Something went wrong. Try again later

mrchup0n

This user has not updated recently.

353 21580 87 79
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

Conflict of Interest for Podcast, and Other Things

By mrchup0n 1 Comments

So, here's some clarification on what Ron B. can and cannot answer on the podcast(if you're confused, see my last blog post):

- He can talk about WHO his clients are.

- He cannot talk about what they're currently working on.

- He can't talk smack about his clients as if he were just one of us (obviously, since he's in P.R.).

I've asked him if he can talk about the PR experience with products out on the market already, such as Spore. Waiting to hear back on that. Regardless...

...I'm brewing up a new short 1-minute segment called "Conflict of Interest" in which you, dear listener, send in questions that are so obviously a conflict of interest or biased for whatever guest we happen to have -- or even any of us. The object would be for us to choose the most asininely conflicting/biased question. Pointless? Yes. Makes everyone uncomfortable? Yes. That's the point. So I guess it isn't pointless. Or maybe it is.

For some mild examples, you could ask Ron, "Why did Army of Two suck so much ****"? (He can't talk smack about EA), or you could ask Mr. Alex Navarro (who may or may not be able to join us for a few minutes in the weeks to come depending on his schedule), "How often do you dream about Guitar Hero: World Tour?" (He works for Harmonix.) You might ask me something intentionally ridiculous about Gamespot's reviews system or ask Al why Optimum Online is the worst internet service out there, since he works at, oh let's call it Snablevision. Or you could ask Slunks to recite the entire recipe for Chick-Fil-A's waffle-cut fries. These are supposed to be asinine questions, folks -- nothing really serious -- but at the same time not so random that they don't make sense. In other words, like I said, REAL questions that you know we can't answer or to which you know exactly how we'd (have to) answer.

This new segment may not fly if it sucks (and it just might suck hard), so it's all up to you, dear listener.

Anyway, Ron will be joining us as the subject of our "main" segment as well as for our mailbag (obviously). Since I'm sure there will be some sort of news attached to at least one of his clients in the news bucket, he won't be joining us for that. He may join us for What We've Been Playing and we'll just edit around it, so don't be shocked if you hear him for the first segment, bow out for the news, and return for the final segments. (Obviously we'd record the News last, and editing magic would make it all happen properly.)

"Where do I send my questions / comments in?" Well duh: mailbag AT!!! trigames DOT!!! net. Or this form. (Also feel free to send in questions about Too Human since that's fresh in my mind.)

Other Things:

* the_antipode just txt'ed me that he's about to buy Too Human thanks to the aid of a gift certificate. Hopefully I'll be able to dive into co-op this week and lend my final thoughts on the game in the form of a review.

* I just started Blue Dragon yesterday, in yet another blow to my backlog. I played it while packing for my train ride back to NYC today. Whenever a cutscene (there were numerous 30-second cutscenes, which -- if you know me, you won't be surprised -- irritated the living **** out of me) popped up, the controller went down and more clothes were folded. Whenever a battle popped up, I mashed the A button with my foot while folding more clothes / throwing them into my luggage. Yeah. So far, not impressed. But it's only been 45 minutes and I hear the job system gets pretty FFV-ish, so we'll see.

* Today is September 11th, and while I am traveling home via train instead of plane, I am still nervous. Go figure.

* Playing Xbox 360 in SD resolutions, and interlaced to boot, is painful. Graphics still look tight in Too Human and Blue Dragon, but reading the smaller text hurts. It's legible, and it's not like Dead Rising was, but it's still a shocker even when knowing what to expect.

1 Comments

Trigames.NET Podcast Episode 105 and an important announcement

By mrchup0n 3 Comments

Trigames.NET Podcast episode 105 is up now. You can find it at the usual place. Instead of giving the blurb thistime, I'm going to take the room to make a special announcement for the podcast: one of my high school friends, Ron B., is now working for a PR firm that handles Capcom games, EA games, and gaming journo site Crispy Gamer (where Alex Navarro contributed a few reviews while he was freelancing).

Please send in questions for Ron. I am currently finding out exactly what he's able to talk about, as he just started with the company a few weeks ago, so the more you send, the more we have to filter from. I'd assume that more general questions about the PR industry and games, or how everything works, yadda yadda, would have a better chance of avoiding the "no comment" answer, but still, ask whatever comes to mind.

mailbag AT trigames DOT net -- and only there. Comments here are NOT guaranteed to be seen and thus NOT guaranteed to be asked on the podcast. So if you want your question answered, email us at that address or use our email form.

Ok I lied -- here's a tiny blurb (and oh, it's 2 hours and 11 minutes long):

"Listener Digi_Matrix asks about Quicktime Events, and listener supersonic97 asks about game unionizing and makes note of the tragic self-shooting of a boy who stayed home from school to play Halo."
3 Comments

Too Human: Day Two, or rather, Finished

By mrchup0n 3 Comments

Let me put this up front: While it falls way short of the greatness I had hoped for, I'm glad I took the time to experience Too Human. There are two main reasons for this:

1) I'm a huge fan of Eternal Darkness, a game that Silicon Knights and its father, Denis Dyack, worked on for the Gamecube. I'm also a fan, though nowhere near as big, of Blood Omen: The Legacy of Kain. Given these two titles, I was looking forward to Too Human -- even with the recent backlash -- and am glad to finally have played it.

2) Despite its numerous issues, I still see something that can help this become a competent trilogy when all is said and done -- provided that Silicon Knights takes heed of the complaints. Had I written it off as a "flop" and relied on the hugely mixed reaction as a sign to stay away, I might not even care about future installments. Now, I want them to come.

That said, it's not like it's over. I still want to play co-op. I've heard that the game is better suited to co-op, after all. In any case, after nearly 12 hours of single-player Too Human, there are a whole bunch of thoughts rummaging around in my brain. You've already seen most of my thoughts with regards to the combat, but I'll sum them up here in addition to everything else.

WHAT I LIKED

* I liked that the combat was easy to learn and get into. One of the personal barriers to entry for me is learning a new game when I've got so many in the backlog that I'm already familiar with. That Too Human stayed away from being too complex helped me ease into it. The same can be said for Titan Quest, God of War and any FPS using a mouse.

* Very few loading times. Unless I'm remembering incorrectly, the combat environments NEVER suffered a loading time. There were loads going to Aesir (your "home base" of sorts, like the Citadel in Mass Effect or the Town in Diablo I) and back mid-mission, and there are likely loads masked by elevator travel and mission-intro cinematics -- but that's about it. Room to room, skirmish to skirmish, the game did. Not. Load. And that's a good thing.

* Re-spec. Now, I didn't re-spec my skill tree at all because I was happy with my choices. But, if you realize you've made a mistake, you can take back your skill points and re-apply them as you so choose for a small (very small) monetary fine. I really like having this flexibility and it gave me peace of mind throughout my experience.

* No grinding. I don't mind grinding in RPGs. I'm used to it. Have been since Final Fantasy Legend II on the original Gameboy. However, I also find it to be a little wasteful in this day and age, with the only real "joy" coming out of the "pride" I take in having monstrously powerful characters. "Yeah, I worked hard on that," is the mentality. But here, as long as you don't run away from every battle like a coward, you will be able to progress through the ranks. Honestly, I don't even know if you CAN run away from a battle into the next room, as I've never tried. But I liked that I could beat the game without having to re-visit old areas just to fight more enemies.

* Aesir and the world tree. One of the issues that Kevin Van Ord had with the game was that it was just big. Walking through long, lifeless hallways can get tedious. I completely understand where he's coming from. That said, I somehow didn't mind exploring Aesir at all. Maybe it's because it was the prettiest locale in the game. You also have access the the world tree, which is also referred to as cyberspace in the game. Now, the world tree is like a sub-area -- similar to those alternate planes of existence in Eternal Darkness -- and many of its locations (bone graveyard, lakeside mountain) are graphically barren. But it was a nice break from the nearly endless combat (which I'll get to in the negatives) to be able to just go back to Aesir, jump in the world tree, and explore at my leisure to find hidden rune stashes.

* Item customization. Some weapons and armor have open "rune slots" -- similar to Materia slots in Final Fantasy VII -- in which you can place one of the several runes in the game. Runes have properties such as increasing your health, damage potential, attack speed, et cetera. I spent a lot of my time looking at weapons and seeing how I could build them up to my liking. Even if I was never going to use a weapon, I liked seeing its "Empty Rune Slot" entries fill up with wicked bonuses.

* Sentient weapon. The sentient weapon is a skill that sends a copy of your current weapon flying around and hitting enemies on its own accord. It sounds really dumb, and in fact it also looks really dumb. But the effect in-game is wholly amusing. It's something of a guilty pleasure to know that you can be in one area, pounding away at an enemy, while in the other corner of the room a replica of your sword is doing the tango with another enemy.

* The environment graphics from a technical standpoint. The environments in Too Human, except for many parts of the world tree, look very detailed. HDR lighting was used nicely, too. Bear in mind, my entire time was spent playing this in SD resolutions via component, so I still have to evaluate it in HD -- but it still looked good for the most part. It doesn't maintain a rock-solid framerate when enemies crowd the screen, but since the game is a hack-and-slash looting RPG, this wasn't that much of an issue.

* The music. I don't remember much of it, but that's not to say it was bad. What I heard of it, I liked, and I want to find a soundtrack just so I can listen to it more carefully.

* The story. The actual events and revelations that transpire are pretty neat. I'm not a story guy, so even if this game had the crappiest of stories, it wouldn't have changed my experience with the gameplay, but it was definitely a nice-to-have. In reading up on some Norse mythology, Silicon Knights did a good job transplanting the events in the ancient poems to this strange modernized cybernetic world.

* The fact that I finished this game. I barely finish games I play for leisure anymore, and it's always nice when I make it to the end of one.

WHAT I DISLIKED

* Combat after long periods of time. For the first few minutes of any combat sequence, I'm enjoying myself. By the time my thumbs have pushed on the analog stick for the tenth minute in a row, I'm bored. I explained the tactile differences that my brain interprets between holding / double-tapping an analog stick, clicking a mouse and pressing a button here (same link as above). My brain prefers the necessary skill -- however minimal -- in pointing to something or pressing a button over just holding the stick in a general direction. (And before anyone tells me that Geometry Wars says "Hi" -- erm, Geometry Wars requires infinitely higher reflexes than does Too Human. Play it. You have one hit to live, and look at how fast and numerous your adversaries are.)

* Visual design. Aside from Aesir, which was really pretty, the combat areas are all bland from an artistic standpoint. Yes, I did mention they are very technically well done -- and they are. Every texture and glowing whatsit looks crisp. Allow me a metaphor: It's like saying that F.E.A.R. was the best rendering of an office building I'd ever seen (which it's not, but let's just say it was). Does an office building really excite you? Likewise, every combat area in Too Human is some rusty, metallic place with glowing walls or floors. When I saw the Ice Forest, I thought -- ooh nice, I'll get to fight in the snow. Not so much. You trek through the snow INTO another metallic place. The only varied area was the final one, and yet again it was mostly a... rusty metallic fortress, just this time brimming with a lot of red and orange on the periphery. It made me feel like I was playing in some nightmarish extension of Halo's Library level, only this time for several hours on end. Oh, and the world tree has pop-in. Yuck.

* Penalty for death is a little too lenient. Yes, your armor wears down. Yes, you have to watch a really stupid 20-second cutscene where the valkyrie takes you to Valhalla. No, you don't start "exactly" where you left off (at worst, though, a few seconds away). Still, dying felt like a non-factor. Armor takes a long time to break, so I never felt ANY urgency surrounding that. Now, I mentioned that I hated the "repair" aspect of these loot games (Titan Quest has none -- HAH! -- or at least, none that I've seen in my first 4 hours), but instead of forcing me to not want to die, this dislike just resulted in me never repairing armor until it hit almost zero. And I still progressed just fine. What do I think should be the penalty? How about, your armor and weapons don't wear-and-tear, but if you die too frequently within a time span (who knows -- three times in a mission), the equipment you're wearing breaks completely and you have to go back and fix that. I can live with that. Or how about, you get to keep the experience you earned (because apparently people didn't like loot or leveling penalties so Dyack conceded), but all minor enemies in that area respawn completely. All of them. I could deal with that.

* The fact that 80% of everything you customize (skill tree, runes, charms) consists of buffs and enemy de-buffs. I really wanted to be able to unlock something like, twirl the attack stick in a 360 degree angle and you can execute some massive awesomeness. Or learn the ability to stick out a blade while you're rolling. Things like slow / stun effects from charms are nice, but I'd like the ability to be able to execute them as spells whenever I want to, at some cost. The Spiders and War Cry just don't feel like enough.

* Pacing. Assuming you never really need to go back to Aesir, I feel that the overall game progression was like this: multiple hours of combat, Aesir and a 10-minute cutscene, multiple hours of combat, Aesir and a 10-minute cutscene, multiple hours of combat, ending. Only the first 3 hours of the game or so lept back and forth between heavy combat, exploration, and plot exposition. That was pretty cool. The rest, not so much. In all fairness, you can go back to Aesir any time you want and explore the World Tree, which is nice.

* Camera. Instead of having some fixed camera, it was decided that this game needed a smart camera to best capture a cinematic experience. However, I really didn't like having to switch from pushing the analog stick left to pushing it right when running down a walkway just because the camera decided to "smartly" swoop around in the exact opposite direction for no apparent reason. This happened quite often, and in battle, too.

* The names for weapons and armor. In truth, this didn't affect my experience, but "Bodyform Legguards of Elusion"? "Willful Plated Schynbald of The Maiden"? Doesn't that sound just a touch ridiculous? It's amusing, true, but I highly doubt that this was a case of self-parody.

* Why no healing items? I get that the enemies drop healing pickups, but I want to be able to use a potion-esque item when I please. This would allow them to ratchet up the challenge level of the enemies a little bit while not making the game cheap.

How did my Thoughts Contrast to Some Review Points

I find that some people read reviews and then play a game with the review in mind, which subconsciously directs them to look out for flaws for them to agree with or more vehemently oppose than they normally would. This is why my friend Gideon said he only ever reads reviews after he plays games. I try to "forget" about a review before I go into a game that I've decided to buy on my own, so after my experience with Too Human, I mentally went back and tried to remember what I felt were the most interesting issues or praises with the game and see what my own experiences were. Here are the conflicting points:

* "Too much special loot." This was one complaint voiced by Giancarlo Varanini that wasn't entirely universal across critics. I can definitely see why the complaint was made, as nothing really feels special because you're getting some hot new weapon or armor every so often. As far as armor goes, this bothered me because I would spend some powerful Runes customizing a piece of armor that, well, became obsolete 15 minutes later. However, this didn't bother me SO much because they throw a whole lot of powerful runes at you. Maybe excess in general is the issue here -- too much armor, too many runes, too many enemies. But all in all, I personally wasn't bothered too much by it.

* "Frustrating controls." The analog stick combat wasn't frustrating at all. It was just clumsy and grew boring too quickly. It was the targeting that was frustrating for me. Why am I shooting directly into a wall when I'm clearly pointed at the enemy? Why am I shooting at a DEAD enemy? Regardless, this didn't happen often enough to piss me off, as I mostly concentrated on melee combat.

* "20 second death animation." You know what? This honestly did not bother me. At all. In fact, it gave me a brief reprieve from when combat became mind-numbing. At points, I *welcomed* this cutscene. Weird, I know...

* "Combat can be fun when you get into a groove." Oddly enough, it was when I got into a groove that combat ultimately became boring. It's likely because it doesn't take much to be in that groove. You don't have to have particularly good reflexes or timing to push someone in the air and juggle him. Like I said, it's the first few minutes of a skirmish that are the most fun for me, because these moments come just after I've been walking around with nothing happening and I'm ready to fight.

* "Storytelling only really got good in the end." Fair enough -- I find that many times, the ending sequences to games, films, et cetera, are viewed as the better parts simply because they reveal stuff, and this was no exception. However, from a story perspective, I found enough to be interested in throughout all of the cutscenes from beginning to end. The plot points behind Hod were pretty cool, and they were introduced only halfway through the game.

* "The game never slows down or lags at all." I only saw this from one review, but then, my brain doesn't remember seeing complaints about framerate issues elsewhere, either. Either I remember wrong, or I should be surprised: The framerate indeed chopped up for me, if only slightly, quite a few times. It never got unplayable, but it's definitely noticeable and distracting when it happens. Sometimes even in the world tree, I'd encounter areas where it would rocket up from the high 20's to a smooth 60. In my book, it's better to have a consistent framerate than to have one that can reach 60 often, but also slows down every now and again. Often I find that it's a jarring transition that bothers me moreso than a slower consistency.

As it stands after Single Player, were I to review this on Trigames.NET, it'd be a 3 out of 5. I won't write one until I play some co-op with the_antipode, though.
3 Comments

11:54:53, Level 27

By mrchup0n 1 Comments

Too Human beated.

Yeah. Detailed text thoughts on single player tomorrow during lunch, perhaps. For now:

3 out of 5, "Decent", Rent It, whatever you want to call it. That's my summary.

EDIT: For those who are wondering, podcast will be uploaded tomorrow evening.
1 Comments

Too Human Day One

By mrchup0n 5 Comments

The time count is around 5 and a half hours. The biggest inconsistency for me is the combat. One instant, I'm enjoying the multiple air combos and double-stick finishers. The other instant, I'm yawning at the monotony of it all. Every time a skirmish starts, I get excited but inevitably end up leaning back and then getting tired of it. It's like an unrelenting sine wave. I don't yet fully understand why I can't stay engaged in the combat like I can in Titan Quest; scratch that, I'm never "engaged" in either game, but I'm able to tolerate it in Titan Quest. So I don't know why I can't tolerate Too Human's combat past the first 60 seconds of every skirmish, but I also don't know why I'm excited again after each skirmish.

It might have something to do with the linearity of the game. I know there are little secret areas to find -- but I feel like they're either few and far between or they're just little side rooms as opposed to the breadth of optional caves and sidequests you'd find in such games as yes, Titan Quest (again). My aim, by the way, is not to compare this to Titan Quest -- but it's very similar in spirit to a game like Titan Quest, and while it should be able to stand on its own, my brain just can't help but wish that Too Human wandered off the beaten path more than it does. Because I know that all I'm trying to do is get from A to B, it just makes the combat-ridden path all the more monotonous. There's a reason I don't play Dynasty Warriors, after all.

The other thing is that I really, REALLY don't feel enraptured by just pushing analog sticks. In fact, while it's very simple to get into, I also find it incredibly clumsy (as far as the double-tapping, targeting, and RB mashing goes). In fact, the targeting and "smart" camera are, at times, unacceptable. Sometimes I'll be shooting at nothing even with my sticks pointed at the enemy. What gives? Also, I've had more than three instances of me executing a devastating air-combo... at thin air. Now, by comparison, Ninja Gaiden and God of War made me feel like I was in control of every blade swing, and Titan Quest doesn't feel clumsy. But, at least the mayhem you get to cause in Too Human is juicy to look at -- I definitely won't deny that.

I do like the variety of weapons I get, though I do slightly agree with the sentiment that they give too many good things too often. The problem is that I was able to make it through the last 3 hours of my playthrough without paying much attention to my inventory. Not having a real penalty when you die -- none of my armor broke, and respawning almost right where you left off is laughably lenient -- just saps all the motivation out of the game. And it's not even like I died often, either. So what's the point of fiddling with the inventory?

Messing with runes and charms felt largely inconsequential, too. Like with the inventory, I just trucked along, downing enemies left and right, barely batting an eyelash, for about an hour or two until I realized that I had new runes and charms to fiddle with. The "sidequests" are a nice touch, but they feel more like achievements than actual quests, and I don't feel like I have to expend extra effort, skill or gumption to explore in order to succeed at them.

The other thing is that these are some of the stupidest names I've ever encountered:

Reciprocal Blast Array of The Cunning
Mobility Plate Legguards of Ferocity
Dragon Shockplate Traction Pads of Ferocity
Willful Heavy Schynbald of Plate
Iron Fist of Striking (sounds like they got this one from Engrish.com)

It sounds like the designers just tried to stuff as many syllables as possible. It's not like these names matter, mind you; I just find these names both amusing and a little sad. But hey -- at least, presentation wise, the game looks and sounds good. Well... some of the character models and faces are quite poorly structured and animated, but the environments look really pretty. Artistically they're not the most mind-blowing or innovative designs, but they're very nicely detailed and colorful. And even on an SDTV via component cable, it still looks really good.

In any case, I don't dislike the game so far. I just don't like it very much, either, and that's disappointing considering that -- despite the reviews and controversy -- I remained deeply interested in it. All the positive points pointed out in all of its reviews -- whether the final assessment was positive or negative overall -- kept me interested, and are still tangible now, but so far they're just... not... enough. Of course, I'll reserve final judgment until the final hour is complete. I'm looking forward to seeing what kind of Champion I can craft with my skill tree decisions, I'm looking forward to seeing what happens with the dismembered head guy (I just defeated Hod), and I do want to try and do a 300-hit combo (my high so far is 207).

Regardless, even after only 5 hours of game, I am hoping that the Too Human trilogy continues. I see a good foundation that Silicon Knights can improve on. And if it's any comfort to anyone looking forward to this game or who likes this and was expecting me to love it, thus far it's nowhere near the disappointment that the god-awful Red Steel was.

5 Comments

This is Boring and You Don't Wanna Read It

By mrchup0n 2 Comments

For the first time ever, I'm taking my Xbox 360 with me to work. It's been something many of my friends have suggested I do, ever since I participated Zaps' Guitar Hero League union on GS (now rebranded the Rock Heroes Union, run by GabuEx). This came about because I had to bow out of a semi-finals round on account of it taking place during the week, when I was not at home with my 360.

What's the big deal about lugging it around? Well, when I fly to work, I want to be in and out of the airport as quickly as possible. I don't want to check my luggage; in fact, I've had a few bad experiences with lost luggage (once when visiting my sister when she was living in San Francisco, and once when visiting Taiwan and subsequently had to buy a week's worth of cheap faux-brand shorts and shirts - Hike is NOT the same as Nike, believe me). So, whenever I can drag my luggage on-board, I do it. Whenever it's *just* too big to fit in the compartment, I gate-check it so that I can receive it right there as the nice luggage thrower puts it right in the walkway attached to the plane. No waiting for it at the claim and wondering if a thrower put it on the wrong belt, lost it altogether, or ate the entire thing.

Putting my 360 in my luggage would cause two great inconveniences:

1) During security check-in, I'd have to unwrap it out of whatever shirt(s) I'm using to cushion it, place it in the bin, and then re-wrap it and put it in my luggage. The amount of time taken and annoyance caused was not worth the hassle. Plus, that's just another electronic device that the friendly security people might find mysterious residue on. No, it's not what you think, perverts. They swab devices for chemicals used in explosives or something or other. Hell, don't ask me, I don't know. I'm going back to my trailer...

2) I'd barely have enough space to put everything I needed for the week. It was either take the 360 and it's overly large power adapter, or take the numerous t-shirts I needed for playing basketball and working out at the hotel gym.

The first inconvenience is greater than the second. Naturally, this is why I can take the monster with me this week. I'm taking a train to Harrisburg, PA where I go about 50% of the time for this project. Now, I've been doing this for the past few weeks, but in addition it also dawned on me that I'm just coming off of a mysterious ankle sprain. I did not visit the gym the entirety of last week and instead resorted to doing sit-ups and push-ups in the room, which didn't generate that funny bodily fluid most people call sweat. Hence the need for a gym t-shirt every day diminished, as did the need for my oafishly large basketball sneakers.

So, out went the T-shirts and big kicks, and in went the 360 and its monstrous power adapter. No need to take it out for security checks since there would be none for the train; no need to stress about whether or not I'd make it on time. (I'm notorious -- to myself -- for making it to the gate barely 3 minutes before boarding. Hey -- I'm not a morning person, and these flights are at 7AM. Give me a break.)

With this decision made, I decided to run out and buy Too Human. Part of me half-jokingly wanted to buy Kung Fu Panda, just for kicks, to see if that would satisfy Mr. Pereira, but my brain decided to not deactivate for once and prevented me from making that decision. So now Too Human sits in my CD booklet, waiting to be unleashed on the blurry, SD television that awaits in my hotel room. I also brought Blue Dragon with me since, you know, I can play that and edit the podcast simultaneously (Mark MacDonald apparently played another game or read a book while playing Blue Dragon).

If anyone wants to send me a copy of Kung Fu Panda, feel free. (...riiiight...)

2 Comments

What do YOU want to hear? That's right -- we're asking YOU.

By mrchup0n 3 Comments

We have our regular news bucket going on for the Trigames.NET Podcast, but I thought it'd be nice to do a little throwback to the listener appreciation day episode we had a while back and ask what topics you guys want to hear us talk about. Bear in mind that we don't always get a chance to play the latest games, so "what do you think about [game name]" is probably not going to get a lot of airtime but anything else should be fine -- current industry topics, retro topics, trends, et cetera. Send your topic ideas to the usual spot -- mailbag AT trigames DOT net -- and we'll try to cover as many as possible. If you have a topic that is so engrossing that we take most of the episode, we'll name the episode after you

AGAIN -- mail the topic to mailbag AT trigames DOT net please. We do not guarantee that we'll see -- and thus, read on-air -- anything that is posted anywhere else.

You can find Episode 104 here.

WE RECORD THIS SATURDAY AT 11:30AM EST. Get your entries in before then.

3 Comments

Trigames.NET Podcast Episode 104 - Gumball de Slunk

By mrchup0n 1 Comments

Kid drops out of high school to pursue a career in Guitar Hero... but not Guitar Praise, the Christian rhythm game with its own plastic guitar! Will he resort to "doping" in order to beat the likes of those Jordan / Fire and Flames FCers, or will he just leave that to those in an Australian gaming league? Meanwhile, we discuss Denis Dyack's antics and what effect it has or may have, and listener mail reveals that someone thinks DKC is more entertaining to watch than LBP. Oooh -- scandalous! We finally cap it off with a mix-up between cheap difficulty and inexpensive difficulty. Only the Tony. And before I forget -- Slunks joins us after weeks of work and collagen. I mean college. College!

Kid convinces parents to let him drop out of high school to play GH
http://kotaku.com/5037975/

Tecmo President Resigns Amid Lawsuits
http://blog.wired.com/games/

How to get RB1 songs on RB2 for $5:
http://kotaku.com/5039837/how-

Steroids in baseball? Pah! Try street pharmaceuticals in Pro Gaming.
http://blog.wired.com/games/

Square Enix files friendly takeover bid for Tecmo
http://blog.wired.com/games/

God loves all his creatures, especially those plastic guitars. But He felt that Satan's music had enough time in the sun:
http://blog.wired.com/games/

Six more Rock Band albums due:
http://blog.wired.com/games/

Musical Interludes courtesy of:

Bionic Commando: Rearmed - Intro (X360)
Too Human - Titan (X360)
LittleBigPlanet - Sackzilla Trailer (PS3)

Download here.
File size: 81.7MB
Running time: 2:50:13

Want to be heard? Hit the mailbag - mailbag AT trigames DOT net.
Want previous episodes? Hit the Podcast Homepage.
You can review us on iTunes, while you're at it.
Add us to your RSS reader or iTunes feed! http://trigames.net/rss.xml

1 Comments

The Callout - or, Pereiramassina

By mrchup0n 2 Comments

If you listen to The Hotspot, watch G4's web content, listen to the Giant Bombcast and/or listen to IGN's Nintendo Voice Chat podcast, you might already have an inkling as to what this might be about.

For the rest of you, here be the skinny: On top of all the controversy Denis Dyack has caused for his game, Too Human, now game reviewers are getting into the midst of things. G4's Kevin Pereira has called out Kevin Van Ord's Too Human review. Then, as I was listening to the latest episode of IGN's Nintendo Voice Chat podcast, I heard Matt Casamassina saying that any critic out there who had given the game a middling score -- C's, 5/10's, et cetera -- had "no business reviewing games" and were "obviously reviewing the company, not the game."

Before I go on with my thoughts on this, let me disclaim now that, in the past, I once had this feature on Trigames.NET called "The Callout" in which I'd literally call out someone whose review I thought stunk -- and explain why. This was childish and stupid, and I stopped it after the second edition. (However, I've kept it up on the site as a reminder of the mistakes I've made in the past. If you want to see me at my very worst, feel free to search for it. I'm embarrassed, to say the least, and I'd definitely put this way below my Halo review on Trigames, my Final Fantasy VIII reader review on RPGamer, and my scathing forum defense of my Breath of Fire II Gamespot review on the "how low can you go" scale.)

With regards to Pereira's callout, I think Van Ord himself sums my thoughts up pretty nicely in saying that a little professional courtesy would have been nice. Why not start a dialog, instead of just throwing up your hands and saying, "That's bull. I gotta respond"? Kevin Van Ord is not a fanboy on a forum, using the veil of anonymity as a confidence booster to say whatever he wants about a game through text. Kevin Van Ord -- whether you agree with his views or not, whether you enjoy his writing or not -- is a professional game critic who holds himself completely accountable for what he writes. As such, I think Kevin Pereira -- a fellow critic -- should have treated him as such, reached out to him, and said, "Hey, I disagree with you, but I'd definitely like to discuss this further. And hey -- it'd make for a pretty interesting video feature, don't you think?"

It goes beyond that, though. If you're going to lambast a fellow critic on his own opinion / views, I'd think it would behoove you to give it some clear, articulate thought. Now, I know this is on KP's personal blog, I know he disclaimed that it was a rambly mess, and I can understand and appreciate that; he, too, should be allowed to voice his opinion in a manner he pleases. It's just that as a professional critic / game journalist, it doesn't look very good for your own official critiques -- in terms of perserving your integrity with your audience -- to spout out something jumbled and then go on to say that you feel the need to defend the game in question even more. One's review of a game should be based on his/her own views -- not the views of others. Of course, I'm not saying that he's going to go back and write his review to say, "And to the haters, screw y'all -- Too Human is fantastic! It's better than I say it is because someone else hates it!" But this type of message sticks in the minds of your audience.

(By the way -- I hope this isn't viewed as a callout of a callout. I'm not trying to demonize KP, nor do I think he has "no right" to do what he did. I recognize there's a thin line between giving your thoughts on what someone else says and actively calling their butt out and telling them they're wrong, and I hope I'm not crossing it. If so, I apologize for the ironic hypocrisy.)

Now, I have a different issue with the Casamassina thing. He basically makes a blanket-statement towards anyone who lowballed -- read: disagreed with his opinion of -- the game. Specifically, I remember him saying a C or C- was a lowball. You know who gave Too Human a C-? 1up.com's Giancarlo Varanini. You know GCV. He's been around. He's been around for nearly a decade, if not more. He used to write for ol' Gamespot waaaaaaay back when. He then moved to the Official Playstation Magazine before Sony ended its publication partnership with Ziff, following that up with a stint as a staff writer at GameTap (before it went under) prior to rejoining the Ziff army.

Then there's Jeff Gerstmann over at Giant Bomb. He gave Too Human a 3 out of 5. That's a middling score, and definitely below the "low eights" Casamassina said he'd have given Too Human had he reviewed it. Whether or not you agree with Jeff, whether or not you like his work, this man has also been around the industry for around ten years. Then there's Reiner from Game Informer -- 6.75 -- and again, Reiner has been around the industry for about a decade.

My question is, why does Casamassina insinuate that these people have "no business" reviewing games? Is it just because he can't stand that they disagree with him, which puts him at a similar level to frothing forumites? Or does he have some truly legit reasoning, none of which I heard on his podcast? I don't think that just anyone can come in and review a game, true, but I will say that anyone who can clearly write out their arguments in a balanced manner, understands games, and plays enough games to have perspective on what they're writing has at least some business voicing their opinions in a publication.

Oh, and lest I forget, it'd be anyone who also doesn't bow to personal pressures. Note: Casamassina clearly states on the podcast that the IGN Nintendo team is "very good friends with Denis" Dyack. I'm not necessarily saying that this alone colors his opinion of the game itself, but rather it colors his statement that others are "clearly reviewing the company, not the game" -- which is to say that it sounds like Casamassina takes every negative review as a personal insult to his friend. If that's the case, and that's what he thinks, so be it -- but that doesn't invalidate those reviews. Here, too, I would like to have seen some real reasons for why he thought Too Human was a "low eights" game and why exactly these other reviewers have no business in their trade.

I do appreciate that perhaps that wasn't the platform to discuss his opinions of the game, but it certainly doesn't help the issue when he's not backing up what he's saying. Casamassina himself has been around for an incredibly long time. He's an industry dinosaur with a robust track record, and as such, I expected a little more out of him.

Should I be opening a dialog between Pereira and Casamassina? Probably. But I'm just a peon, a lowly bug skittering around the bottom of the totem pole. I'm still more of a fan first and foremost. And as a fan, I'd wait for them to open a dialog with Van Ord, Varanini, Gerstmann, and everyone else who they felt "lowballed" Too Human (and felt compelled to comment on) first before seeing them waste their time on me.

As far as review scores and people griping about them, I used to be one of those -- and sometimes I still am. That's changed slightly since Alex brought me on to be a freelance peon. I can't say that my catalog of Virtual Console and "lesser-in-demand" portable games makes me a power in the game critic industry (hah! as if; I'm still a peon), but it does bring a new perspective when you're organizing a critique for a widely-read publication where you have to be extra careful about firstly backing up your points, and secondly making sure that the review hits your audience the right way.

By that I don't mean you cater to the audience to "make them happy" but rather the exact opposite. You can't just slap on a score of 8 or above on a game with flaws that could hinder the experience just because "well golly I had so much fun". We have to take into account whether or not the flaws are something that are acceptable in this day and age; we have to take into account whether our level of fun is tainted by nostalgia or certain odd predilections for certain game mechanics. Should I have given Shiren: The Wanderer an 8.5 just because I loved that it was a game made for masochists? No -- absolutely not. Could I justifiably give, say, Castlevania II: Simon's Quest a 9.0 just because I know how to progress through the game on account of previous personal (childhood) experience, even though the complete lack of in-game info will leave many people today gnashing their teeth at where to go next? No, of course not!

Every time I see a review that I personally disagree with, I now try my best -- though I still fail on occasion -- to look at it with this perspective in mind. Because hey, it hurts when someone insinuates to you that you don't know jack about games just because they don't like the score you gave something, even if you did your due diligence and backed up what you were saying. I'll still gripe among friends, yeah (whoever said I wasn't childish, anyway?), but I stopped doing the stupid Callouts even before I started reviewing for GS, and I'm glad I did. Nothing good could come out of them -- at least, nothing that couldn't have been better served by well-reasoned discourse and dialog.

(Note: The "recommend" versus "discussion" distinction bears mentioning here, in terms of: Does the review serve to recommend the game to the prospective buyer [Gamespot, Giant Bomb], or does it serve as a discussion point for those who want to dissect it and engage in discourse [1up]?)

So, I'll end this by going back to Too Human for a mite. What does it "really" deserve (hah! yeah right)? I don't know -- I've only played the demo. I see flaws, and I also see merit. Based off the demo alone, I would "predict" that I would give the game a 3 out of 5 on Trigames -- which, for us, still means that you should play the game while being prepared for annoyances (read: IT'S NOT A BAD SCORE! *jeez*) -- and that comes with a big fat "I could very well change my mind once I finish the retail copy" disclaimer. I still want to play the game, whether it be via rental or ownership, because even with all of the negative things said about it, there are still positives there -- even in the middling-score reviews -- that intrigue me. At the end of the day, and I said this on a recent podcast episode (I forget which), those that just look at the score and dismiss the rest might be missing out on something they'd truly enjoy, because, "*scoff* I never play a game that gets lower than a 9" is just not the way to go about things. Fair enough if you don't have the time or money to risk it, but there's no reason to be faux-elitist about it. Besides -- you never know if you'll end up thinking that the 9 was too generous

2 Comments