At this point, Call of Duty has become its own genre. Never mind calling Activision’s seemingly limitless cash cow a military shooter, much less a plain Jane action/adventure game. CoD has reached such a critical mass that to call it anything less would be a gross understatement. With over $1 billion of combined sales between Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops, Call of Duty has become a entertainment behemoth. But with that success comes the pressure to continue producing a quality product.

Make no mistake, people will buy Modern Warfare 3. The question is: does MW3 settle for the status quo, or do Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer Games forsake the security of the established formula in favor or something new and, possibly, better?

The short answer is: no. This is Call of Duty. It took years for Infinity Ward to move the franchise into the modern era with Call of Duty 4, and CEO Bobby Kotick would sooner eat a bucket of leeches than relinquish his stranglehold on the golden goose.

As a result, Modern Warfare 3 is the most polarizing game in the the series. After five straight years of UAVs, perks and shooting dudes, you likely either can’t get enough, or you’re sick of Call of Duty. That’s not to say Modern Warfare is bad, it’s just more of the same. More UAVs, more Soap and Price, more crazy set pieces and more explosions on said crazy set pieces. The bright side is that, if you’re into shooting virtual dudes, Modern Warfare 3 is about as safe of a purchase as you can make.

Modern Warfare 3’s single player is undoubtedly its weakest asset. Soap and Price’s battle against Makarov was never meant to be the next Iliad, but MW3 feels devoid of any genuine emotion or suspense, particularly after Treyarch’s Cold War conspiracy in Black Ops.

The level design is uninspired, the pacing is rushed and the set pieces feel like trailer bait, rather than awe-inspiring spectacles. The developers continue to include psuedo-stealth missions in which you creep behind enemy lines with either Price or Soap, but they never come close to the intensity of “All Ghillied Up” in the original Modern Warfare.

It all boils down to following the guy with the word “follow” above is head, and shooting the bad guys.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

Sometimes you need to plant explosives, other times you’ll shoot more bad guys on a stationary turret. The formula isn’t complicated.

After the credits are done rolling, the game chauffeurs you over to Spec Ops, the cooperative, mission-based mode that first appeared in MW2. This time around, however, Spec Ops also includes a horde-esque survival mode in which you hold off waves of increasingly difficult enemies. The catch is that you can purchase various defenses, such as a squad of AI friendlies or a missile strike. While fun, Spec Ops is limited to two players. In an age where every game under the sun features four-player co-op, MW3’s Spec Ops feels out of date.

Of course, multiplayer is why CoD is where it is today, and, unsurprisingly, it’s the area of Modern Warfare 3 that has received the most attention. You have your usual assortment of new guns, but the big ticket item in MW3 is a complete revamp of the killstreak system. In an attempt to lure those who would otherwise be turned off by CoD’s steep learning curve, the developers have included a Support streak which carries your kills over deaths instead of resetting after dying. In addition, actions like capturing control points and shooting down UAVs also contribute to your streak.

All the standard modes, such as deathmatch and headquarters, are included, though, for some odd reason, gun game and one in the chamber - two popular modes from Black Ops - are only playable in private sessions with no matchmaking.

Also gone from Black Ops is the currency system, in which you could purchase attachments (scopes, grenade launches, etc.) for your favorite weapons. Now, each weapon levels up individually as you use it. While this requires a bit more of an investment into a weapon before unlocking the coolest add-ons, completing the small milestones of the overall goal is highly satisfying.

Modern Warfare 3 features 16 maps, and there isn’t a dud in the bunch. While some mimic the campaign locales, each has it’s own look and feel. Rural towns that have fallen into disrepair, suburban communities ravaged by war and abandoned military bases are the order of the day, and while they aren’t a huge departure from previous titles in the series, MW3’s maps have that “lived in” feel, rather than just being playgrounds for destruction.

The bottom line is: this is more Call of Duty. The shooting is solid and the game runs at a smooth 60 frames per second, regardless of the onscreen action. If you weren’t a fan of any of the previous titles, Modern Warfare 3 will do little to change your mind.

The killstreak changes are nice, but nothing groundbreaking. No amount of ballistic vests is going to stop level ten prestige players from dominating, but the ability to contribute in some small may lessen the sting some. The campaign is almost as nonsensical as a Michael Bay movie, but the multiplayer and Spec Ops are more than adequate enough to make up for any short comings.

If you still haven’t tired of blowing crap up and making dudes sleepy, Modern Warfare 3 is right up your alley, but if you’re looking for something new and different, MW3 might not be for you.

At about this time last year, Electronic Arts took its first real stab at the ever-increasing Call of Duty market with the revitalization of Medal of Honor. The plan was solid: make a shooter that incorporated elements from Modern Warfare and E.A.’s long-running Battlefield franchise. In execution, however, Medal of Honor was less than spectacular. Game mechanics from Battlefield, such as environmental destruction and class-based multiplayer were dumbed down, and elements taken from Modern Warfare felt shoehorned in. So now, one year older and (presumably) wiser, Electronic Arts is firing the opening salvo against Activision with Battlefield 3. Does the newest installment in the Battlefield franchise live up to the massive hype that surrounds it, or should it be court marshaled for treason?

There’s no doubt that developer D.I.C.E. (Digital Illusions Creative Entertainment) knows what side their bread is buttered on. Multiplayer is clearly the main attraction here, and rightly so, if you asked series veterans.

True, Battlefield has never been known for a rich and engaging single player experience, but after surprisingly enjoyable campaigns in the Bad Company series, it’s discouraging to see D.I.C.E. take a step backward. Particularly when it’s so evident that more time and effort was put into emulating Modern Warfare’s set pieces, than catering to Battlefield’s strengths.

Battlefield 3’s story feels like that of a direct-to-DVD action movie. Lackluster characterisation, incoherent narrative and unnecessary plot twists that can be seen from a mile away make the scant five or six hour-long campaign a mercifully brief endeavor. There are flashes of brilliance mixed in, such as a roller coaster-esque fighter jet sequence, and chasing a suicide bomber through the streets of Paris.

Perhaps the biggest disappointment is the campaign’s inability to familiarize players with the ins and outs of Battlefield’s multiplayer. Crucial game mechanics like being a combat medic or flying a helicopter fall by the wayside in single player, leaving users to learn through failure in multiplayer.

Such is the way of things in hardcore PC gaming, but for those unaccustomed to the hazing process of more tactically-minded games like Battlefield, the barrier of entry may prove too great. That said, for those willing to put their pride aside and adjust to the more team-oriented gameplay of Battlefield, the multiplayer is an absolute joy.

Make no mistake, this is not Call of Duty. High kill-to-death ratios don’t mean squat, and lone wolves are seen as a liability to the overall success of a team. There’s nothing stopping you from playing how you want to, but you won’t be getting the most out of Battlefield by confining yourself to the so-so team deathmatch mode.

The true fun in Battlefield is embracing the roles of the class system. Running through a hail of gunfire to heal a downed squadmate, repairing a tank as it lays waste to everything in its path, laying down suppressive fire so teammates can safely capture an objective, these are the moments that make Battlefield great.

They’re also crucial to success in Battlefield 3, and the developers have done everything they can to encourage selfless play. Experience is rewarded for acts ranging from healing allies to keeping opponents’ heads down. It’s entirely possible to play an entire round without pulling the trigger, and still contribute. With tons of awards and class-specific incentives, in addition to an overarching carrot-on-a-stick system, Battlefield has no shortage of reasons to keep you fighting the good fight.

The multiplayer isn’t perfect, however. Glitches, latency, connection drops and audio cut-outs are too frequent to ignore, and the classes and vehicles could with for a little more balancing.

The cooperative mode is decent enough, though it feels tacked on for an extra bullet point on the back of the box. Limited to only two players, coop has you playing through various scenarios, either inspired by, or directly taken from Modern Warfare 2’s Spec Ops mode.

First debuting in 2008, D.I.C.E.’s Frostbite engine set the standard for sound design and dynamic destruction in games. With Battlefield 3 comes Frostbite 2, and while environmental destruction may be toned down, Battlefield’s audio is absolutely stellar.

Weapon reports are phenomenal, with every shot sending an authoritative boom through the subwoofer, and bullets hissing and cracking with each near miss. Soldiers scream and curse, jets whoosh overhead and the low rumble of an incoming tank is unmistakable. Combined together, it all creates a chaotic and believable atmosphere of war. Add in Frostbite’s fantastic graphics, and you have the most convincing reproduction of an actual battlefield available, short of joining the Army.

For as good as the multiplayer portion is, Battlefield 3 ultimately suffers from trying to be what it’s not. The unnecessary Modern Warfare mimicking only serves to spoil Battlefield’s established strengths. However, it is a testament to those strengths that Battlefield 3 still stands as one of the best games of 2011, despite its flaws. It may not be the game of the century, nor a Call of Duty killer, but D.I.C.E. can be proud of the latest entry in its Battlefield franchise.

It’s tough to say the third time’s the charm in the case of a hugely popular series like Gears of War. However, calling Gears of War 3 the definitive game in the trilogy shouldn’t be taken as a shot against its predecessors, but as an exemplification of just how much an improvement Gears 3 is. Epic Games has filled Gears 3 with such an abundance of content that, in order to unlock everything legitimately, you’d have to play consistently for months, if not years.

Of course, the Versus multiplayer is still where many players spend their time, but you get the sense that it’s just the side attraction this time around. Not to say that the hallmark of the Gears franchise has been neglected; there are dozens of in-game milestones and unlockables to keep even the most fervent Gears fan busy. There’s just such a large emphasis on cooperative play, whether through the campaign, Horde and Beast modes, and a stronger narrative in Gears 3.

Speaking of campaign, the story in Gears of War 3 is undoubtedly the best in the series. The campaign does a good job of creating an atmosphere of desperation and chaos between factions and humanizing the characters of the franchise.

Seeing squadmates Augustus “Cole Train” Cole and Dominic Santiago react to the world, the former simultaneously relishing and lamenting his glorious sports celebrity life before the war, and the latter clinging to hobbies like gardening to keep himself together after the death of his wife, Maria, goes a long way toward creating a natural connection with them, and a genuine investment in their survival. While some big questions are left unanswered, the trilogy’s conclusion is satisfying and well worth the investment.

Like Gears of War 2, Horde mode is the star of the show. Whether or not you’re into Versus is irrelevant; Horde is an absolute blast to play with friends. For the unlucky few Xbox owners who have yet to play it, Horde mode has you and four others fighting off progressively more difficult waves of enemies.

The catch is that, with each tenth wave, the game adds more enemy variety and buffs, like higher accuracy or more health, to the Locust onslaught. New to Gears 3 is the ability to play a little tower defense, with objects like upgradeable turrets and barricades, as you earn cash after each wave.

New to the Gears franchise, and honestly, it’s a wonder it took this long, is Beast mode. Beast sees you filling the role of the locust’s wide variety of creatures. Similar to Horde, humans are holed up in an area of the map, and it’s your job to make them sleepy in as little time as possible.

The best part is progressing from the lowly suicide bombing Tickers to the big baddies of the Locust army, like the Berserker and Corpser. The only drawback is that, by the time you’ve unlocked the coolest Locust, the game is over. With only 12 rounds, compared to Horde’s 50 round marathon, which can last hours, Beast feels like it ends right as the real fun is beginning.

With a wealth of game modes and a completely revamped story, it might be easy to assume that Gears 3 is taking the ‘quantity over quality’ approach. On the contrary, the series finalé takes the strong foundation built by Gears 1 and 2, and makes a far more polished and accessible experience for all gamers. The inclusion of Beast mode and enhancements made to Horde, campaign and even Versus make Gears 3 one of the best games of this console generation, and easily the best in the Gears of War franchise. Whether you’re a Gears veteran looking to dominate online, or a casual gamer who just wants to play with friends, Gears of War 3 offers such a broad experience that you’re sure to find something to your liking.

At this point, I think it's universally understood that the summer is the annual back catalog period for gamers. Big publishers like Activision and Microsoft are saving their best franchises for the ever-jam packed holiday release window of late September through mid November. Gears of War 3, Batman: Arkham City and Modern Warfare 3 are just three of the biggest titles that will be made available to the masses this fall, with many more in tow. But, for now, that's neither here nor there.

As I said in the open, summer is a time to catch up on games that may have passed you by the first time around as well as revisit old favorites that haven't seen the inside of a console in a while; that's what I'm here to discuss today.

So, as you may or may not have heard, there's this little trilogy called Mass Effect that's coming to a close next March. For those unfamiliar with the series, Mass Effect is an action/adventure game set in space. Humanity has recently become a space-faring species and, subsequently, have discovered that they're not the only kid on the space-block. This leads to inevitable racial and territorial tensions between the various other species and provides the backdrop for the first two games, in which Commander Shepard (you) goes from badass soldier to interstellar super spy, and attempts to stop an omnipotent sentient-robot race from destroying the galaxy; you know, that old song and dance. Anyway, one of Mass Effect's biggest selling points - other than giant angry space robots - has been the ability to carry your choices (and their consequences) from one game to another. So, for example, if you decide to let one of your squad members die in Mass Effect 1, they stay dead in Mass Effect 2 or 3.

In anticipation for Mass Effect 3, I decided to play through part deux again. Believe it or not, that game is still awesome, though some of it's problems, like stiff combat movement and some awkward animations, are a tad more evident after seeing some early ME3 footage. The characters are just as memorable, though I made a concerted effort to give some of the characters in the latter half of the game, particularly Legion and Samara, more time in the spotlight. One part of the game that I found considerably more pronounced since my first go around was the audio. I bought a nice 2.1 speaker set since then and now feel stupid for ever playing anything without them, but with Mass Effect, in particular, it was night and day. On your ship, The Normandy, there's this hollow atmospheric presence in the background, like you can hear the nothingness of space surrounding you. I definitely can't wait for the epic conclusion to this excellent trilogy, currently set for release on March 6, 2012.

I've also been playing a bit of the Sims 3. Now, I know there are people somewhere out there that play this game like a straight-up life simulator, but I can't go through that game without it devolving into, 'find new ways to make my sim's life a living hell.' By now, I'm sure everybody knows about the golden oldies of the franchise, like having a sim go into a swimming pool and then removing the ladder so they can never get out, or putting a sim in an empty room and deleting the door. But, as the saying goes, "variety is the spice of life." Or in this case, death. I'm not a sadist, or anything, but I think EA Games secretly wants you to inflict all manner of horrors upon those gibberish-speaking guinea pigs. Just look at them, with their doe eyes and unbridled lust for life; their ghosts turn different colors depending on how they die, for crying out loud. If that doesn't say, "Tinker with the television and see how long it takes to electrify your sim," I don't know what does. It is a sandbox game, after all.

As you PC gamers out there are more-than-likely aware of, the annual Steam Summer sale recently came to a conclusion. For those not privy, Steam is a marketplace for buying and playing computer games, and their annual summer sale is a period of about two weeks where a large portion of their games are available for anywhere from 15 to 80 percent off. I'm not a huge PC gamer, but I decided to pick up Battlefield: Bad Company 2 in anticipation of Battlefield 3 - which comes out October 25 - as well as Assassin's Creed 2, which was an enjoyable, albeit lengthy, adventure through renaissance-period Italy.

Bad Company 2 is decent enough, like a summer movie where you just want to see stuff blow up and don't really care why (I'm looking at you Michael Bay). The single player was completely forgettable, serving as more of a tutorial to the ways of the Frostbite engine's destructible environments and bullet gravity. The multiplayer is definitely where it's at, with a sizable community and a 'by the numbers' persistent career element. Though, to be honest, the most fun I had was running through a hail of bullets as a medic, and bringing teammates back to life with the magical cordless defibrillator paddles they give you.

So that's been my summer swoon so far. I haven't had a chance to pick up Catherine, a Japanese puzzle game by Atlus Games, but the demo seems interesting enough and that studio has a good track record. There's also Suda 51's, Shadows of the Damned, a third-person shooter that already has a cult following. Anyway, I hope your summer has been less hectic than mine - taking over a newspaper will do that.

In 2009, Sucker Punch ditched the cartoony, Ocean’s Eleven antics of its mainstay Sly Cooper series in favor of a grittier, ripped-from-the-comics style of Infamous. Cole MacGrath’s journey from anonymous delivery boy to hero (or villain) of Empire City received much praise for its fun electrical powers, addicting collectables and a comic book plot that didn’t feel paper-thin. Two years later, Infamous 2 is looking to draw on its predecessor’s success, keeping much of the original’s gameplay mechanics, while simultaneously expanding its color palette beyond the drab blues and greys of Empire City. Does Infamous 2 provide a spark to the summer swoon, or fizzle out?

Infamous 2’s story picks up not too long after the conclusion of its predecessor, and, without spoiling one of the coolest tutorials in recent memory, Cole must make his way down south along with formerly annoying-as-hell sidekick, Zeke Dunbar and Lucy Kuo, a government agent looking to help Cole become more powerful as a mysterious new threat draws near. Infamous 2 employs a morality system similar to the original, though the decisions put before Cole aren’t nearly as hokey as the “be an angel or a dick, and nowhere in between” quandaries found in the first game. What’s more, Cole’s powers reflect his choices far more, reaching such a disparity between precision and chaos in the latter part of the story that they feel like two completely different games. The powers and parkour truly are the heart of Infamous 2’s experience, making up for a story that, while cooler in concept than the original’s, really begins to drag by the last third. In addition to the main story and side missions, Sucker Punch has also included a level creator and user-created content throughout the world. It’s a nice distraction from the story missions, but doesn’t serve as anything more than a novelty.

By today’s standards, Infamous 2 isn’t exactly the prettiest game on the block. Other than the main characters’ faces, the graphics can look anywhere from decent to embarrassing, particularly on close-ups of pedestrians, who reach almost Wii-levels of bad. However, if you’ve played Infamous, you’ll instantly feel some good ol’ southern comfort as the series swaps out its faux New York in favor of the colorful New Marais - though why they don’t just call them New York and New Orleans is mystery, considering that the game specifically mentions other real U.S. states. Regardless of its name, New Marais is a beauty to look at, with neon signs, old forts and a flooded suburban area that equates to a “the ground is lava” scenario, which makes traversal even more challenging and fun.

Infamous 2’s music clearly reflects its new-found southern roots, with a heavy emphasis on drums during action and meandering strings during exploration. The problem is that the game is far too inconsistent about when it plays, with intense battles or long stretches of traversing the city in unexplained silence. This exposes another of Infamous’s shortcomings. Much like the original, the game lacks any kind of ambience. Cars silently glide along and the hussle and bussle of New Marais is equatable to a mime walking on tip-toes. The only exception being occasional pedestrian chatter as you pass by, and the sweet(?) saxophone or fast-paced beat of a makeshift drum played by street performers.

There’s no doubt that Infamous 2 is better than its predecessor. Sucker Punch largely fixed the problems of the original while creating a sense of identity and originality that Infamous never had. However, the series’ audio problems really detract from the experience and the story is awfully anxious to move through the neon district and bayou that set it apart from other open-world games, in favor of a more generic industrial district. The user content feels bolted on, and there are so many side missions already that the user missions feel like an unnecessary attempt to extend the experience. Sucker Punch’s second crack at Infamous is a mixed bag, most of which is great. At the very least, Infamous 2 is worth a rental, but if you’re into action, comics, or just want to go crazy in an open city.

Any baseball manager will tell you that, for all the stats and sabermetrics, you still have to go out between the white lines and play the game. That, for every 5-tool superstar like Troy Tulowitzki, there are scrappy gamers like Nick Punto who contribute in less tangible ways. Such is the life of 2K Sports’ frumpy also-ran baseball series, MLB 2K, which has long-since been abandoned by gamers for Sony’s stick-swingin’ sim, MLB: The Show. But while The Show may possess every tool in the proverbial shed, and despite 2K’s lame duck exclusivity deal with MLB drawing to a close, MLB 2K11 somehow finds a way to deliver a fun, albeit arcady baseball experience.

As with last year’s entry, 2K11’s big strengths are the pitching and hitting systems, which mimic your onscreen athlete’s actions. When pitching, you choose your pitch and location, and then perform a two-step motion with the right analog stick. Some pitches, like a four-seam fastball, are straightforward, with an easy back-then-forward motion, while others like a curveball require more complex movement to accurately perform. There’s a good variation of pitch types, which keeps pitching fun throughout the grind of a full, 9-inning game.

The hitting system hasn’t changed since 2K9, and for good reason. It’s easily the better batting interface of the two current games available, and just might be the most comfortable I’ve ever used. Everything, from the depth perception of the ball to the pitcher tipping his pitch on a bad delivery, feels right, and the exaggerated, bat-shattering sound of squaring a ball up further-accentuates the feeling of success.

One aspect of 2K’s arcady nature that succeeds is My Player mode, which debuted in 2K10 and remains intact in this year’s game. In what is essentially Sony’s Road to the Show mode, My Player boils down to creating a top prospect and guiding him from the minors to the Hall of Fame, all while playing exclusively from his point of view. What sets 2K’s version apart is the manner in which you rise to the top. Road to the Show is more comprehensive, forcing you to constantly work on all assets of your game, or they’ll degrade over time. In 2K11, you take on more of a Bryce Harper, “golden boy” role, with dramatic clutch moments occurring late in games and skills that don’t decline until late in your career. While it’s not as realistic, My Player sacrifices a WoW-style minor league grind for instant gratification and a quick rise to the bigs.

While The Show is praised for its gorgeous visuals, 2K remains the ugly duckling, occasionally looking decent when the lighting is right on an all-star’s recognizable mug. At its worst, 2K11 is laughable, with grossly oversized versions of players like Baltimore’s Mark Reynolds and shots of pitchers gasping like a fish out of water. What’s worse, the same three or four stock faces are used in lieu of less recognizable athlete’s faces, making for some pretty comical situations in which multiple players appear in a game with the same generic face.

In terms of game modes and overall additions, MLB 2K11 might as well be a palette-swap of 2K10. Other than some roster bug fixes and updates to Brian Wilson’s beard, there’s no real incentive for anyone other than PS3-less baseball purists to re-up with 2K Sports’ baseball franchise this year. However, if you can stomach the less-than-stellar visuals and John Kruk constantly saying “ath-a-lete,” then there is some fun baseball to be had in MLB 2K11.

Every so often a game comes along that changes your perception of a particular genre, that makes you smile and remember all the amazing moments you had with it, even while you’re still playing through it for the first time. Portal 2 is such a unique and polished experience that it would be unfair, no, an insult to compare it to any other puzzler, shooter or even the original Portal. That’s right; Portal 2 is so much more refined and streamlined that even the original is shrouded in its shadow.

From the moment you first wake up, Valve displays their uncanny ability to combine seamless narrative and comedy, while still keeping strong gameplay at the core of the experience. Wheatley, a small spherical bot who accompanies you throughout the game, conveys more emotion though rapid eye movement and body language than most games are able to accomplish with an entire human body. Add in a timid, yet unwittingly hilarious performance by Stephen Merchant (of The Office and The Ricky Gervais Show) and Wheatley steals the show, with the exception of GLaDOS.

Yup, Portal’s cake stealing, party submission position, neurotoxin spewing baddie is back, and boy is she pissed at you. This is one of those elements that show just how evolved Portal 2 is when compared to its predecessor. Throughout Portal, GLaDOS was far more reserved, dipping occasionally from mad robot scientist to straight-homicidal during the test chambers, and then going full-on maniacal during your escape. This time around, the big bad bot is stone cold, playing more of a Jigsaw role by keeping you alive just to go through more increasingly difficult and deadly tests.

The actual gameplay of Portal 2 remains largely intact from the original, with the energy pellets being swapped out for “thermal discouragement beams,” lazer beams that can be redirected to open doors and destroy those cute-as-hell turrets. In addition to the discouragement beams, Portal 2 features bridges made of pure sunlight, gel that can be used to speed up movement and propel you through the air and tractor beams. These puzzle features add a new wrinkle for series veterans and make navigating test chambers even more treacherous and fun.

While Portal 2 is a relatively short game, coming in at around 10 hours, the addition of a cooperative mode that allows two people to run a separate series of test chambers does extend the experience. However, the sheer quality of the content that is there more than makes up for any shortcomings, and with additional downloadable content (the first of which will be free, by the way), Portal 2 is a game worth hanging on to.

Valve has once again taken the lofty expectations of a fervent fan-base and completely shattered them. Do not hesitate to pick this game up, regardless of your gaming preferences.

With the exception of episodic releases of games like Sam & Max and Back to the Future by developer, Telltale Games, the point-and-click adventure genre has become pretty barren. However, the semi-obscure, Madrid-based developer, Pendulo Studios is attempting to fill the gap with their release of The Next BIG Thing for the PC.

As beautiful as it is charming, The Next BIG Thing is a classic adventure game in every sense of the word, with puzzles ranging from clever to downright head-scratching, often requiring the player to randomly experiment with different items in order to succeed. This is more an indication of the hand holding approach developers take in modern games, rather than a fault of TNBT’s replication of a long-revered genre, as any gamer who played the Monkey Island series in the early 90’s will attest to. However, the presence of a hint system that coyly drops clues about the current situation helps at times.

The Next BIG Thing is chock-full of personality, with quirky characters like Liz Allaire, a disturbingly energetic field reporter, with a propensity for blurting out random statements, and Tobby, a pet Venus Flytrap with a taste for caviar. The genuinely funny script is further enhanced by rapid-fire dialogue that fits the game’s absurd brand of humor to a tee.

To put it bluntly, TNBT is gorgeous. The cell-shaded 3D characters look sharp and are animated well, with the exception of spotty lip-syncing. The dubbing is especially disappointing because it detracts somewhat from the stellar dialogue. The hand-painted backdrops will leave your jaw on the floor, especially when played at higher resolutions.

The big drawback of The Next BIG Thing is its price. At $30, it's a little expensive, especially considering that when you've played through the game once, you have pretty much seen everything it has to offer. When compared to Telltale charging around $10 for similar games, Pendulo might be pricing themselves out of the market.

Despite its cost, The Next BIG Thing is an exceptional adventure game that harkens back to the early years of gaming. For those who can afford the price of admission, TNBT doesn't disappoint. With its classy style, sexy looks and excellent dialogue, The Next BIG Thing is a short ride, but one that you'll enjoy every minute of.

This past decade has not been kind to the Mortal Kombat series. With additions like a cartoony, Mario Kart-style racing mode, a slow-as-molasses chess mode and DC superheroes performing “heroic brutalities,” America’s bloodiest and oft-criticized fighting game has seen its reputation take a nose dive. So with a return to the series’ roots of solid 2D fighting mechanics and cringe-worthy finishing moves, does Mortal Kombat 9 mark the return of Scorpion and Sub-Zero to fighting game prominence?

Developer NetherRealm Studios, headed by MK mastermind Ed Boon, has a knack for taking a game disc and filling to the brim with as much content as possible. With a full-fledged story mode to go along with the traditional ten-match ladder, online and offline versus modes and a humungous 300 level challenge tower, Mortal Kombat is no lightweight when it comes to ways to play. Add in 500 unlockables like concept art and extra character outfits and fatalities, as well as Test Your Luck, which adds randomized elements like headless combat and infinite special meter, and you have no shortage of incentives to keep playing long after the story credits roll.

All that content is great, but what is the point of it if the game is not fun. Fortunately, Mortal Kombat’s best asset, above all the flashy modes and extras, is its core fighting mechanics. The controls are responsive, and with each fighter having their own heft – Kitana glides across the screen with ease while Sheeva lumbers along, no one character plays the same. There is a real sense of impact when a fighter lands a hit, and with blood and damage persistently accumulating over a match, the characters really do look like they have been through the ringer after a tough bout.

As good as it is, Mortal Kombat is not without its faults. While the story mode starts out strong, retelling the first two games with smooth transitions between cut scene and fight, by chapter 15 the story goes so far off the rails that it almost makes MK: Deception’s zombie Liu Kang look good. Another sore spot are the fights with Shao Khan and Goro, which force the use of cheap tactics like projectile attack spamming to win. They are neither fun, nor satisfying when you are eventually victorious.

Mortal Kombat’s online mode features a matchmaking system, as well as a lobby system where players can chat and challenge each other. There is also King of the Hill, which attempts to replicate the arcade experience of the 90’s with a line of players awaiting their shot at the current champion, and a peanut gallery where spectators can cheer, taunt and vote on a fight’s quality. There were issues with player connection and matchmaking, however, often taking minutes before an opponent was found.

The story and connection issues are hardly enough to spoil an otherwise top-notch brawler. With stiff competition from Street Fighter 4 and Marvel vs. Capcom 3, Mortal Kombat distinguishes itself, not as a mediocre-playing shock jock, but as a solid, tournament-ready fighter with enough bloody pizzazz to keep the experience fresh and exciting.

With the introduction of larger hard drives and faster internet connections, downloadable games have seen their presence in the gaming industry grow considerably since the launch of the current generation of consoles. But with Sony hyping bluray as the evolution of DVDs since the Playstation 3 debuted back in 2006, is bypassing physical media truly the future of games?

Consider that since its launch in 2004, the Xbox Live Arcade has grown from a small collection of games, most of which were re-releases of classic games like Gauntlet and Ms. Pac Man, to a library numbering in the hundreds. And the Arcade hasn’t simply been a place for companies to cash in on older titles. Small and independent developers that lack the backing of a big publisher like Activision have found success there as well.

Being a longtime gamer, I understand that there is a certain fondness for having a physical copy of a game. And there’s an odd feeling of pride, seeing that vast collection of titles accumulated over a lifetime of gaming. But to be honest, how many of those games do you truly cherish? I wouldn’t give up my mint condition Twisted Metal II for anything, but I don’t extend that same sentimental value to something like Homefront.

Let’s say you don’t have an emotional attachment to a particular game, and you couldn’t care less about supporting a fledgling game developer. It still makes economic sense to go diskless. Buying a downloadable copy of a game is often $10 to $15 cheaper without the cost of printing a disc or manual. What’s more, you get it instantly, without having to use gas driving to the store. You can always download the game again if you delete it, and there’s no risk of scratching up the disk.

Why fumble around opening cases and exchanging disks when you could simply select the game you want from a list, and play. It may sound like nothing, but it’s just one more way downloadable games are cutting the fat out of the overall experience. They embody the streamlined, less-is-more attitude of the modern consumer; which is why downloadable games are becoming a larger part of mainstream entertainment than their traditional counterparts. How could an experience like Mass Effect, which requires hours of investment, compete with something so instantly gratifying as hearing Beethoven’s “Ode To Joy” blaring as you beat a level in Peggle?

From Nintendo’s Virtual Boy to Sony’s Eye Toy, the gaming industry has seen its share of short-lived, “next big thing” technology. But downloadable games offer practicality rather than flashy gimmicks, which has, and will continue to aid in its success. It may take some time, but eventually downloadable gaming will become the standard of entertainment consumption.