wrote that in-depth editorial on games journalism when Kotaku, the site he currently runs, is a shit show in terms of overall journalistic standards and integrity and employs some of the absolute worst journalists/columnists whose pieces I have ever had the displeasure of reading.

Agree 100%. It baffles me why any credible news site, developer or publisher even give those clowns the time of day.

Even sites like IGN which spout out garbage "new articles" and top ten lists every other hour are infinitely better than that shit hole Kotaku.

What are you talking about? There's a lot of good browser games, Bastion for one.

How could you fall for leading more hits to an internet Troll?!

Hate, Love, or indifferent to the Halo franchise, or Halo 4, he gave it a 20... yes 20 out of 100.

Carnival Games, Fn Carnival Games didn't get a lower score FROM anyone than a 49!!!!

Naughty Bears, a semi broken game didn't get lower than a 43!

Plus it's not a well articulated point, his complaints would fairly apply to all Call of Duties since 4, Gears of War, New Super Mario, Mario, Zelda (well a little bit at least), and God of War. Oh Nos, they didn't reinvent the wheel when changing developers... and it still feels like the game who's name is on the box... I'll give it a 20!

The only reason to score a Tripple A game, for being like the game it is a sequel to, and that IS NOT broken, below the score of broken games and far far below the average is to get attention, hits, and start a flame war with the only goal to get more attention or hits to your site.

I own and love all three consoles, this is not about Halo, xbox360, PS3, Wii, fanboy-ism.... It's about calling out BS

Bummed you fell for the BS Patrick.

The review is fantastic, but 1 star is too low. I don't know that site, so maybe they give out zeroes, but in most cases, 1 star is reserved for the absolute worst of the worst. The writing of the review sounds like it would fit closer to a 2/5.

Oh man Distance is by the Nitronic Rush guys. I AM ALL OVER THAT TEN TIMES OVER

Man it genuinely scares me when people get so worked up about other people opinions. I played Halo 4 and enjoyed it well enough . But I totally see where Chick is coming from here .

"That’s apparently a thing. Rampancy. An AI thing. It was better when Shodan and GlaDOS did it. Also, AIs have a lifespan, like replicants. Didn’t you know that? In case you didn’t, Halo 4 is telling you now. By the way, Halo 4 says, AIs have a life span." -Tom Chick

Oh.... Was rampancy never explained in the previous games ? I know what it is because I read Fall of Reach and listened to I luv bees ( and even after that this game assumed i knew stuff that I would never know unless i was chin deep in halo shit ) . But if rampancy was not explained allready in any of the games that's a fucking joke .

I'm a fan of the halo story and the fact that some of the shit Halo 4 breaks out goes right over my head is sad . I have no interest in multiplayer (dont even have live gold) and the campaign is all I'm ever about in the Halo games so the story problems really bum me out .

@Zekhariah said:

Tom Chick's reviews are interesting. They are pure opinion (which might be the case for other sites), but Tom reviews games that he usually hates. It seems a bit odd, but Tom will write a review for pretty much every major release without any regard disliking that type of game in general.

Which is a bit like a movie review thing. Although I kind of think that sort of thing is pointlesss - maybe it brings in another viewpoint. But if you already hate Halo I'm not sure you need a review written by someone who also hates the series to decide if you want to purchase it.

Just read the Halo 4 review in question, and it seemed to me like he was saying that he actually liked Reach and ODST, but hates Halo 4.

His score does seem a bit unfair. In a 5 star system, I think he probably should have given it a 2/5, meaning he didn't like it, but that it works.

Of course, reviews are subjective, so if he thinks the game is an abomination that should not be played by anyone then I guess 1/5 was the right call. The problem with his apparent review approach is that it doesn't consider how anyone else might approach the game, which makes his reviews sort of useless when trying to decide if you want to buy a game or not, unless you are his clone.

I think it would have been more interesting if it were a longer, more thoughtful deconstruction of the game. There are a few interesting points and at least one bad one (rampancy), but as it stands it is too easy to write off as flame-bait.

@fmprodguy said:

How could you fall for leading more hits to an internet Troll?!

Hate, Love, or indifferent to the Halo franchise, or Halo 4, he gave it a 20... yes 20 out of 100.

Carnival Games, Fn Carnival Games didn't get a lower score FROM anyone than a 49!!!!

Naughty Bears, a semi broken game didn't get lower than a 43!

Plus it's not a well articulated point, his complaints would fairly apply to all Call of Duties since 4, Gears of War, New Super Mario, Mario, Zelda (well a little bit at least), and God of War. Oh Nos, they didn't reinvent the wheel when changing developers... and it still feels like the game who's name is on the box... I'll give it a 20!

The only reason to score a Tripple A game, for being like the game it is a sequel to, and that IS NOT broken, below the score of broken games and far far below the average is to get attention, hits, and start a flame war with the only goal to get more attention or hits to your site.

I own and love all three consoles, this is not about Halo, xbox360, PS3, Wii, fanboy-ism.... It's about calling out BS

Bummed you fell for the BS Patrick.

Or maybe he's just using a 100 point rating system in a way that makes some amount of sense. What purpose is there to having a range of 100 points if even universally reviled games like Carnival Games and Naughty Bears get scores in the 40s. What does being AAA matter if you don't like the game?

You wouldn't expect a movie to get a decent rating just because it was big-budget, and I see no reason that should be true about video games either.