Yesterday, oh how I long for it again, three friends and I had an infinitely awesome time with The Beatles: Rock Band. I won't speak for them, but for me it was the absolute most fun I have ever had with a rhythm game. Matter of fact, it was the most fun I've had with any game in a long time.
 
I got the game the day of release, of course, and played it strait through in a few hours on a combo of vocals/bass and vocals/guitar (I generally went with whichever guitar part was rated harder, unless it was a song I didn't know very well). I had played Voxtar on regular Rock Band before in anticipation for The Beatles, so I wasn't a total train wreck, though I did fail a few songs because I was too distracted trying to figure out a few vocal lines and lyrics to play the guitar. I loved rocking out to songs like Hey Bulldog and revealing some emotion on songs like Something, and in the end I felt overall satisfied with the game. It looks fantastic, plays great, the dreamscapes are wonderful, and the little details really do help improve the exerpience as a whole. I am let down by the ending, which is rather anticlimactic, both for the cinematic and song choice, but really I'm just mad that Harmonix hyped up the song by keeping it a secret. I also thought there would be a bit more of a narrative of the Fab Four's career. I then played the game with my dad later on, just in quickplay, and when he scrolled through the list of songs, his first reaction was, "That's it?" Right then I realized that I kind of felt the same way, and I was wondering what my friends would think when they came over on Saturday.
 
However, once that day came, any fears I had for the replayability and overall entertainment value of the game vanished. Having us four rocking out to what is a wonderful selection of Beatles songs was an amazing experience, and anyone who doesn't have people willing to play with them is missing out on something great. The most noticeable reason for all the excitement was the three part harmonies, and even though we were all singing along regardless of who had a mic (we have three) and how many Beatles were actually singing, having everyone joining in on songs like All You Need Is Love is marvelous. I was trying as hard as I could to actually harmonize, which I did manage to do on a few songs, but damn, to us it didn't matter - we were just loving the game no matter who was singing what. I'll definitely go to practice mode and work on that for next time, that's for sure, but there's nothing wrong with four people all singing lead on Don't Let Me Down. ;)
 
The thing that really made my day was seeing my friends' reaction to the game, one in particular. He comes over every now and then with another friend to play regular Rock Band with me, but he doesn't have any of these kinds of games at his home, except for maybe an old Guitar Hero. All throughout the day he kept saying how "freaking awesome" the game is and that he's in love with it, and even said he wants to buy it. It was a genuine reflection of his opinion of the game, and it is a perfect example of someone who isn't exactly a regular user of rhythm games that plays The Beatles: Rock Band and is just blown away by it. It really put things in perspective for me because since I'm an avid Rock Band player, I tend to nitpick details with the genre and probably overanaylze things, but he got me to see it from his view: It's a game all about The Beatles and their music, so let's have a freaking good time!

Not only have I been spending more and more time on Giant Bomb lately, but this Fall/Winter game season will probably be my favorite one yet, so I think it's time I dust off my blog. Obviously, I'm super excited about The Beatles: Rock Band, but there are plenty of other titles on the way within that time line that have me chewing away at my nails for, like Borderlands and Left 4 Dead 2. I'd like to go ahead and thank anyone that actually reads this, but even if no one does it'll still be fun since I love to write and love video games. :D
 

Motion Plus Bust? I think not!

Not too long ago I got my hands on a copy of Wii Sports: Resort and two Motion Plus add-ons for the Wii. I've had a pretty much nonexistent relationship with me and my Wii for a long time, but Resort helped with that a bit. Matter of fact, I probably haven't even logged 50 hours on all of my Wii games combined, and I've had it since the Christmas after launch (though the rest of my family still used it, so it wasn't a total loss). The console just never got a grasp of me, because of both its lack of interesting games (or games I didn't already have a 360 copy of), and its incomplete, downright annoying motion capabilities. My experience with the first Wii Sports was something like this: the pointer on the screen was rarely even close to accurate, the slightest tilt of the Wiimote would make a bowling ball go strait to the gutter, and it didn't matter which way you swung your tennis racket - as long as you flung your arm in any sort of direction or position, you would hit the ball if your Mii was competent enough to run in the right direction. I was quite frustrated that the Wii was so disappointing. From then on I left my Wii abandoned, only playing it when a few new games were released. Even then, however, the system only got minimal attention from me.
 
Then along came the Motion Plus announcement at the E3 2009 Nintendo Conference, and I held the same mentality about it that I currently have about Project Natal and Sony's Motion Controller, i.e., I'll believe it when I see it.  I had a lot of doubt about Motion Plus, but all that doubt went away after I finally played Resort with it. Your Mii's motion actually matches your own! I first played the sword game, which I've never touched since then because it's incredibly boring, and I was extremely pleased to see my Wii swing and sway his papertowel roll-looking sword just how I was flaggering my Wiimote around. I finished the match quickly to test out the Ping Pong, which is basically Wii Sport's tennis, but smaller, to see if it actually worked like it should (the piss-poor tennis was my main complaint about the original title). What did I find? That you actually have to make forehand and backhand shots, not just swing your Wiimote any which way, to hit the ball! It was at that moment that I knew that Motion Plus did was it set out to do. Since then I have found that frisbee is the best game on the...game, probably followed by bowling and golf (though golf is still horribly inconsistent at times, like all other golf video games). These are all much easier and more natural to play with Motion Plus, and I've been playing Resort a lot, and it has probably pushed me over that 50 hour mark. 
 
However, I will still remain skeptical on whether or not Nintendo will actually start using the Wiimote to its full potential. These minigame compilations most certainly do not last forever, so unless some of the big titles integrate Motion Plus's abilities into gameplay using unique, innovative methods, the entire Motion Plus upgrade will have been for nothing.
 

It's The Beatles: Rock Band for a reason

I, of course, cannot turn down another Rock Band title (well, I'll probably pass on Lego Rock Band), but a game dedicated to The Beatles? That's just magnificent. There's been both mass praise and criticisms surrounding it, and I'm on the praise side, obviously. There's been many, many reasons for the complaints, however I haven't come across a legitimate, valid one yet. Guitar Hero fans have band together against the Rock Band crowd, calling us hypocritical for degrading their franchise for having released a few band related games, however they've got their chins so high up that they refuse to listen to the fact that Harmonix is delivering a genuinely unique experience that will progress people through the Beatles career and their music. Unlike the Guitar Hero games, The Beatles: Rock Band will not just be a game featuring a playable real band and a setlist mainly dominated by their songs - it will be strictly Beatles, and will be abundant in behind the scenes pictures, audio, artwork, and gameplay features, the biggest being the vocal harmonies. Then there's the people who are just against single band games altogether, but they have to understand that there was no way The Beatles would get into these games without their very own. Besides, they're The Beatles, and they deserve their own game. And of course, there's the people against rhythm games altogether, which I don't have a problem with until they something like, "These games are ruining the music industry." Noooo, people like Kanye West and the Jonas Brothers aren't the problem, it's obviously these games that so clearly are not introducing great music to a lot of people, particularly in the younger crowd. Anyway, The Beatles: Rock Band will be stunning, and I cannot wait to start rocking out to their amazing catalog, especially with those vocal harmonies, which is the greatest innovation to this genre of game in a while.
 

Speaking of The Beatles...

As just a little something to give my blog a little something extra, I figured I'll add a little portion at the end discussing whatever music I may be listening to a lot at the time. I'll probably restrict it to an artist a week to mention in the blog, and since that game is on its way in about two weeks, I've been rotating The Beatles' songs through my iPod like crazy. I'm one of the few Beatles fans who seem to prefer their early pop-rock days over the latter half of their career. Though I like all of their various styles and albums, their early work is what defines The Beatles for me. In fact, I can't decide whether or not Please Please Me or Help! is my favorite Beatles album. The early stuff is also probably the best place to start if you're a new Beatles fan, because some of their later music is a bit...out there, though most fans prefer that. And I'll probably get some major gripes for this, but I honestly don't see the big deal about both Rubber Soul and Revovler. Good albums, yes, but overrated. I love Sgt. Pepper's, though, so go easy on me!
 


Any Wii double entendres were completely unintentional.... Ok, fine, the caption was on purpose.

Ok, I can now honestly say that the only way that I will bother to beat the Call of Duty: World at War campaign is if

A, I'm paid, or

B, Kiefer Sutherland comes to my house and yells at me until I do.

After taking a long break from this game and spending my time on Fallout, I decided to venture back into it. Naturally, I went strait to the multiplayer, but after winning one match I lost interest. Then came a mysterious feeling to me that I should play the campaign a little more, since I've only done the first (or second if you count the escape from the Japanese camp) level. So I continue my journey of bad writing and Kiefer Sutherland shouting, and then I hit the first Russian level. I was already annoyed by the fact that yet again Treyarch tries, and fails, to make their game all cinematic by making me sit there and watch my injured comrades get shot by Nazi scum, while I sit there, moaning and wobbling around, without being noticed.

Then I realized I could start crawling around. The first thing I think is that I should go backwards, seeing as I just saw a Nazi with a gun standing in front of me and walk away. After finding out I'm going the wrong way, I waste another couple minutes of my life crawling back to my starting position, and then even more going to where I was supposed to be. After having some fun (yes, I had a little fun in this venture) shooting a few Germans in the face with a sniper rifle, my new comrade and I rush into a building. Wait, I take it back, I rushed to the building, then noticed that he was still starring at the German brigade that was walking by. Finally he tells me to follow him, and he hurries over to the building which I have been waiting [im]patiently at, and goes inside.

Now we head upstairs. Sniper. Duck and cover. Ok, so we're being pinned down, but since it's only me vs. a single stupid AI instead of a whole goddamn boatload of them, I stand there in the open room and scout out the sniper. My brother informs me that he'll be running around on the top floor between the windows. I look up, see him, and get shot. Ok, I thought, now that I know where he'll be this should be a cinch. The checkpoint reloads, I once again stand out in the open, this time knowing where my target will be. He runs into his hiding spot behind a window, and I calmly wait for him to peak his face out. I misjudged which side he would pop out on, so the next thing I know is that he reveals himself, and without even a thought in his mind he has shot me and I am dead. All within two seconds, he was able to pull a perfect shot on me without even having any time to aim or even pinpoint my position. So, after ten or so more tries of playing hide and seek with this perfect marksman dirt bag, I finally end up winning the game and declare my victory over the most poorly designed Call of Duty enemy ever. Of course, it takes me two shots to the cranium to kill him, versus the one it takes for him to kill me.

Now that we have a clear path, me and my comrade (whom I had forgotten was even there, even after he kept spewing motivational remarks at me while I endlessly fought the sniper) were able to advance downstairs. Oh look, another German brigade is passing by. Oh well, we'll just hide in between the windows and they won't even notice us. DING, DING, DING, says the old and ugly grandfather clock, and all of a sudden giant balls of fire are being shot through the windows. What? Do the Germans think that they are so destructive that they managed to destroy every single object down to the last clock, because apparently an hourly timed alarm is a sign that trouble is afoot for them. Now I find myself slowly crawling once again, trying to avoid the carelessly aimed flames from the outside Germans. I follow my companion to the end of the room, after almost being crushed by a bookshelf that landed against the wall just before it was able to land on and kill me. Then a thought came to me, You know what Treyarch? I'm playing your game to shoot Nazis, not sit through these gimmicks that you feel you must add in every ten minutes in order to make your game more...intense, if that's the feeling your trying to convey. I, on the other hand, only felt more excitement in me for Modern Warfare 2 and what a wondrous savior Infinity Ward is for this series.

We make it into the next room, but then the enemy sends in the big guns. Germans with brains. There's now enemies actually aiming and shooting guns at us, versus the ones still standing at a window and shooting a flamethrower inside at a perfect strait angle that I could crawl under with ease. I get killed, go through that process three or four more times, save and quit, and made my decision that I explained at the beginning of this post. Oh, and played one more victorious mutliplayer match.

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to play as much of the three games I got for Christmas lately as I had hoped due to some personal issues, but I've had enough time on each of them to give me an idea of what each game is all about. Call of Duty, Far Cry 2, and Fallout 3 have been alternating in and out of my 360, though the majority of my gaming time has been taken by CoD's multiplayer, so that's what I'll start with.

Since it was once again Treyarch's turn to install a new game in the Call of Duty franchise, my hopes weren't all that high. Modern Warfare is one of my favorite shooters out there and has taken up more of my time than most other games, so before CoD 5 was even out I was ready to be let down. CoD4 has a both a spectacular and explosive campaign and purely addictive online play, however World at War seems to only have the latter. After Call of Duty 3, I was hoping Treyarch would learn from their mistakes in both areas, and while they seemed to do that with multiplayer, their single player gameplay is just corny and, well, bad. Sure, it's got the same Call of Duty formula that we all know and love, which is fighting off countless numbers of enemies at a single spot until you finally are able to move onto the next one, but the horrid writing and lack luster voice acting makes you wonder if Treyarch's staff went to live in a cave to avoid any criticism for their past Call of Duty game. Guess you can't learn from your mistakes if you don't realize what they are. But wait, Hobbies you ignorant fool, they got Kiefer Sutherland! Yeah, they got him, but it was more of a publicity stunt than anything. His voice overs are probably the worst in the game, either because he's a terrible actor or he really just didn't want to be there (I've never seen 24, so I can't confirm which it is). I played a whole hour of the campaign, then heard the mutliplayer call my name. I had played the beta, so I knew what to expect, but I can say that I was pleasantly surpised at the variety of the maps. There's only two that I have a real problem with, but the others make up for it. The tanks are far more balanced than CoD3, but if your team neglects getting in them or blowing up the enemies', then you're pretty much screwed unless the other team is doing the same. There doesn't seem to be any one particular gun dominating over the rest, but sniping is still as easy as point and click, though I haven't run into anyone that was overly excessive with that. HOWEVER, some of you may remember all the complaints about CoD4's spawning, when you didn't think it could get any worse...think again. CoD5 will plop you down in the same small shack as an enemy, looking right at him, no less, or the other way around. It's ridiculous, and I guarantee you will run into this problem every match you play at least once.

Ok, enough about  Call of Duty. The mutliplayer is fun and will keep my tied for a while, though I can honestly say I don't know if I'll ever bother finishing the campaign. I guess I'll try it in co-op, which should liven things up a bit. Oh, and the Nazi zombie game is fun, though I can see it growing old really fast. I now eagerly await Modern Warfare 2! Anyway, the next game on the list is Far Cry 2. The first Far Cry was average, at best, and even though the map maker was great, few people used it well enough to have fun online. When I learned that Far Cry 2 wouldn't have some sort of crazy rage virus driven character I got kind of skeptical, but once I started playing the game I started enjoying its realism. Instead of becoming some sort of insane monster of sorts, you're infected with malaria, so no more jumping on top of bad guys and ripping their chests open. I can say that I am disappointed, however, because the predator gameplay in previous Far Crys felt like the series' trademark, and without it the game just seems a little empty and without cause. Maybe I'll think differently as I delve further into the story, but I've played enough to get the basic feel. Not that it's bad, because the game actually has a great level of realism that makes it unique, and the graphics are beautiful. Haven't tried the mutliplayer yet, but I did look at the map maker, and, yes, it's more extensive than the past ones. I actually felt overwhelmed and lost with all the tools, but I'm sure it's not as hard as it looks once the time is taken to learn how to use it.

Lastly is Fallout 3. I've now played through the beginning three times, not because I thought it was fun (though it is), but because each time I left the vault I felt like I had made a mistake in choosing what skills to raise and what choices to make. I did walk around a little each time I left the vault, including going to Megaton in my second time, but I always felt like I was lost and needed to start over and pay attention to what I was doing. Then, on my third (and now permanent) character, it finally struck me. I'm playing an RPG! It's supposed to feel like this, duh! So, I started actually thinking about what I was doing (unlike the previous two games in which you only have one thing to do, which is use guns to blow things up), and I am now hooked on it, even if I'm only two hours or so into it. Just typing this tempts me to go play it and stay on all day, however that's just not an option for me right now, unfortunately. I guess I should be talking about whether the game is good or not...hm, well let's do a quick comparison to Oblivion, Bethesda's previous critically acclaimed RPG. In a nutshell, it's more diverse. Each character has their own voice, look, and personality, there's a lot more junk to aimlessly collect, and everything just seems to actually fit into the game world, which is an apocolyptic wasteland, and a very interesting one at that. Since this is an RPG, playing for such a little time doesn't really give me much more to say. I'm going to enjoy it, I know that, but I just hope the game keeps me hooked throughout the whole experience like it is now.

Oh, and my game of the year is Rock Band 2. ;D

Just ask the oh so serious bloggers at Yahoo.

http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/mojo/7313/guitar-hero-must-die/

In summary, some fool babbles on about how Rock Band and Guitar Hero are ruining music in various ways. "His" main (and only) evidence? The [in]famous South Park episode "Guitar Queer-o."

Actually, that's all I could really get out of the post. The author tries to explain the "shamelessness" of popular rock bands subjecting their music to these games and that the continuation of it will cause some sort of catastrophe for...something. After reading half the article you start to wonder when he'll actually tell you how exactly these games are destroying anything, except for maybe the quick jab at Mad Catz at the end for manipulating actual guitars into video game compatible ones. Apparently he worships Fender Strats as Mesopotamian gods or some kind of sacred sacrilegious relic.

He doesn't believe the squeaky plastic toys that we play with hold any similarities to the functionality of actual instruments. While this may be somewhat true for the guitar (albeit not completely), the drum kits can, and do, help people understand what it's like to actually play the real thing, especially with the inclusion of Rock Band's drum trainer/freestyle mode. Think about it, you have a bass pedal, pads for toms and a snare, and have the option to have cymbals, all of which you'll find on an actual drum kit. I can go into freestyle mode and make my own beats and realistically drum to my favorite songs.

Obviously, since these expensive toys aren't anything like their more expensive real life counterparts, these games must not teach anything about the "fundamentals of music." Also wrong. I had music experience years before I played my first Guitar Hero game (GH II), but playing these games for so long has helped me understand ryhthm, timing, etc, etc a ton more than I used to. Like I said earlier, I can drum my own drum beats now and even translate them onto my brother's drum set. I am much more in tune (pun) with musical technicalities than I've ever been thanks to these video games.

Rock rhythm games are "the most juvenile extremes of rock 'n' roll idol worship," says the writer. He and many of the fools in the comments are elitists who believe gaining musical knowledge through Rock Band and Guitar Hero is a bad thing. None of them ever explain why, though that makes sense since I cannot even imagine a way to support that idea. These games are probably the best thing to happen to the music industry in a long time. WIth all of the garbage out there today, the revival of rock music is very crucial right now, and Rock Band and Guitar Hero are leading that revival. Baring that in mind, I guess you could actually make the argument that people against these games are the real criminals actually harming the industry, and not the games themselves.