Torchlight 2

I never REALLY liked diablo. I mean yeah, the first one was kinda interesting but since then things never really made significant progress. The mechanics was copied over the years in dozens of games, each one not being able to hook me on for more than coupe of days. I remember spending hours and days on to the games that had some sort of co-op, since the monotonous hack and slashing is more fun if you have someone with you.

So, looking forward to the co-op i recently got Torchlight 2.
The game itself is basically the original introducing co-op features. Yeah, ofcourse the graphics is polished and there is a lot of new content (monsters, levels and sceneries, tons of weapons, etc etc ..) but the core mechanic is the same - clean up the monsters, complete quests, kill bosses. It's definitely me, but it was boring when I was solo-ing. I've loved RPG's since I started gaming so the repetitiveness (of the mechanic) becomes quite a killjoy.

But as all tiresome tasks become fun, or at least bearable when you have a friend with whom you're doing them with, Torchlight 2 is no exception. Fact is, the co-op is not new in hack-and-slash RPGs but the social aspect delivers. Another thing that is a big plus, is it's difficulty. This was no click-your-way-to-the-end kinda game. There are some serious difficulty spikes that require adjusting your strategy (I've played on the highest difficulty - Elite). Especially if you're playing co-op.
It's a fun co-op game.

Everything is a game

I've read lots of stuff on the subject of gamification,  but recently a friend of mine stumbled upon a cool video related to the subject.
Enjoy.

The Elder Scrolls : Skyrim

The latest in the Elder Scrolls Series - Skyrim. The hype for this one was insane. Memes , Soundtrack themes covers, videos and whatnot. But what surprised me the most, that people started telling their stories. Call me nostalgic but that kinda remembered me of the early dial-up era , when internet was a privlege and there were no gaming hubs on the web, when you needed to actually talk to fellow gamers about your journeys in the virtual world.

Having played the previous Elder Scrolls games (Morrowind and Oblivion) I can say that for me there is decent amount of novelty brough into Skyrim, but it somehow lacks the addictiveness. To elaborate :
The crafting system - which is something you do until you are able to craft the best weapon and then you almost never get back to it. The same can be said for the enchantment. It's kinda of a crach course to power. I can't recall I dabbled arround with it when I crafted the weapons I wanted.
The shouts - I never used them except for solving a few puzzles. They just never seemed like a tide-turner in battles mainly because they lack the damage output, so I stuck to good ol' sword and spell. That's the kind of player i am - practical. I never do stuff if a certain way if can do it in a more efficient one.

The gameplay on the other hand was impeccable. It works like it's supposed to be. although sometimes it can be annoying when the guards have no visual on you and yet they immediately know it's you who commited the crime, and instead running to the place of the crime they engage in a pursuit. Also , the interface could've been better. Constant switching and gear changes seriously hinder the fluidity of the gameplay. They could've done with some gear sets like gear set for thieving, gear set for trading etc.. instead, you have to manually equip the specific gear.

Regarding the story i have nothing to say. To be honest It kind of bores me, being set in some fantasy medieval surroundings, with all it usual cliches - poisoning, assasinations, treachery and loyalty, vendettas... I've done it so many times before in other games and Skyrim was kinda "Meh.."

Still, the world is vast and there's plenty stuff to explore and find out, but I think Fallout 3 offered much more interesting locations that seemed to form a stronger connection with me. Skyrim is not the best RPG ever but it's definitely a good game.

Castlevania : Lords of Shadow

I can't seem to find the right words to describe something which is mediocre. Not like it has good parts and bad parts, but mediocre all the way. Well, to be honest I didn't expect it to be different I just wanted to have another God of War 3 experience and since the graphics of the first and second GoW HD remakes were too blocky for my taste, I went for Castlevania: Lords of Shadow.

So I got what I wanted. Maybe too much of it. Same 2-3 strike combat mechanics, spiced up with combos and QTE, Several types of enemies and a few puzzles but nothing too difficult. The combos were pretty interesting thing to me (yes i haven't played Heavenly sword or Devil May Cry :S ), but although the enemies had mythological background this game lacked the "epicness" of the GoW series, and ofcourse the Gore.

Story-wise the protagonist has pretty bland personality. Seeking redemption via the visualisation of the loved one is just not very original nor does the plot devlopment inspires emotions, instead I just  poker-faced through the cutscenes, with the occasional yawn. Some of the twists were really un-necessary but also very predictable, which is my impresion of the storyline in general

So, to summarize things - I wanted Gow experience and i got it. If you're into some quick fun without much engaging - be my guest, but if you're expecting something more there are other games out there.

Boss battle

http://www.explosm.net/comics/2637/

Sometimes when you're on the internet ... you *find* things. On rare occasions, they make you smile :)

Difficulty : Irritating

It's human nature to want to improve in multiple areas, because by doing so we gain experience which can then use to adapt to various life scenarios and eventually overcome them. Essentially (and Darwinistically) it's what made us what we are now(yeah I admit we are not THAT great, but at least in Earth's domain I'd like to think that we are the most developped species :).

Games-wise that means that variety is more than just a fun factor of a game. It also helps improving our skills but more importantly, our inherent ability to adapt to various situations. Siituations that require us to use our acquired knowledge to overcome them, also known as problems. Problems vary in different factors and categories, but one common characteristic is most certainly the difficulty of the problem. As computer games are essentially consisted of problems variant in type, the game itself can be attributed the difficulty factor.

On that topic, I'd like to address the Demon's Souls difficulty hype all over the net. This is not a difficult game, but an irritating one. I'll just analyze my case.
I play for 30-35 minutes in a level defeating all the enemies along the way. Which proves my case that I posess the skills required to overcome the obstacles at hand. Then I encounter a boss for the first time. An enemy i know nothing of. To spice things up, he takes 3/4 of your health with one hit. Long story short - you die. Up to this moment I haven't found a statement on the internet that implies that someone defeated a boss first try(not before reading walkthroughs and strategy guides at least). So you're taken back from the beginning. Yes, you have to pass all the trials that you've proven that you're better than. Another 30-35 minutes of doing things you already did, solving a problem you already solved all for a CHANCE at the boss again. Which in 80% of the cases means that you'll die again, and go back from the beginning again. Imagine that you play FIFA and if you concede a goal you start at the bottom in the league table with 0 points, or each enemy's succesfull hit brings you back to level one. That does not improve your ability. That just makes you Sisyphus with a long way ahead of you. Not to mention the bossfights. Big healthbars and repeating the same attack pattern over and over. That's not a test of skill. That's a test of nerves.
And that's just the aspect of difficulty. I will not analyze the entertainment value, since it treads onto the grounds of subjectivity.(I mean , there are people with masochistic fetishes aren't there?)

So, to summarize what I'm meaning to say. Difficulty is essential in order to improve our skills (at everything, gaming included) but increasing to the severity of punishment does not increase difficulty, it only increases frustration. And frustration is the exact opposite of what games are about, at least for me.

Deus Ex : Human Revolution

It's funny how some games drop the price more than others and there is no significant difference in quality (Yes I'm looking at you L.A. Noire). Before i continue i must say that i was a bit late for the original Deus Ex party, and hence i only have played for like 6-7 hrs or so, so all the comparisons to the original Deus Ex in the mixed reviews out there were kinda meaningless to me, but generally I knew what they were refering to.

With that said I want to point out a few things about this game. First, the game mechanics - It's really nothing new. The missions are resolved basically by a combination of several basic actions - disable guards and hide their bodies, hack computers, and look for air vent ducts. I know it looks limited and repetitive but in reality (okay, game reality) it's very well implemented. The buildings infrastructure is always different so the basic mechanics is complemented with substantial variety in enviroment, which requires quick switching of tactics and approach to the task at hand. Kinda like my first encounter with Tetris. A set of 2 actions resulting in so much fun. Well done.

A few short remarks about the story. I never got the impression that the player makes actual impact on the way things happen. It's like you always get from point A to point B in the story, but which route you take to get there is up to you. So the freedom of choice applies only to the methods but never the world itself (maybe a few different dialogue content but that's basically it). While I'm on the subject, the various dialogs based on person's character type was a fun thing for me. You get different responses by choosing the same dialogue options based on person's character traits (ex. if he's impulsive the chances are bigger that he'll respond with an outburst but then again he might not). So yeah, no walkthrough for these :)

I've heard tons of hate-speech about the boss battles, and though i must agree that they are a strange fit into the picture, for me, they were just the kind of variety I needed to break through all the hiding and sneaking.

All things considered, I enjoyed playing it. And I think so should you.

The Fallout stories

What i really want to talk about this one is actually the plausability and yet the huge diversity of the world depicted in Fallout 3. To be honest I’ve never experienced such a variety of situations you can stumble upon. That’s due mostly to the brilliant scenario, IMO. The choice of the setting is allowing practically limitless directions of development. Before I indulge, I just want to briefly describe the state of the world the game’s main storyline is taking place.

USA is engaged in war with China, and in the war reaches it’s escalation point when nukes start to fly destroying all, irradiating the entire Earth’s surface with massive radiation. People were forced to retreat to Fallout shelters that were built all over USA. After a certain amount of time they’re opened and people resurface to find entire new situation on the surface. The player is put in a role of one of the guys who comes out of the shelters.

First, this scenario offers a world of possibilities. People who stayed are suffering severe radiation symptoms (decay of the skin) and are shunned by the people who were not affected by the radiation. This actually makes a lot of sense, since the people who could not afford/couldn’t get to the Vaults were mostly farmers and in general people with low financial standing so in the chaos that followed the bombing they called upon their primal survival skills and employ unethical methods to continue their lives. Most of them, anyways…

The pinnacles of power are always formed around the money wells. The Enclave , who are self-proclaimed descendants of the US Government , (basically politicians and part of military) who are using the current situation to perform multitude of testing for their variety of agendas (creating super soldiers, silencing the speakers of the people or everyone with a potentially harmful opinion, eradicating their failed experiments with mutation) and the Brotherhood of Steel , which are essentially well organized technology scavengers ( formed also by part military/scientists) with an honor code embedded in their beliefs. There is also the mutants, who were actually humans infected with a virus developed by the Enclave, and a lot of other fractions - various AI’s and androids/robots , aliens, Raider gangs and groups  and whatnot. Add that to the fact that the world is on a crossroad, there are ideals and there are tools so basically everyone forges the world in his own direction.

So, back to my original point, basically just by providing a fruitful setting for the storyline quests and various situations the player can get himself into is tremendous. Every “what if” idea can sprawl a city/encounter on the map when that idea is brought to life ( and there are pretty awkward ones , like “What if I make my own state and name it after myself , where everyone does what I say” to the utopian ones like “What if we organized to defend people everywhere” ). To make the situation more real, every idealistic commune (a city or an organization) has individuals who think differently on the idea which they themselves are a part of. So you have a human-loving mutant, anti-slaver fighter with a knack for monetary, Brotherhood of steel member who does not share the zeal and enthusiasm of his fellows (a.k.a. he just works there) etc, etc..

All of the ideas implemented make sense and not seem “made up”.  But what’s more realistic is the painting of the humans as individuals in that big picture. For I think that in every human is the desire to be unique and at the same time the desire to be a part of something.  A game trait which for me (and whole lot of other people) is a solid base for building an immersive experience.     

NBA Jam : On Fire Edition

Take basketball, inject it with adrenaline and you get NBA Jam : On fire edition. The core mechanics is basically copied over from the original NBA Jam, like other various ports  (College Slam, NBA Hangtime etc.) but it's polished enough to match the current technology standards. So there is no surprise there: 2-on-2 matches, highly exaggerated dunks, the timing of steals/blocks, on-fire bonuses, the weird playable characters... Everything is there with much more increased dynamics which proportionally increases the fun factor.

The game offers various play modes that earn you jam points, which you then spent at the store bying/unlocking stuff. Though it serves as some kind of motivation, the pure joy of playing against a friend outweighs all, whether it's a co-op game or VS one. It's one of those "Holy sh*t it is midnight already" kinda games. Though, the AI routine is pretty much reworked so it's much more human-like, so playing solo is also interesting but it becomes predictable after a while.

Another thing that really contributes is the commentary. Tim Kitzrow's voice plus some of the most hilarious one liners i've heard are absolutely fantastic. He even sings in some rare occasions :) This just speaks more to the effort that is made to preserve the things that are(were) fun from the original and just tweak it a little bit to improve on certain points. Most of the improvements are made in gameplay (various powerups and match modes that favor certain strategy like 3 pointers , assisted dunks etc..) and the effect they achieve is a substantial increase of amusement.

On other hand, this can certainly be viewed as "squezing a buck from already great game" but at least with this one you get the old school sport action in HD. The price is definitely worth it.

8.5

Ni no Kuni

I can't say that I'm a fan of Studio Ghibli's movies, but I never argue how cute they look. I also think their stories never lack depth, secret meaning, dreamy-like surreal atmosphere - just the perfect ingredients for an epic fairy tale. I just hope they get the recipe right.

Looks beautiful, combat system seems interesting, Ghibli's involvement promises some good storyline, that spells awesomeness for me! 

People die . Gamers ...

http://kotaku.com/5839729/whats-left-behind-when-a-gamer-dies

Never really thought of it till now. I got an eerie feeling reading the post .

"I may sound overly sensitive but this is what we will be eventually. An idle account. A virtual room filled with toys waiting for you to come back and play with them. Frozen in time."
On the other hand .. i guess it's better than nothing.

Is immersiveness necessarily a good thing while reviewing a game?

Usually when I do the things I like, i involve myself deeply with them. In some of them more than others, but for every one at least to a degree to temporarily reduce the importance of every other thing. Playing games is one of the things I like, and I do it whenever I can with great passion.
But onto the question from the title (which essentially is the reason for this post.)

Let’s have an example with a more .. realistic nature. Since not every one likes video games ( although i like to think that the people who visit this blog - all 4 of them, DO :) I’ll make an analogy with everybody’s familiar topic - relationship and romance. So, let’s say I have a partner whom I love very much, I love myself for loving her and I love everything because of that. Let’s say I’m immersed in her. I’m lost in her personality, or I think it’s more suitable to say that I’m *found*. Anyways I like spending time with him/her A LOT. Let’s say I am forced to form an opinion about that person. If I go with my gut, and form an opinion coming from my feelings and state of mind my judgement will be flawed because I’m in a position when the good trhings greatly outweigh the bad. On the other hand, if I try to judge objectivelly, I will have to break the immersive bond and will have to watch over from a distance. But then I will not enjoy myself as when I’m immersed, because I’m into “analyze” mode.

Now let’s take the same example with games. There is a game that you love playing, a highly immersive game, and you wan’t to make a review about it. If we put things graphically, where does the reviewer stand ?

1 - Grants him objectiveness but deprives him from the fun. He studies the game instead of enjoying it.
2 - Vice versa.
Ideally he should be somewhere in between, but is that really possible?
Or maybe he’s supposed to shift between them at certain points. If so, when?

Incubation : Time is running out

Unfinished business is a great motivator. Also one of the main reasons for re-playing an old game that I played and loved in the past. I remember that I bought pirated copy of this game in a compilation CD along with AAA titles like Quake 2 and such, without ever played a ... tactical squad action game before. But the game was corrupted near the very end , and there was no torrents back then so I was forced to quit it.

Anyway, i now got another copy (also pirated :) and had another go. This game is released 1997 so I would not comment the graphics and the quality of textures, I can only say that if you're into that retro style graphics the visuals will appeal to you. At least, they won't be a distraction.

The game itself is said to have a lot of stuff inherited from X-Com (which I can't confirm since I haven't played it) which means that you manage a team of space marines pitted against an alien threat. The game is essentially consisted of 2 phases, team management and combat. In the team management well, you manage your team :) in short : you can buy/equip gear, apply earned experience into several categories and all that stuff, and you can use your team members in the combat situations that follow. It's very simple, yet very addicting combo. The combat mechanics is relatively easy to learn, especially since the concept has been copied and improved over and over (I had the same out-of-the-world locked-in-a-room experience with Jagged Alliance 2 afterwards)

The singe player game has a relatively short campaign (like around 5-6 hours) but the missions offer a great variety and each require different approaches to reach the goal (defend position, reach certain point, survive, kill a certain alien..) so it's packed with fun and in most situation moderate strategizing for succeeding the mission. That's actually what makes it a fun game. Viewing it as a puzzle game.

I think it's ungrateful to rate a game from 1997 fourteen years later, and I also can't really recommend anyone to play a game this old but it was as I said - unfinished business :)

Super Mario is not one of the best games

I'm really annoyed when i see a top 10 or top 5 list with Super Mario in it. I really don't get all the hype. I mean - Yes , I've played it avidly when I was a kid but a top 5 best game ? Really?

It would be like forming a top 5 list of best superheros per se, and put the stuff I was watching when I was a kid like He-Man in there or god forbid - Captain Planet (and yes , I've seen people actually do that :). Super Mario is a great game, really fun platformer, but IMHO it does not have best game material compared to some of today's titles. Especially since there are so much more developed platformers which even for people with different tastes are better than Super Mario in several (if not all) aspects of the game. 
Trine, for example. You can do shitload of things there, with multiple characters, as opposed to mainly  jumping, kicking bricks,collecting coins and stepping on several types of enemies.


Super Mario will always have a special place in my heart, but if we decide about games by heart alone then it's bad judgement. As it is with all things in life. 

King's Bounty : The Legend / Armored Princess

If i can single out the best 3 games ever made, the list will definitely contain Heroes of Might & Magic 3. It's such a perfect mix of cleverly made challenges that always kept me on my toes requiring careful planning strategy and optimizing combat effectiveness to beat the game (which I must say , I haven't done till this day :). It's no secret for me that King's Bounty : TL/AP feeds on the ideas used in Heroes of Might and Magic and the similar games, but actually the game is a spiritual sequel on the 1990's game King's Bounty (which I've never played). King's Bounty : The Legend also introduces some modification of the game segments that improve the overall player's experience.

King's Bounty : The Legend , and Armored Princess have too much similarities for me to make separate reviews for both games so whatever i say here goes for both games.

The player takes control of a hero general who explores the map in real time, and if a combat situation arises the time is stopped and combat is done in turn based manner. The combat itself can be easily described like some sort of modified chess version where the hero's troops take on the ones of the enemy. Of course, there's a billion things to take into account beside the raw combat stats of the unit, the unit's morale, the leadership of the hero, the special powers, strengths and weaknesses of the units, various magic and also randomized combat terrain with power up objects... The mechanism is not really that complicated, but it requires careful planning to make the most of the battle. The units can be of various appearances mostly represented by creatures from various mythologies, divided into several categories/races (Humans, Animals, Demonic, Elves...) but after the first encounter with them it's relatively easy to get to know their ability. That's basically combat mechanics 101. The fun part kicks in when the superb AI shows up. It is so cleverly done that it's designed to react differently to a different approach, so the battles are NEVER boring. Yes, in The Legend the enemy armies were largely consisted of same class (depending of the world/map the battle is taking place), so it's kinda lame to fight the same enemies over and over but it's corrected in Armored Princess.

Army management is just part of the story. The strategy part. The other one is the RPG. The hero can gain experience and level up, gaining talent points in 3 different trees magic, mind and might, each giving bonuses in different categories. The hero can also wear gear that improves his basic attributes (Attack, Defense and Knowledge) delegating the attack and defense benefits to it's commanding troops, and the Knowledge directly influences the effectiveness of the magic the hero uses in combat. Customizing specific gear to fit specific fighting styles or even single battles can be sometimes annoying but it's always fun to beat a challenge using your own intellectual prowess which is actually is a significant part of what gaming means.

This game is definitely among my top 10 games I've played, and I'm not sorry for every minute I've spent. If you're into RPGs and turn based strategies this one will definitely win you over. Just be sure to have some work vacation days available :)

10.0

Mafia 2

I'll just cut to the chase and say that I am very disapointed of this game. This coming from a guy who's played the first Mafia and find it one of the best games on the subject of crimeworks in general, if not ever. The game had it all - the cinematic appeal, the voice acting, the whole "mafia" mood, I can safely say that it was to games what The Godfather was to movies - a jewel.

Mafia 2 is almost like an exact copy of the first game, and it has all the "good stuff" but lacks the "for the first time" factor.

The storyline is best described with the caption of the last chapter "Per aspera ad astra", meaning that it describes the rise to power of a small time crook, to a key figure in the criminal world. Yes, the story has all the suspense, trust and betrayal, power struggles and everything but it's nothing new.

The gameplay mechanics is almost an exact copy from the first game, with a little touch from GTA. City map with various locations to explore, cars to steal, several different weapons and people to run over and everything does not pack much of a WOW, I think everyone would agree. Even the variety of the missions carries over from the previous game, torching the competition, illegal distribution and smuggling to the classic sleeping with the fishes kind. It's not that it isn't substantial , more that it isn't something new.

Also, overall the game is rather short.I finished it for like 10 hours or so, on Hard. I dunno what was I expecting, I guess I wanted something different, but instead i got the original Mafia. I think the "2" in the name is obsolete.

6.5

The world is saved (again)

An awesome youtube video from an IGN blog. There is no better way to put into words, all the feelings of epicness brought by playing video games. It's so great it's hilarious!

Infamous

I must say I was a bit predetermined that this game will be kinda shitty, since I found out that lot of the people who played it compared it to Prototype. I don't have anything against Prototype, just that the fact that after you get the Devastator moves (which is kinda 50-60% of the game progress), the gameplay slides downfall into boredom.

So, with that in mind I was pleasantly surprised. The storyline is just the right mix of situations to keep you invested, though not enough to be the sole driving force throughout the game, but that's mostly because of the marvelous game mechanics. The key characters are nicely brought to life and are pretty charismatic each bringing their own appeal through interacting with the main protagonist. Also, loved the art style of the comic between missions!

The game mechanics itself offers a nice array of moves and powers, and the controls are mapped appropriately so very soon you can make incredible acrobatics with great ease. The terrain of the city offers great variety so it was always challenging to me in finding ways of using it to my advantage. The variety of the enemies is superbly done scaled to the players point in the game progress, just so new enemies will appear even at the near end of the main storyline.

I very much enjoyed this game, but as I said , I dived in with some very low expectations, to find an awesome game.

9.0

Thank you games

I've read many blogs about why games in general make you a better person, so I think it's time i gave myself an honest answer.
How games made ME, specifically a better person? What skill-set did they have an impact on?

Well the first one , and most obvious one is the language.
Since I'm not native english speaker, they familiarized me with a vast amount of words, not to mention the middle age English used in some of the old RPGs. Also, I remember playing some of the old adventures with a dictionary next to the keyboard :) Sigh , those days ( nights also )...
Thank you : Every game.

Second one is the sense of orientation and navigating a map.
The allmighty TAB ever since Doom (as one of the first game I've played) many of the games had it, and in pretty short time it comes natural to locate the vital points of the map, recognize the surroundings and discern my next course of action. Also , in cases of multiple routes to get to a point, to calculate the most effective(usually fastest) one.
Thank you : Every game with a map.

On to the pragmatical math skills and resource management.
Ranging from the basic buy/sell mechanics in many games to calculate the profit or the amount of funds needed to gain a certain item , the calculation of damage/hit-miss ratio to the more complex resource management in many turn-based strategies which enhanced my planning skills and also time management.
Thank you : Heroes of Might and Magic 2/3, Civilization 1/2/4, Colonization, Command and Conquer, Starcraft ...

Of course all the things that impact directly the character traits , like : Patience, Persistence, Reflexes, Problem solving, anger management :) ...

Of games and men