I gave my friend Sneak King for his birthday as a gag gift, which I bought for a dollar. It is easily the worst game I have played all year.
There's nothing specifically... broken about it, but the entire experience as a whole is overwhelmingly mediocre, from the graphics to the clunky, robotic steath that makes Metal Gear Solid look fluid by comparison. However, it was only a dollar, so I can't really complain.
Runners up for this award include The Dark Spire, which manages to play like a worse version of Etrian Odyssey (which I didn't have much affection for in the first place), with a sadistic difficulty level, grindtacular play style, and general lack of depth.
Another runner up was Jagged Alliance, specifically the DS version, which cost a full $30. Anyone really interested should probably read my long blog on the subject, but for those who are too lazy, it was basically a straight port with sloppy controls and general unintuitiveness.
Despite deciding to take a little break from the forums to catch up on homework and such, I still find time to play old games that the majority of you haven't given a shit about in a long time. This time it's the last main-series Resident Evil game I needed to play: Code Veronica. I have played RE1 on the DS, RE2 on the N64, RE3 on the Gamecube, and now this on the PS2, which I find kind of funny since these are all ports from their original platforms. But enough exposition, time for some Reviewing!(?) Stuff.
Code Veronica was originally released on the Dreamcast (and then ported to the PS2 and Gamecube with roughly 3 new cutscenes, which somehow warrants a
There is a distinct lack of frightening imagery on this box art separate page on this site) and is the only pre-shooter RE game to feature actual 3D environments as opposed to prerendered backgrounds. Therefore, the graphics are competent and don't make me feel sick, but are certainly no REmake or RE0 in terms of looking pretty. There are also some camera tricks and lighting effects that obviously couldn't be done on the PS1, so good for that I guess.
Unlike RE3, Code Veronica dedicates a strangely generous amount of time to it's story, which I found to be bad in some spots, and laughably terrible in others. I got the feeling that RE1 and even RE2 and 3 were trying to go for a B horror movie vibe. Not this game. . From the creepy, almost incestuous relationship between Alfred and Alexia to the LULZ attempt at a romantic subplot, to the attempts at making it feel like an action movie despite the fact that you control like a tank, this is questionable writing at it's best, because the cheese is all gone, and all that is left is a pizza that nobody wants to eat (if you get that metaphor). It doesn't even try to be scary, which is sad. However, I may have said too much and given off the impression that I care about the Resident Evil story, because I don't. The sheer number of plot holes, retcons, and lame twists rival that of most comic book superheroes, and if Albert Wesker has to choke a bitch, he may do so.
But enough about the story, how does it play? Like a Resident Evil game. /thread. Just kidding. No really, it plays a lot like every other Pre-RE4 Resident Evil game in that you pick up things to use on things, shooting zombies and generally run around like a tank. So I like it, right? Sure. Kind of. The thing about Code Veronica that really stuck with me was the length. I could probably finish all four scenarios of RE2 in the time it took me to get through this game (roughly 10 hours), and "survival horror" (which is still not a genre) doesn't exactly work well with that amount of length. The length feels a little artificial, given that most of it comes from backtracking all your steps like this was Castlevania or something. Maybe someone else liked this change of structure, but I found the plodding pacing to be (once again) contradictory to the "YO ZOMBIES ACTION GUNS" tone that I was getting.
Otherwise it's fine, albeit a little to familiar for its own good. You play as Claire for most of the game, and then switch over to Chris for roughly the last 1/3rd or 1/4th of the game. Chris is better because he has a shotgun and magnum and can take more hits, just like how Leon was better in RE2 for having the... shotgun and magnum and being able to take more hits. At least Jill got everything. Another thing to note that I actually enjoyed: The knife is actually a viable option for zombie removal. That's right, a knife slash can do about as much damage as the Handgun and even though ammo isn't usually a problem, it is cool. Oh, and the Bowgun is garbage unless it has explosive bolts, and Bandersnaches are a tie with the dogs from REmake in the "Most annoying enemy" category.
So, in conclusiveness, Code Veronica is in a weird spot. I found the gameplay to be solid and some of the puzzles to actually be quite clever, but the action vibe (You get an AK-47 and a Sniper Rifle for crying out loud), the laughably bad story, and the length 2 hours too long kind of turn me off. That's not to say that it's a bad game... just that it is my least favorite classic style RE game... That's right. My least favorite. But I still like it. Really. Don't hurt me. 8.8
And with that, I own and have completed every single main series Resident Evil game, and unless someone tells me that the Outbreak series is fun and viable to be played offline (which I doubt), I will be playing Disgaea until Dragon Age comes out. Then, at that point, I will probably not blog for a while. Hooray for the holidays.
As a person who would like to pretend that he has real friends and a real life, I really don't give a shit about "social networking", which is pretty much all that this update does. Therefore, Facebook (bleh), Twitter (super bleh), HD streaming (that's why I have Netflix), and Last.FM (meh) all epitomize stuff that I will never, ever, ever, use, and even if I did the general consensus is that these things aren't implemented well anyways.
It is time once again after a long break for me to review old... games? Actually no. Unfortunately, Disgaea is a long game, as is Baldur's Gate, and with the release season almost upon us, I will probably only be able to finish one before Dragon Age comes out. So instead of bothering to review something new, I will take a look at some of the games I have reviewed previously and see how they have held up since I looked at them prior. Sounds good? Good. Let's go.
Goldeneye
Even I can agree that this is the best bond game See original review here Ah yes Goldeneye, my first attempt to give my impressions of a game in a rambling incoherent manner. Also the only one to have a post count higher than 10, because everything else I have played is far more obscure and less revered. Well, what do I think of it now, now that I have had more time to play it? It's still pretty good, although the one sticking point from my initial post still stands: the objectives aren't very clear and sometimes it's not your fault if you fail them. I have tried to play a little more Multiplayer, and it still is kind of dumb and shallow by today's standards, but that is to be expected.
Resident Evil 3
See original review hereIt's still no REmake RE3 represents the beginning of the series' transition from "Survival Horror" (which still is not a genre) to a more action-oriented type of game. Thus an abundance of grenade ammo and gunpowder to make even more grenade ammo (Simply put, you don't need to touch the magnum because you have so many freeze rounds), far less focus on story, (not that the story in Resident Evil is really worth caring about) and some puzzles or item combinations that use questionable logic. This is in stark contrast to REmake (and RE0 to a lesser degree), which are all about running the hell away from zombies instead of shooting them and solving clever puzzles. I still enjoyed RE3, but it is the weakest in the series I have played so far... Once I eventually get Code Veronica you can fully expect me to review it at some point and see how that fares.
Jagged Alliance
See original review here (WALL OF TEXT WARNING) Not worth $30 Perhaps I was a little harsh on Jagged Alliance. It certainly has it's charms... but not enough charm that I didn't sell it. I guess the reason I held it to a higher standard than every other game I have looked at (all of which have a "This game is hella old but that's ok" phrase in there somewhere), was because I spent the full price of a DS game on it. I could have gotten Devil Survivor, and seen why Video_Game_King hates it so much, or New Super Mario Bros, or something else that is actually worth $29.99 USD
Maybe if I got it for the PC I would think differently... nah. It still sucks. Don't buy it.
The Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall
See original thing here. The dungeons are still way too big Daggerfall is still not a bad game. It may be full of some of the most pointless shit I have ever seen in a video game (I blame a lack of playtesting), but even with language skills, unnessesarily huge dungeons, towns, and pretty much everything else that screams "THIS GAME WAS MADE IN 1996 IN CASE YOU DIDN'T NOTICE!!!", I find that all the rough edges give it a certain old-school charm. That's not to say that I enjoy spending three hours in a dungeon trying to find a bear, but it is free, which really, really helps. To anyone who enjoys these kinds of games I recommend at least taking a look before you decide that it is way too janky to be worth playing.
I think I will stop here. I can do second looks at Thief, Fallout, and Colonization some other time. Now I pose a question to you, the readers. Since I can't make a poll in a blog post, which game should I finish first: Disgaea or Baldur's Gate?
32 Comments
This list represents my intended priories for obtaining games as of this holiday. Unlike last year, where I actually didn't find any games that interested me, this year is chock full with stuff I would really like to have. Unfortunately, I am not made out of money, and so some sacrifices will have to be made... unless I get a job or something. But oh well, if not now than later. List is in order with #1 representing the most likely game I will buy this year.
Obvious. I played more than 50 hours of COD 4 multiplayer, and while I only prestiged once, I get my money out of it. Oh, and the single player was really good as well. Not to mention it comes out extremely close to my birthday. Easy buy.
Filling in second place is a sequel to a game that I really liked despite its numerous flaws. If this game manages to fix said flaws and make me care about the story, it will probably be a buy.
I like RPGs. I like Bioware. Coincidence? I think not. Despite the terrible marketing campaign (THIS IS THE NEW SHIT?), the pedigree as well as the phrase "Like Baldur's Gate" have sold me on it. Too bad I only have a 360 and therefore will have to get the inferior version.
And, at the bottom, is Halo. Not a bad game by any account, it's just that everything else looks far more outstanding. Sorry Halo... I will get you eventually.
Aaaannd, that's my list. EDIT: Oh yeah. MUA 2. That's a game. Put it behind Halo.
4 Comments
Assuming that I am both able to muster enough Dollares Americano and fall into the good graces of Santa this year, I plan on obtaining these games this holiday season:
In the current hubub revolving around the 10th anniversary of everyone's favorite failed console, I find it time to talk about old games. However, unlike everyone and their dog I am not talking about the Sega Dreamcast but instead am talking about Sid Meier's Colonization, which was released for DOS in the early 1990s after the original Civilization. But, how could I acquire such a game if it is not easily available on amazon or some download service? Oddly enough, I found it while going through the thrift store with some friends to look for weird stuff (One of us bought a leg brace. Fun times). Seeing a plastic baggie containing 3 floppy disks and a manual among all the other crap that was there is certainly interesting, and I only had to pay $1.50 for it. Thankfully, my computer is old and crappy enough to still have a floppy drive, so I was able to install and run it on DOSbox.
But what about the game itself? Simple. If you have ever, ever, ever, even touched any of Sid Meier's non-pirate related works you have played at least half of Colonization. That may be some exaggeration, but the basic form of gameplay that makes some people go crazy (not me, by the way) and play long into the night is there. You, as the newly appointed leader of a colonial expedition are to rape, pillage and plunder the new world, but in a strategic manner, all while preparing to declare your independence from the mother country. Yep. However, there are enough differences from Civ to warrant explanation: You can only get new dudes from your mother country, indians converted from their heathen ways, and the random chance of population growth. Your combat troops entirely consist of Soldiers, Dragoons, and Cannons, but any of your citizens can become a soldier or dragoon simply if given some muskets or some horses. The majority of your income comes from pillaging indian villages or trading with the old world.
Don't Believe me? Here's a video that I recorded with DOSbox's internal codec (thus no music, which ranges from catchy to obnoxious) which shows some inital gameplay.
That, is Colonization in a nutshell. I pissed of the natives by visiting an ancient burial ground. However, I did make some cash! However, how do I feel about this game? Well, considering that Colonization is pretty much the same as most of Sid Meier's other work, this is basically my opinion of all those games. Treat it as such, as I will never do a thing on Civ II or Alpha Centauri.
I would not consider myself a fan of Sid Meier. I can appreciate and even enjoy his games (Pirates, mostly) but I am not a fan. It's telling for me to say that my favorite part of Alpha Centauri are all the awesome quotes, either from real philosophers such as Plato or Machiavelli, or from the game's fictional leaders, that you get when you research a new technology. Then what is my problem with those games? I am fine with the level of detail and almost fine with the level of micromanagement involved in such an endeavor (Thus my love of Galactic Civilizations II), but the main issue I have with Sid Meier is the time/accomplishment ratio that most (all) of his games have. In layman's terms, his games take too damn long for anything interesting to happen. Once you get past the initial excitement and startup, it starts becoming a time-sucking monotony until the end, when more excitement happens. However, that middle part is 90% of the game. Some may disagree (as they are allowed to do.), but I much rather prefer the Heroes of Might and Magic series (which Video_Game_King should play, so he can tell me that I have bad taste or something) or Disciples II, which don't take 3 hours for things to move along. I simply have trouble coping with that pace.
However, despite that, I still find myself enjoying most of what colonization has to offer. It's a strategically deep game with a clean interface and an interesting premise that people who like those kinds of games will enjoy the hell out of. I am not one of those people, but it's still fun, even as I see my time drain away while deciding if my colonists will plant tobacco or chop lumber. 8.8
Since I only discovered the DOS version of this game by chance, you probably won't be able to find it if you tried. But, there are people with too much time on their hands who have created a fan-remake (which you should at least try out) as well as an official remake using the Civ IV engine. Those games, I assume, manage to capture the same experience as the original.
Next Up: Probably something Might and Magic related, although maybe not with Heroes.
5 Comments
Once again, it's time for my pseudo impressions/reviews of old games that I never played when they were popular or important, now with a new title, mostly due to the lack of actual offending. I was originally going to do Heroes of
A Post-Nuclear Role Playing Game eh? I played one of those once. Might and Magic, but that would kind of be like cheating since I did play those games when they were popular or important. So instead I will talk about a game that is sure to draw some ire and perhaps hatred (much like my Daggerfall blog, in which a person signed up just to troll me for not liking the stupidly huge dungeons). I am of course talking about Fallout (which is conveniently available on Steam for the curious), which I decided to take a look at because I liked Fallout 3.
Fallout 1 was released in late 1997 by Black Isle (so a year before Baldur's Gate) and is considered one of the greatest RPGs of all time by the "fine" folks at No Mutants Allowed. Anyone who has played Fallout 3 or even just read about it knows the premise of a retro-futuristic United States that has been nuked. However, unlike F3, Fallout 1 (and subsequently Fallout 2) takes place on the west coast of the US. Your job is quite simple: Get the Water Chip for your vault before the time limit (that was removed in a patch) expires. Of course after you get your vault its water chip the Super Mutants decide to look for your vault (in another time limit that was removed by the patch) and you have to destroy both the Super Mutant base, as well as the leader of said mutants: The Master.
This of course leads to Character Creation, in which you allocate S.P.E.C.I.A.L. stats and tag your three choice skills. Sounds Familiar? Well you can also give your character optional "traits" which are usually a benefit along with a penalty. However, among said traits, the only ones worth using are Bloody Mess (which makes sure you get the most gory death every time) and a trait that increases all your stats by one at a slight penalty to your skills. Speaking of skills, Fallout 1 has a mess of them. However, the majority range from trivial to worthless. Yes, you could put points into Gambling, Repair, and Outdoorsman, but why would you when you could instead put points into Small Guns, Speech, and Lockpick (which are the three most useful skills in the game)? Speaking of Small Guns, that is the only weapon choice worth tagging, as you don't get Big Guns or Energy Weapons until fairly late in the game, and Melee skills and Throwing Weapons are completely worthless the entire way through.
So, starting off, you are dumped outside the vault with a pistol and a knife to battle Rats (an RPG staple, even in the Post Apocalypse) and Rad Roaches with turn-based violence. You have a set number of action points (set by your agility, which is the most useful stat in the game followed by intelligence) to move around and kill stuff, as well as target specific parts of the body (aim for the head, obviously). It works pretty well. When you get AI companions, it works less well, since the AI is fairly retarded and has a nasty habit of shooting you in the back.
Oh yeah, where were we? The questing. There are usually several ways to tackle a quest, but unless you want everything to end in violence, you need a high intelligence (which determines the dialogue options you have, thus making Charisma almost as worthless as it is in most RPGs). I was actually surprised by the breadth of options, but (as usual) there is one option that gives you the maximum reward with the least amount of effort (usually involving talking followed by violence). Not that that's a fault, but it is something that irks me, especially since a few of those choices are extremely obscure and hard to figure out without a guide. You also level up way too slow, and only get a perk every 3 levels (most perks in Fallout 3 that don't increase skills do come from Fallout in some form), but at this point I sound like a whiny nitpicker.
As for things I don't feel like giving paragraphs to: Fallout really doesn't have a ton of memorable characters, and the M rating is well earned (Profanity and Violence abound, not to mention you can kill children which is pretty messed up). Also, the graphics are kind of bad, but that seems obvious. The music is fairly decent, but I have trouble remembering any distinctive tunes, so take that as you will. The game is also surprisingly short for an RPG, as I finished it in around 12 hours (although I probably missed some side quests here and there).
Is it worth taking a look at for people who have never played it before? Sure, I guess. I give it a tentative recommendation.
Next Up: Fallout 2? Or maybe I will do Heroes.
7 Comments
Let's see. I am not actively excited about Splinter Cell Conviction, Red Steel 2, Bioshock 2, Dark Void, or Bayonetta. In fact, I am less than excited about some of those. As long as Modern Warfare 2, Assassin's Creed 2, and Dragon Age (and maybe Alpha Protocol) come out this year I will be set, and since any of those games probably won't get pushed back, I think my prospects are looking good.
Log in to comment