New York Times review has been posted.

#1 Edited by Napalm (9020 posts) -

NYT doesn't place a score with there reviews, so you'll have to read the meat of it to get the gist. What I picked up from it, was at times Spec Ops: The Line is genuinely horrifying, but it doesn't put enough of the action and the moral descent in the players hands. I also know Arthur Gies has been saying some stuff on Twitter about it, mostly about how the story is essentially "shorthand" from the films they took inspiration from, making it sound like the story doesn't really commit.

New York Times review incoming:

Spec Ops: The Line, a new game for PC, PlayStation and Xbox, takes the opposite approach. It tries to make the player uncomfortable by lingering on the immorality of the first-person shooter.

When terrorists hijacked planes and crashed them into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field, the frame of reference the nation turned to in the surreal aftermath was just about universal. The director John Landis observed last fall, “Almost everyone said, without guile — and it shows how pervasive film is — that it ‘looked like a movie,’ ” adding that film is our “contemporary mythology,” the “shared experience” for people to draw on to help explain the world.

And yet, not anymore. After 11 years of fighting, this frame of reference has shifted from the movies to video games. (This is especially true for my generation, men in their 20s and 30s, most of whom have not served in the military.) The wars are not “like a video game” in the sense meant by those who do not play them: sterile, vapid, devoid of emotion. No, they are really like a video game: sweaty, intense, full of death.

Evidence of this shift is everywhere. When WikiLeaks released the ghostly footage of an Apache firing on a group of men in Baghdad, the journalist Christopher Beam wrote in Slate, “The video, shot in black and white from a helicopter circling above a Baghdad neighborhood, will be familiar to anyone who has played the game Call of Duty: Modern Warfare or the sequel, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.” After the Navy SEAL raid that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, a digitally altered image circulated online of President Obama watching the operation with a PlayStation controller in hand.

On its surface, Spec Ops: The Line, developed by the Berlin studio Yager and published by 2K Games, has much in common with its forbears. Capt. Martin Walker, the playable protagonist, leads a Delta Force unit into an implausibly evacuated Dubai after it has been hit by a series of apocalyptic sandstorms. Walker is searching for a missing military hero and veteran of Afghanistan, Col. John Konrad, one of several winks in the game to Joseph Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness” and to “Apocalypse Now.”

These are all hallmarks of the genre: an elite Special Operations unit, an absurdly fanciful mission, an alternative-universe story line, not to mention the skyscraper-to-skyscraper zip lines and the dialogue that more resembles stage directions than person-to-person communication. To add to the familiarity, Walker is voiced by Nolan North, whose omnipresence in games makes him either the Harrison Ford or the Kevin Bacon of the medium.

Quickly, however, Spec Ops begins to subvert its rivals, as Walker and his men end up going to war with the renegade United States infantry battalion they once intended to rescue. Philosophers can debate the morals of this instinctual reaction, but killing waves of virtual American soldiers is far more disquieting than shooting foreigners.

Even more unusual for a military shooter, civilian noncombatants exist in the game. In a notable instance, Spec Ops does not reward the player for holding fire, nor does it slap the player on the wrist for shooting an innocent. As with a real urban firefight, the civilian is just there. In another evocative touch, Walker and his men sometimes sneak up behind soldiers and eavesdrop on their quotidian but humanizing banter before — and here the game gives you no choice — ending their lives.

In moments like these, Spec Ops is a thoughtful and harrowing contrast to the power fantasies of its competitors. But it is not confident enough, alas, to trust players with much subtlety. This is the kind of game that can’t let a few ravens pick at a nearby corpse without a character’s interjecting, “At least the ravens aren’t gonna starve.” The images of death and execution become tawdry with repetition. In one sequence, Walker and his men enter an American-controlled section of the game atop a literal road of corpses. In another, their enemies drag themselves across the ground, limbs severed.

There are times when Spec Ops, which is rated M for Mature, is hard to stomach. I thought about quitting. At the beginning, the refusal to flinch from the consequences of death felt brave. By the end, it felt like a snuff game.

Spec Ops is so heavy-handed that I began to wonder if it were intended as a black comedy about Walker’s obtuseness regarding the genuinely horrific consequences of his actions. There is some evidence for this interpretation. After a convoy of tractor-trailers carrying water supplies is destroyed, the game rewards the player with a notification that the “Protect the Trucks” objective was completed. During the loading screens in the late stages of the game, Spec Ops begins gently mocking the player with text: “Can you even remember why you’re here?”; “You are a still a good person.”

And yet it is hard to believe that Spec Ops is a satire of dumb games when it assumes it has such dumb players. The game is not satisfied with having a character ask Walker, “You got a plan beyond killing everyone you see?” No, a loading screen has to explain the moral of the story: “Walker’s obsession with Konrad has brought nothing but destruction — to Dubai and his squad.”

It is probably unfair to compare Spec Ops with the masterwork of English literature from which it takes its inspiration. But “Heart of Darkness” has already been explored with more sophistication in a video game, Far Cry 2, from 2008. That game, set in central Africa, aimed to turn its players into the ruthless Mr. Kurtz by placing them in a bleak environment and then persuading them to take increasingly murderous actions. Spec Ops, in contrast, frequently takes control away from the player, relying on animated cut scenes to illustrate Walker’s moral descent.

In perhaps the game’s low point for literalness, Walker and his men come across a tortured, charred body dangling upside down from a piece of rope. At this moment the game rewards the player with an Xbox Achievement (known as a Trophy on the PlayStation 3) that is titled “The Horror.”
#2 Posted by MikkaQ (10262 posts) -

Whelp that sounds like a video game. Bash the moral of the story on the player's head until he passes out.

#3 Posted by coakroach (2486 posts) -

I'd play six degrees of Nolan North.

#4 Posted by Napalm (9020 posts) -

I do agree with him about Nolan North. I can appreciate a good Northie performance, but if it's Nolan North playing Nolan North, again, it just rips me right out of the experience. Does anybody know who the voice actor was originally who played Captain Martin Walker? I'm fairly certain they had another voice guy for him before switching to Nolan North.

#5 Edited by MarkWahlberg (4580 posts) -

Oh, so you mean it was made without any understanding of subtlety, character development or player agency? Sounds like a video game. Maybe they should've put Rockstar in charge of this just so everyone would talk about how original it is.

Fuck this, I'm gonna go read a book.

#6 Posted by MikeGosot (3227 posts) -

Wait, there's a spoiler in that review?

#7 Posted by activatetheasset (23 posts) -

The New York Times: Where Gamers Go to Know

#8 Posted by Dallas_Raines (2130 posts) -

Breaking News: Video games are still dumb

#9 Posted by Yummylee (21203 posts) -

Das a crying shame is what that is. This is still a game I definitely want to check out eventually, but hearing that the story devolves into pure shock value is... well, kind of expected really, but still disappointing.

#10 Posted by stryker1121 (1323 posts) -

Still sounds more interesting than your average shooter. I'm going to wait for the Washington Post review before deciding whether or not to take the leap on this one.

#11 Posted by august (3824 posts) -
@MarkWahlberg said:

Fuck this, I'm gonna go read a book.

nerd
#12 Posted by PillClinton (3290 posts) -

@stryker1121 said:

Still sounds more interesting than your average shooter. I'm going to wait for the Washington Post review before deciding whether or not to take the leap on this one.

I'm waiting on the Chicago Sun-Times review myself before committing to anything.

#13 Posted by Phatmac (5720 posts) -

@MarkWahlberg said:

Oh, so you mean it was made without any understanding of subtlety, character development or player agency? Sounds like a video game. Maybe they should've put Rockstar in charge of this just so everyone would talk about how original it is.

Fuck this, I'm gonna go read a book.

Might I recommend Heart of Darkness? bahaha

#14 Posted by stryker1121 (1323 posts) -

@PillClinton said:

@stryker1121 said:

Still sounds more interesting than your average shooter. I'm going to wait for the Washington Post review before deciding whether or not to take the leap on this one.

I'm waiting on the Chicago Sun-Times review myself before committing to anything.

The Atlantic will be doing an exclusive about the importance of including frontal nudity within the game proper.

#15 Posted by SpudBug (633 posts) -

seems like they had some good ideas but probably had those ideas squashed by marketing/playtesting. And the fact that their target market probably struggles to follow a transformers movie didn't help either.

WIll try it on a steam sale for less than $10

#16 Posted by jillsandwich (762 posts) -

That late-game tool-tip subversion sounds like it's worth a rental.

#17 Posted by MegaLombax (384 posts) -

That was a different kind of video game review. Seemed to mainly focus on the presentation rather than the whole game. Interesting nevertheless.

#18 Posted by Frag_Maniac (107 posts) -

@Napalm said:

...the story is essentially "shorthand" from the films they took inspiration from, making it sound like the story doesn't really commit.

Very much so, or as many would say, cobbled together vs fleshed out. It has potential, but lacks depth, which makes it feel less mature and more arcade. I suspect this was to make it look more original and potentially more cerebral, refusing to adhere too closely to previous works and making you guess as to the meaning behind the madness, but it kinda falls flat in doing so IMO.

The game stands on it's own merits in originality just via the setting and some of the gameplay nuances, and certainly on sheer adrenaline of it's battles and AI, but I was honestly kinda shocked that GameTrailers rated the story 8.3/10, when they are usually quick to dock game stories for being unoriginal and vague. They seem to have gotten sucked into the shock factor like many are.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.