Arcade, Arcade, Arcade.

Well my ladies and germs, I have recently delved into the Arcade downloads area of the marketplace and I have some good news.

I made 3 purchases this week, and each has been delightfully satisfying in a unique way.

1-Castlevania: Symphony of the Night -

This is an obvious classic and many of you probably played this game back in the day on PS1. I only played parts of this masterpiece when I was younger, so I had no choice but to download it now to finish the dri...story. Just like the old days, it didn't disappoint (Which I was worried about since it is now on the 360 and might have lost some of that old-school feel, but I am happily rolling through it.) No real shocker here, just worthy of mention.

_________

The next two games aren't popular ones and hopefully I can open the metaphorical gaming window to allow in some fresh air for you sweaty, mouth-breathing bozos. Note that I don't say that to sound like some indie fuckbag that will casually move his/her jet-black hair from their eyes and mumble, "yeah, you probably haven't heard of them..." Instead, I say this because I was trying to find games that were unique and more "out there." Mission accomplished on the next two.

2- Greed Corp

This game is delicious, and I hope people start to buy it since the online community seems to be small. Greed Corp looks like Settlers of Catan, but plays like Stratego, risk, chess, checkers, etc. This isn't a game you can immediately download and jump right into, but with about 5-10 minutes to learn the physics and the game play, it is a delight. Instead of trying to explain more about the game, go grab the trial version (which is pleasantly expansive), and get hooked like I was.


Is this how you feel right now?


A brief final pitch as well: The music is scrumptious in this game. The style is certainly from quite a while ago, but if you like music such as this you will not be disappointed.

3-I MAED A GAM3 W1TH ZOMBIES 1N IT!!!1

I meandered into the "Indie" section of the Arcade, and found this hilarious game. Unfortunately, it lacks online multiplayer (which saddens me), but it does have 1-4 on split screen... so not completely a let down. Anyhow, the title essentially explains the game as well as anything else will. There is a game, and there are most assuredly zombies in it. You only seem to use the two directional sticks to play this game, but it is funny as hell and very enjoyable.


The gameplay, like previously mentioned, is simple yet great. You snake your way around the battlefield and shoot the hell out of zombies. Different gun options occasionally appear or are dropped from enemies, but the game holds the same basic premise: kill. Hordes of these flesh seeking baddies pop up, and your goal is to mow them down. All the while, awesome music is roaring over your speakers, making you happy in all the wrong places.



The game is a dollar, and is well worth it. Now go out and blasts some zom-bays. Quick note- If you have epilepsy, this game is certainly not for you. Enjoy.


SC

Top 10: Best Achievements

Yeah, a lot of people hate them or think they're a waste of time. Hell, I hate 'em; I just can't stop going after them. I've spent far too much of my life 'cheevo chasin'. But, even though the majority of Achievements are mundane, sadistic, or just stupid, there are some truly great ones out there. Some are even iconic. So, what makes an Achievement great? It could carry a large amount of prestige, be hilarious, or even inspire copycats. Without further ado, here are my top ten 'cheevos of all time, and no, I haven't gotten them all.

10. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 -> 'Et Tu, Brute?'
The first 'cheevo on the list makes it there because it's perfectly suited for hilarity. This Achievement rewards you for getting five of your friends' dog tags. Not only is it awesome that you can get an Achievement for embarrassing your friends, but DICE had the wisdom to do this one right. 5 is not a large number, but it also requires a little time. This way, you probably can't get the Achievement in one sitting, but you shouldn't feel the need to grind for it ("Okay, come let me knife you and then you knife me"). Plus, you don't have to knife 5 unique friends, so don't expect random friend invites from strangers looking for this Achievement. Also, since you sometimes end up on the other side as your friend if you join him midgame, there should be ample opportunities to get this one.

9. Portal: Still Alive -> 'Out of the Blue'
This one makes the list because it's one of those Achievements that adds a fun challenge without decreasing the fun of the game. That being said, this is no cake walk (sorry...and wtf is a cake walk, anway?). The goal is--once you control both portals--to only use the orange portal as your entrance and always come out of the blue one (geddit?). I've tried this one a couple times and I'm still not entirely sure where I've failed. Guides on the ingterwebs suggest that you have to make sure you get through every portal as quickly as possible. But, hey, don't let the challenge dissuade you. Plus, Portal's just such a good game that you shouldn't mind playing it a few times.

8. Geometry Wars: Retro Evolved -> 'Pacifism'
This Achievement tasked you with surviving the first 60 seconds of a game without so much as firing a single shot. People loved this Achievement so much that the sequel had an entire gametype built around the idea. No, it wasn't all that difficult to get (it should only take a few tries), but it was definitely a lot of fun to get. Plus, since Geometry Wars was one of the first games on the 360, you could really say that this 'cheevo paved the way for Achievements revolving around trying to play the game a certain way or by handicapping yourself.

7. Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock -> 'The Inhuman Achievement'
No, I don't have this Achievement. I've never even beaten the intro. This Achievement is on here simply because it's probably the most prestigious Achievement in existence. It's not like 'Seriously 2.0' where any monkey can get it with enough patience. This takes an ungodly amount of skill and a shit load of practice. If you have this Achievement, you can know beyond a shadow of a doubt that you really are one of the best Guitar Hero players in existence, and that you will probably have carpal tunnel in the near future. Oh, and let's just get this out of the way: yes, 'Kick the Bucket Award' (GHII) came first, but "Through the Fire and Flames" is both a better to listen to and tougher to beat than "Jordan."

6. Battlefield: Bad Company -> 'Darwin's Parachute'
When you read the description for this Achievement, it says, "(Online) Glide in the parachute for 3 seconds." Seems simple enough. So, you get yourself a helicopter and fly as high as you can and then jump out. A moment afterward, you realize you're plummeting towards the Earth and that you have no idea how to open the parachute. You start randomly hitting buttons, but your efforts are fruitless, and you smack into the ground at terminal velocity and get to wait for your next respawn. "Crap, how do you open the parachute?" you think. Then, before you can even finish that thought, you unlock the Achievement. You quickly hit the guide button to make sure you're not crazy. Yep, there it is, but now its description reads, "There is no parachute, right?" Yes, that's right, you just got tricked into killing yourself, and now the title of the Achievement makes sense. This is hands-down the funniest Achievement I've ever seen.

5. The Orange Box -> 'Little Rocket Man'
I did not have the patience for this one (and I, uh, never found the gnome), but one of these days I'm going to go back and get it. This was a very popular Achievement, and it even inspired a follow-up for Left 4 Dead 2. This Achievement takes dedication unlike any other, and shows just how much you want to help a garden gnome reach his dream of making it into space. For those of you who don't know, this Achievement tasks you with carrying a garden gnome from the beginning of Half-Life 2: Episode 2 all the way to end. So, after every firefight you have to go back and pick him up. The most frustrating part is trying find a good place to wedge him in the car you have to drive for a large portion of the middle.

4. Dead Rising -> 'Zombie Genocider'
You earn this Achievement for killing 53, 594 (the population of the local town) zombies in a single playthrough. No, this Achievement was not particularly fun to get. In fact, I outsourced about half the work to a friend. This one makes the list for a few reasons, though: you unlock the bitchin' Mega Blaster weapon for earning it, it was one of the first well-known and much-coveted Achievements, and it inspired several copycats. The first copycat was Left 4 Dead's Zombie 'Genocidest', which was awarded for killing 53, 595 infected over all games. The second was [Prototype]'s 'Trail of Corpses' Achievement for killing 53, 596 infected. In other words, this one makes the list not because it particularly great, but because of its legacy. Speaking of legacies...

3. Gears of War -> 'Seriously...'
Getting 10, 000 kills in Gears of War's multiplayer was no small feat. You were lucky to get 30 kills in a 45 minute game. If you had this Achievement, it meant two things: you played a lot, and you were probably pretty good. Sure, any 12 year-old could get it, but they usually didn't. This is still the most prestigious online Achievement, and almost anyone who has it proudly wears the emblem as their gamer picture. Like Zombie Genocider, it also yielded copycats (The Club's 'No, Seriously' for 10, 001 online kills), including the follow-up 'Seriously 2.0' in Gears of War 2. 'Seriously 2.0', however, was hugely disappointing, as it required 100,000 kills across all gametypes. Anyone who has it probably spent an inordinate and ridicule-worthy amount of time replaying the brumak rodeo over and over again.

2. Halo 3 -> 'Vidmaster Challenge: Annual'
We're getting down to the end, and here we have my vote for the funnest Achievement of all time. This Achievement required you and three of your 'cheevo chasin' friends to beat the final level of Halo 3 on the hardest difficulty with the Iron skull turned on, but with a little twist. Instead of allowing you to use a couple of warthogs and allowing you to strand stragglers, everyone had to be in their own ghost and everyone had to get to the end. It required team work, persistence, and a little luck, but it sure yielded a handful of laughs. This Achievement is the shining example of how to add challenge and fun simultaneously. Oh, and this 'cheevo grants you exactly zilch in Gamerscore, so fun's the only thing you're gonna get out of it...that, and you'll be one step closer to Recon.

1. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare -> 'Mile High Club'
This really shouldn't be a surprise. If I were a betting man--and I am--I'd wager that more time was spent globally trying to unlock this Achievement than any other. It's very prestigious, but only requires a minute of your time to unlock...if you get it the first time...and you won't. What made this Achievement so cool was that it was so hard to get, but it was always just out of your reach. Every time you start up the Epilogue, you think to yourself, "Okay, this is it. This is the time I actually beat this thing." Sure, it required luck to unlock (AI is inconsistent, so the pure memorization of the NES days isn't an option), but once you unlocked it, it was like taking a monkey off your back. And I'm not talking about a cute monkey like Spike in Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls, I'm talking about the kind of mokey that throws feces at you and your friends. If you've unlocked this Achievement, you're in the club.

--Chilly P

Thoughts for Monday 032910

Sorry I haven't been updating much this week, I've been really busy doing nothing. Plus, I had my fantasy baseball draft. Anyway, Joystiq has a PSA you should look at. Ever had trouble defusing a bomb because you kept picking up kits? There's a work-around for that. Speaking of Bad Company 2, what is with that obnoxious horn that goes off when you're about to lose in Conquest? There's no reason for that. In fact, that might be annoying enough to make a certain list.

I'm eagerly anticipating the new Left 4 Dead 2 DLC. The game has 5 campaigns, so you could say you're paying $12 for each. The new DLC is an entire new campaign for $7. Sounds like a bargain to me, especially considering the outrageous price of the "stimulus package." My understanding is that the original cast from the first game makes an appearance as NPCs, which is cool, but it could be way cooler. Left 8 Dead anyone? I guess that title doesn't make as much sense...hmmm, those who are left, ate the dead. Anyway, allowing 8v8 versus would be entirely broken and probably less fun, but it would certainly be interesting and a nice change-o-pace. It would also have the potential for hilarity akin to Slappers Only.

Mass Effect 2's first expansion, which includes a new team member, is also priced at $7. While Activision jacks the prices up, EA is bringing them back down (EA published L4D2, but it does not own Valve like it owns Bioware). I'll definitely be picking this up, as well. I'm not sure when I'm going to find time to play all this while also getting my BFBC2 fix and making my way through FFXIII, but I'm sure as hell gonna try. It'll definitely take priority over Final Fantasy. There are too many good video games these days. I'm still sitting on unfinished copies of Fight Night Round 4, Secret of Monkey Island, Red Alert 3, Burnout Paradise, Beatles: Rock Band, and Call of Duty Classic, and that's just my 360 backlog of games I already own. That's not even including the games I want but have never purchased. I can't imagine what my backlog would look like if I was still trying to keep up with the Wii and DS catalogs. If I ever did buy a PS3, I think it'd cause me more stress than anything else (but God of War III looks soooo cool).

They're making a sequel to Hydro Thunder called Hydro Thunder Hurricane. I might skip this one and just wait for the trilogy to conclude in 10 years with Hydro Thunder Hurricane Tsunami.

Lastly, Penny Arcade had a damn good zinger last week.

--Chilly P

Some random thoughts

Since I know our huge reader base is wondering where I have been as of late, I figured I would just drop in to list off some games that have been occupying my time lately. I also wanted to use this picture I just found, because this kid looks funny. Tee hee.

Fifa 10- It isn't a huge secret that I am a fanboy of Fifa games, but lately this game has really been satisfying. I have probably played around 15 ranked games in the last week or so, and haven't run into a single frustrating game-related, balance problem while playing. Although people are only using the top teams (which I find boring and tedious), they aren't doing anything that makes the game "broken" or whatnot. There is a noticeable gap between those who know how to play the game well, and those who do not. The scores, as of late, have been either very close or a blowout. Overall, I have nothing to complain about here.. just a solid game, that continues to impress and keep me coming back.

Dawn of War 2: Chaos Rising- I already posted about this game last week, but a second mention is in need because it really is amazing. For those who don't like RTS games, you aren't suddenly going to pick up the genre because of this game... but if you like RTS games, this one is pretty damn good and worth the 40 dollar purchase (for Dawn of War 2 and the Expansion, Chaos Rising). Besides the basic multiplayer gameplay online (1v1, 2v2, etc), I have found that I spend a lot of my time on the "Last Stand" game, which is a gametype where the player teams up with two other players to fight off hordes of baddies. You control one hero/leader/etc. character, and level them up in a sort of, World of Warcraft type fashion. I wasn't sure if it would be my cup of tea, but I am pretty hooked. At a certain point (around level 15 or 16) the waves become too much for my hero (regardless of the team combination I am playing with) and I inevitably die... but hopefully the more I play, the better off my character becomes and I can hopefully win once I keep leveling up.

I have also heard that the campaign is very entertaining, and it is also co-op. For those who are strict campaigners, I imagine it would tickle your fancy. Unfortunately I don't play many campaigns, so I will stick to 2 v 2 and last stand.

NCAA 10- Over the last 3 or 4 years my feelings in regard to football games have slowly declined to a point where I am reluctant to play them at all, let alone buy them (except Tecmo Super Bowl, I will always play this legendary game). But a couple of years back EA Sports introduced the "Online Dynasty" mode that turned my normally negative feelings into somewhat positive. Fighting for recruits, playing in the same conferences, and all of the other fun that comes with regular dynasties became significantly better, because it all involved other human players. Although the game is far from perfect, online dynasty mode seems to pull this game from mediocre, to above average and has grabbed my attention yet again.

Shout outs- I saw/played the demo for the new God of War game today and it was pretty ridiculous. The game was far from polished (the demo came out a while ago), but the gameplay was sick. Quick note: the execution moves in this game are hilariously over the top, but unbelievably awesome (see: pulling a cyclops eye out of his head, after just using him as a vehicle to rock little opponents, or breaking a horn off a creature and using that horn as a stabbing device to stick into the creature's eye.). Anyway, the demo was impressively long, and if the game turns out to be anything like the demo, I imagine it will be a force to be reckoned with.

I downloaded the demo for this little gem about 2 or 3 weeks ago, but I still find myself playing it occasionally. I am not sure if it is worthy of a full purchase, but the demo is a nice way to waste some time and relax. You build towers in a small, toy battlefield, and try to shoot all of the opposing army men who attempt to destroy your toy box. Sounds simple, and it is. You have the option of going first-person and firing the turrets/gun placements/planes/etc which adds a nice wrinkle. Again, not sure if it merits the actual download, but the demo is fun enough to leave on the ol' hard drive.

Oh, I have also been playing the basketball game I linked to a few days ago. I can only handle it in bursts because I start getting frustrated when I miss repeatedly, but I thoroughly enjoy trying to move up the rankings to something that is respectable. A friend had questioned whether people were cheating to achieve their scores, and although I wasn't sure, I wouldn't doubt it. So I probably won't be climbing into the top 10 from a general lack of skill and probable foul play by some of the other players, but it is still a great flash game.

Have a good one.

SC

Shameless Self-Promotion

I'm going to be lazy today and not do a big post. Instead, I'll suggest you head over to Kongregate and play Vision by Proxy. I made this game with a team of 5 people (2 programmers, 2 artists, and a guy in charge of emailing us and telling us to do work), and I'd say I was the lead programmer and designer. Anyway, enjoy.

Vision by Proxy

A bit of fair warning: get your mute button ready.

--Chilly P

Thoughts for Tuesday 032310

Cute, isn't he? The pic will make sense later.

That Hind on the last leg Isla Inocentes is way too overpowered. I'm not waffling on that anymore. O. Ver. Powered.

I'm also ready to say that the M60 is far and away the best gun in the game. Is it fair that the class with health packs and which usually gets the most points anyway also gets to have the best gun? I'll say "maybe not." Was that last sentence a run-on? Probably.

I'm 10 hours and 45 minutes into Final Fantasy XIII, and the game is still pretty boring. Outside of a few battles, I really feel like I'm just going through the motions more than playing a game. Honestly, the only real "gameplay" to be had is the game of quickly navigating menus. I've read a bunch of reviews now, and whether or not they liked the game, they all say that it starts to pick up around the 10 to 15 hour mark, and that until you get there, the game is basically a tutorial. Seriously? A 10-15 hour tutorial!? Let's put that in some perspective:

• Metroid Prime: 15-20 hours
• Resident Evil 4: 20-25 hours
• Twilight Princess: 30-35 hours
• Mass Effect 2: 18-22 hours
  
• Halo 3: 6-8 hours
• Bad Company 2: 6 hours
• Dante's Inferno: 8-10 hours
• Portal: 2-3 hours
• Final Fantasy XIII's Tutorial: 10-15 hours!

I think you get the point, and that's that most games are done by the time this one has told you how to play it. The game is advertised to be 60 hours long, but that still means that more than a sixth of it is dedicated to introductory play. I'd say the first third of Portal is the tutorial, but Portal actually required a lot of instruction because it was a completely new gameplay experience. FFXIII is just overly complicated and they guide you along way too slowly. I still feel like I'm just waiting for the game to start.

I downloaded Perfect Dark on the XBLA, and I'm not yet ready to make a recommendation. While it's aged better than I thought it would, it still hasn't aged as beautifully as Halo:CE. However, it's actually playable, unlike the the N64 catridge. Have you tried to play Perfect Dark on the N64 recently? You can't. You can't tell what's going on because the resolution is ridiculously fuzzy. Yeah, it was fine back then, but so was not owning a cell phone. The multiplayer isn't as much fun as I remember, but I'm playing with strangers. I think joining up with three friends and maybe even playing a little--dare I say--splitscreen would be more fun. The single-player, on the other hand, is not very nostolgic for me because I never really played it. My overprotective parents didn't let me have M-rated games back in the day, so I only played it at friends' houses. I guess Goldeneye 007 was rated T because I played the crap out of that single-player and even unlocked all the cheats.

Playing through Perfect Dark's single-player is a blast from the past. No regenerating health or shields. No checkpoints. Ambiguous objectives. No indictator of where to go. Over-the-top animations and auto-aim. Wacky and made-up weapons. No scripted events. If you look at the evolution of the FPS, Perfect Dark and Goldeneye are like the monotremes: more advanced than their predecessors, but an evolutionary dead-end. I'll say the former is the platypus and the latter is the echidna because platypi are venomous, and Perfect Dark had that tranq gun.

In the Spirit of March Madness!

Want another way to procrastinate when you have important things to do? Great, here you go!

Recently a friend sent me a link to an online flash basketball game that is a wonderful way to procrastinate or piss away your day. The game is very simple, but addicting as hell. You can play online with a community that seems to fluctuate from 300-650 during different parts of the day, or create your own mini groups to play your friends.

The game is played by simply clicking the trajectory of the basketball, and hoping that it goes in. "Clean" baskets (no rim or back board) add a multiplier that are crucial to high scores. Each round lasts about 2:00 minutes, and there is about 30 seconds in between rounds.

Also, after each shot the player is shown a bell curve of sorts that illustrates where you are currently ranked in relation to the other players. The more you make, the better your ranking and your little bar will move further to the right. Start bricking? Well, the opposite is true.

So bookmark this game, because it is awesome.

Basketball Flash Game

Quick final note- Sometimes you need to create a profile (very simple) and choose "Global" in order to play online. Be patient, occasionally it can take 2 or so minutes for the next game to start.

SC

DICE Makes Another Parody Video

If Digital Illusions CE doesn't want me to love them, they're doing a terrible job. They just released parody video of Infinity Ward's F.A.G.S. (I didn't come up with the acronym) video, and it's definitely funnier than the original for several reasons: A) It's closer to the truth B) It has Sweetwater in it, and C) It even pokes fun of the celebrity in the video. Anyway, here're the original F.A.G.S. video and DICE's F.R.A.G.S. parody:





You know, when I first saw that F.A.G.S. video, I thought to myself, "Oh, good. They're getting rid of cheap kills." Obviously, I was mistaken. Anyway, DICE also had a pretty good parody for the first Bad Company of what is probably the best video game commercial of all time. I'm feeling generous, so I'll go ahead and embed those as well:





That one's not as good as the F.R.A.G.S. video, but it's still pretty funny. It was more an excuse to put that "Mad World" trailer on there...still gives me goose bumps. Anyway, since I'm one of the few people who's really looking forward to a Mirror's Edge sequel, I guess that makes me a pretty big DICE fan these days. I just hope they eventually get their shit together in whole single-player level design department. Both BFBC2 and Mirror's Edge had the tools to be great single-player games, but they fell way short in the level design. I'll stop rambling now. I'm going to be in Orlando this weekend to go see my 'Stros play, so I won't be updating much. Sweet Cylde may have something for you, though.

--Chilly P

Dawn of War 2: Chaos Rising

I am willing to bet not many of you are that familiar with the Dawn of War games that started back in 2004 on PC. With that in mind, the original Dawn of War didn't seem to be as popular as I thought it deserved to be, but it didn't cause Relic and friends to stop producing expansions. In 2005, the first expansion was released which helped popularize the game a bit due to the low cost as well as the ability to play alongside all of the other previous owners as only one of 5 available races. A year later in 2006, a second expansion was released that added two more races to the mix. At this point, most RTS fans would be extremely happy with the diversity offered by these games... but the game didn't seem to gain any popularity. In 2008, I was shocked to see yet another expansion released, that added two more races bringing the grand total to 9. Again, RTS fans typically love a large variety of races/factions and units to choose from when playing games, and this seemed to be perfect.



Yet unfortunately, the game really never hit huge heights like any of the Blizzard or Westwood/EA games. Yet this game had pretty much everything you look for in a real time strat: a cool, squad based combat system, variety of gametypes that are entertaining, huge array of races/factions/units, and an above decent online system.

I bring all of this up, because about a week ago Dawn of War 2 released its first expansion, Dawn of War 2: Chaos Rising. I haven't been playing tons of RTS games lately, but I downloaded it from steam to occupy some time. Granted, I am a fanboy from the older games and also the sequel Dawn of War 2; but this expansion is pretty great. If you had any chance to play DoW2 and enjoyed it, this game is more of the same with new units and a new faction. Another gametype has been thrown into the mix, that resembles the custom games called "Enfos" from Warcraft 3 TFT. (Also, the online system is vastly improved.)



So I guess this rambling all culminates to: If you like RTS games that revolve around squad based missions and fighting, you will probably enjoy this game. At the minimum, you will laugh at the voice actors when clicking on the different characters and having them all interact. If your computer has a nice graphics card, this game can be pretty stunning as well. You can also buy the original game and the expansion for 40$. Worth it, in my opinion.

SC

$15 for 5 Maps? No Thanks.

What happened to the days when map packs would cost $10 and then become free after ~5 months? Halo 2 did it. Gears of War 1 did it. Halo 3 used to do it. What happened? Now Activision has the gall to charge 1/4 the original price of Modern Warfare 2 for three new maps and two remakes (one of which is more Overgrown, which was terrible). They charged $10 for three new maps and one remake (Chinatown was a remake of a Carentan) for Call of Duty 4, so I guess they feel an extra remake is worth $5. I was reading some of the reactions to the news on Joystiq, and they seem overwhelming negative. I just feel like this game is spiraling downward toward a disaster. Remember when Titanic had a 10-month run in theaters, became the highest-grossing movie of all-time by a landslide, and won a record-tying 11 Oscars? How many people do you know that still like that movie? It's starting to look like Modern Warfare 2 might get that same sort of backlash, and if that happens, the entire Call of Duty IP may follow. Honestly, it wouldn't really bother me, but it'd certainly be interesting to see.

Now that I've bashed Activision and suggested (you could say, 'hoped that') they may be in for a whirlwind of backlash, let's take their side for argument's sake. First of all, before you bring up Bad Company 2's free release that same day, know that they're not releasing two entirely new maps. A friend and I actually got into a game of Rush on Laguna Presa once (and we aren't the only ones), so clearly I already have that capability and it just hasn't been unlocked. That's not so much an argument for the $15 price tag as it is a knock on the argument for the other side (Also, I don't want to bash EA on that either because I completely understand the strategy, and I don't really mind all that much. They're going after Goliath.).
Anyway, let's compare this to Rock Band's DLC. They come out with new songs every week and charge $2 for each. Infinity Ward is offering 5 maps at $3 each. Wouldn't you say that a new map adds more replay to Modern Warfare 2 than a new song does to Rock Band? Wouldn't you also agree that a lot more work goes into creating a new map than goes into making a new song? I know a large portion of that price point is because of licensing, but wouldn't you still argue you get more bang for your buck paying $3 for a map than $2 for a song? I never hear people bitching about Rock Band's DLC pricing, yet companies charge for map packs and the world explodes.

All that being said, I'm not buying the "Stimulus Package;" however, I'm not going to ask you to boycott Infinity Ward because I think that kind of shit is fucking ludicrous. Let the market determine pricing, and if some yahoo wants to pay $15 for a map pack, then by golly, he should be able to do it without being harassed. Honestly, I don't think this thing is going to sell as well as Activision wants it to so I'm betting this won't happen again, but who knows? XBLA prices have skyrocketed ever since the success of Braid; $15 is the new $10. This may even become a common trend. I don't think it will, but we'll see. If 68% of the people who bought the Call of Duty 4 map pack buy this one, Activision will have made more money, and that's really all that matters to them (and for good reason, they're a business).

If you want to buy the maps, then go ahead. If you don't, then don't. I just know that I'm not, but a lot of that has to do with Modern Warfare 2's community becoming a cesspool of cheesers. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a bracket to fill out.

--Chilly P

p.s. What's with the [noun] [preposition] [noun] naming convention of WWII games? Think about it. Medal of Honor, Call of Duty, Band of Brothers (HBO mini-series, but it still fits), Brothers in Arms, Day of Defeat, World at War, Hour of Victory, Company of Heroes, Hearts of Iron... I know not every WWII game follows that convention, but a whole lot of 'em do.

More About Bad Company 2

I've now gotten to the point in Bad Company 2 that there is nothing left to unlock. I have all the guns and all the gadgets and I even went well out of my way to secure the Garand via DICE's veteran program. Basically, I've played the crap out of the game at this point (over 2 days worth), and I'm ready to start breaking it down into further detail.

First and foremost, this is one of the best shooters I've played in some time. The Rush gametype is simply fantastic. One thing I've missed about the first Gears of War is playing games that would take up to 45 minutes to complete, based on how competitive the teams were. Rush is like that. The game is built so that if the teams are evenly matched, I'd say the offense has about a 60% chance of winning at each pair of bombsites, and then somehow each team really does have about a 50% chance of winning each game. The best games are where the offense gets down to 15 or so attempts every time and somehow keeps pulling through it all the way to the final showdown at the end.

I think I can pretty definitively say that the M60 is hands-down the best LMG. If you put a red dot and magnum ammo on that puppy, you can snipe people by firing one shot at a time. The other gun that stands out as better-than-the-rest is the AN-94 Abakan, an assault rifle that fires in two-round bursts. The fully automatic VSS sniper is also pretty nasty when you put a red dot scope on it and use it close or medium range, but, ironically, it doesn't have the same range as the AN-94 or the M60.

While there are only 5 Rush maps at this point, I have to say that all of them--with the exception of Nelson Bay--are expertly crafted. I find myself celebrating each time a new game starts as if we had just gotten a good map in a sea of bad ones (something I've just gotten used to). While Nelson Bay isn't terrible, it's dark, there are no vehicles, and it's the only map I've actually gotten spawn-camped on (that was a singular occurance, however). I don't mean to say that Nelson Bay is a bad map, I just don't like it as much.

The Hind is nearly impossible to take out on Isla Inocentes. There needs to at least be a Bakcha AA or a stationary AT at the attacker spawn so they have a chance at destroying it.

The squad system can get a little frustrating at times because if you have a party of more than four, it's a real pain in the tookus to get everyone in the same game and on the same team. It'd be nice if you could go to the create a squad menu and create two squads that join a game together. They might not get on the same team to begin with because of how the dedictaed servers work, but hopefully they would eventually. Actually, come to think of it, if you have dedicated servers, why can't I just pick a game to go into? That way I could make sure my party gets into a game with fewer people so my dog tags aren't on the line.

Anyway, the game is fantastic. I absolutely cannot throw enough praise at it. I don't see myself going back to a Call of Duty of any sort for a while. DICE really has their shit together, and they may just be defining online warfare.

--Chilly P

p.s. The single-player was a huge let down. I really enjoyed the first game's campaign, but I wouldn't recommend anything past the first 6 levels (Once you do the part where you run between buildings to keep warm, you can safely call it quits).

Playstation's new toy

(Your eyes aren't deceiving you, we are actually going to talk about a Playstation for a bit)

I guess watching the Wii make unbelievable amounts of money (which is interesting, considering it is graphically challenged in comparison to its rivals) has caused Playstation to try and get a little piece of the pie.

Here are some videos of the new technology that is being worked on.

Part 1

Part 2

I have to say, the bow and arrow at the end is pretty awesome looking. I know there was something like that in Zelda for Wii, but this looks like it could be pretty bad ass as well.



SC

Who's the Current FPS King?

So Joystiq just posted some early impressions on the next Medal of Honor game, and I came away with basically thinking that EA has scrapped everything from the shit storm that was Medal of Honor: Airborne and is just straight ripping Call of Duty 4. Hell, the article even says its campaign seems like a truer sequel to CoD4 than CoD:Mod2 was. It also says that DICE is developing the multiplayer (EA Los Angeles is doing the campaign), and given how much I'm loving Bad Company 2, I might actually have to keep an eye on this one. But then I got to thinking...

The new Halo: Reach trailer mentions having loadouts, and even Bioshock 2's multiplayer aped CoD4. So here's the question: is Call of Duty the new king of the shooters? I guess the answer would have to be, "yes." I mean, Modern Warfare 2 was the fastest selling-game of all time, beating a mark once held by Halo 3 and then broken by GTA IV. Now, it's not exactly a fair fight because both GTA IV and Modern Warfare 2 are multi-platform games, but still. It says something that all these new FPSs are trying to mimic the Call of Duty formula when for so long everyone was chasing Halo. Have we already seen that fabled Halo-killer?

Just think about that. I remember a few years ago thinking that the idea that a Halo-killer could possibly come out before Bungie was done with the series was just preposterous. Killzone and Killzone 2 were both hyped as Halo-killers and I think we all know how that turned out. I can't believe that I'm about to type this, but Halo: Reach is playing catch-up to Call of Duty. Halo is no longer the leading innovator in the genre. How did this happen?

Well, way back in 2007, Halo 3 and Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare were released. I still consider the former to be the premier shooter on the console, but I'd say I'm in the minority. I think where they lost their audience--not to imply that Halo 3 is struggling to find an audience, they're just not way out in first place anymore--is that they spent too much time innovating in the wrong areas. More on that in a bit, but first a little background: Halo 3 was the first game to eclipse Halo 2 in online activity, and this was after the first Gears of War and three Call of Duty games had come and gone. While Call of Duty 4 was a much-hyped contender (Game Informer named it, not Halo 3, as its most anticipated game of 2007), there was little reason to believe that it could actually top Master Chief.

So where did Halo 3 misstep? While I know Sweet Clyde has some considerable distaste for the game, I would probably say it's my favorite game of the series. It's a lot like Halo 2 but with more dressings. That's the problem, though. While Forge and the ability to save replays are awesome, they're not features that will draw in more people than a fresh experience. The problem was that Halo 3 felt like Halo 2 in HD with more features but the same gameplay. While I loved that, I'm not playing it anymore. I feel like I've been playing it since 2004. Sure, Grifball was enough to bring me back for a while, but they won't offer it to me on a consistent basis, and the gametype doesn't yet have the staying power I'm looking for. The fact of the matter is: Halo 3 didn't innovate gameplay and Call of Duty 4 did.

So, back to the question I proposed in the title: who's the current FPS king? Honestly, I don't know. Is it Call of Duty 4 still or Modern Warfare 2? With Activision pumping out a "new" CoD game every November, how long before that series becomes stale? Maybe Halo: Reach will take back the crown in a year when the CoD torch has been passed to Treyarch. Hell, maybe even Bad Company 2 or Medal of Honor can come in and take the reigns. There certainly seems to be room because if nothing else, Modern Warfare 2 was cocky as hell. It's actually very easy to draw a parallel between Modern Warfare 2 and Halo 3. They were both sequels to what was the most popular FPS on the market, and neither felt particularly fresh.

If there's a recipe for success when creating a sequel to the most popular game on the market, I think it's following the footsteps of Halo 2. Sure, there are still people who are waiting for a "real" sequel to Halo: Combat Evolved, but if Halo 2 had just been more of the same, the proverbial Halo-killer may have arrived years earlier. You can't just follow the "If it ain't broke don't fix it" philosophy because otherwise people will get bored. I know Sweet Clyde saw jet packs in the Reach trailer and groaned, but that tells me that they're trying to create a fresh experience (Yes, I know Tribes had jet packs, shut up. No one else is allowed to do jet packs because Tribes did it? Did you consider Halo: CE a Doom-clone, you narrow-minded prick?).

I know I've rambled on about this for a while now, but if you take one thing away from it it's this: the state of the current FPS market is in flux and we may never again have one series that is the golden standard for the genre.

--Chilly P

How to Fix Modern Warfare 2

I said I would get to this last week, but since Bad Company 2 came out the matter has seemed less urgent. Nonetheless, Modern Warfare 2 is an incredibly solid game with a mountain of aggravating problems. Fortunately, there are a few relatively simple ways to fix this game's online experience without having to change the core makeup of the game. So, here are some ways to make the game more competitively balanced but without sacrificing too much content.

1. First, and this is the easiest one, bring back Team Tactical in first person. That one's really easy, and it's just inexcusable that it hasn't been in there from day one.

2. Get rid of roll-over kill streaks in Search & Destroy. No one should ever get an f-ing harrier--much less a chopper gunner--in Search & Destroy. That gametype is completely ruined by overpowered killstreaks. While you're at it, make sure nothing above a precision air strike is allowed in a care package in S&D. Sure, no one will use them, but that's the point.

3. I completely understand why you don't want to allow party chat for Search & Destroy because it's basically cheating, by why the hell can't I have party chat for other gametypes? Now you're just purposely pissing off your user base.


4. Make some sort of MLG-esque playlists. You don't have to go strictly MLG because they'd want you to completely remove killstreaks and I think that would make your game lose a lot of its appeal. However, you need to offer Domination, S&D, and Headquarters playlists that do not allow the following features:
* Machine pistols
* Shotguns (Unless you want to make them primary weapons)
* Tactical Nuke, Harriers, Chopper Gunner, and Care Packages
* All hip-fire aiming reticules (this will nerf grenade launchers considerably)
* One Man Army, Last Stand, Commando, Scavenger, and Lightweight
* Deathstreaks
* Thermal scopes
Honestly, I would prefer the entire game was like this, but I understand that you'd want to keep a lot of the wackiness of your game. Just offer people some sort of respite from these cheesers running around knifing people. If you're worried about people having trouble with illegal classes, just set defaults for illegal classes: USP, Marathon, Stopping Power, and Steady Aim. I'm sure you can come up with an algorithm that realigns illegal killstreaks, and worst-case they're stuck with just UAV and Predator Missile.

At this point, you can completely ignore me if you want. I'm not sure I care anymore. I'll just keep playing Bad Company. It's just such a shame because the primary weapons are so remarkably well balanced in this game, and it's all ruined because of all the crazy shit you allow to happen. This game could have so easily been better than Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare.

--Chilly P

Emulate this! #1

I would like to introduce a new feature to the blog, Emulate this! Here, I want to make a recommendation for a classic game that perhaps you might have forgotten about or never had the privilege to play when you were younger. The obvious classics like: Megaman 2, Contra, Double Dragon, or Dr. Mario. always dominate our memories and need no reminder or recommendation, yet there are some unsung heroes of years past that deserve a second look.

The first edition's recommendation:

Ice Hockey

Although Blades of Steel seemed to dominate the Hockey gaming world, Ice Hockey was a quiet star. Players can choose from 6 national teams to compete in an entertaining 5 v 5 throwdown.


Shooting and scoring wasn't difficult enough to make you frustrated, yet not easy enough to make the game a cake walk. Button mashing was crucial to winning the puck when players scuffle for possession. Fights can break out where players must, again, mash buttons in order to be the victor of the 8-bit battle.



This game is best enjoyed when competing with a friend. I won't say that beating a computer isn't fun, but being able to yell and scream at the person sitting next to you never gets old with these classics. Also, enjoy the zamboni show in between periods.


SC

The First Hour of FFXIII

Wow. I've spent an hour of my life watching cutscenes with excruciating dialogue and pressing the "A" button periodically. Seriously. What the hell is this shit? I'm really hard-pressed to call this a game. Does it still count as gameplay when all you do press the "A" button? Once to select "Auto Attack" and once to attack whichever enemy is already highlighted. That's all I'm doing, and I'm getting 5 star ratings for every battle and finishing them in half the target time. Even when I'm not watching cutscenes--and about 30 minutes of the first hour is cutscenes--I feel like the "combat" is just a damn cutscene. My favorite part was when after watching a 5 minute cutscene, the game was nice enough to let me push forward on the joystick for 5 seconds before I was forced to watch another 5 minute cutscene.

I guess I wouldn't mind so much if the cutscenes didn't suck so much dick. What kind of pussy-ass name is Snow? This guy just talks about how he's a fucking hero and he's so intelligent that he brings his fists to gun fights. Here're my favorite (read: "fucking dumbest") lines so far:
"Real heroes don't have plans!"
"Didn't I tell you? Moms are tough."
That second one comes up about 5 seconds before she dies from a fall that didn't even seem to bruise Snow (who couldn't care less about her death). Oh, and there's also some chick named Lightning (who does have a bitchin' Swiss army sword and rocks a mullet that would make Billy Ray Cyrus jealous) and the kid whose mom wasn't as tough as she thought is named Hope. There's also a black guy with a canary named Chewbacca living in his afro...that dude is cool.

And what the hell is with the clothing? These idiots are trying to fight some oppressive government while making sure they look stylish as hell (this must be the Japanese equivalent to space marines fighting Nazis). What's the best attire for fighting robots with guns? How about wearing nothing but a vest with fur trim or just dressing like a pirate hooker? Snow likes to wear a beige trench coat that magically has a wolf on the back while he's fighting.

Lastly, there's some pigtailed hooker who after watching Hope's mom die (Hope is a boy, mind you) decides that there's no time for grieving, he has to drive a flying F-Zero Arcade cabinet into what I guess is some sort of flying fortress shaped like a crucifix. She also likes to make random sex noises during conversation. Okay, I might be alright with that last part, but she's still a bloody strumpet!

In case you can't tell, this is my first foray into a JRPG that doesn't demand that I "catch 'em all." I was just so pleased with Mass Effect 2 that I thought, "Hey, maybe I should play RPGs more often." I'm not ready to call the game a load of shit just yet, but the outlook is bleak. If the game continues to consist of, "Run straight, enter battle, press 'A' until battle is over, watch cutscene," I will quickly lose patience.

--Chilly P

[Update]: Alright, I'm something around 5 hours into the game and now that there actually seems to be a plot, I'm enjoying the game more. Also, while most battles are still mindless "press 'A' to continue," there are some more difficult battles where you have change up how your entire party approaches the fight on the fly. It's kind of real-time turn-based sort of like Bioware games of old, but really complicated. There's potential there, though. I'm no longer hating it, but it's still ridiculous and strictly linear (so much so that I might as well be on a rail between fights and cutscenes).

The Online Cheese Factory

The current state of online gaming- Cheesing.


Since the advent of a running kill-to-death ratio, tracking of levels, win to loss ratios, total points, etc., online multiplayer gaming has taken a depressing turn for the worse. The problem begins with the players, who seem to all have an obsessive desire for a status symbol of some sort. Game companies quickly noticed this growing trend and started to tailor their games to this addictive wave that is crashing onto the shores of contemporary gaming. The days of simply joining a server and playing games without any tracking mechanism of kills, deaths, wins, or losses are long gone. Like previously mentioned, there are droves of players who would applaud the departure of pure, anonymous gaming... yet I stand firmly in the opposition of this. I would submit that games become disturbingly trimmed down, so that only the “competitive” weapons, characters, players, items, builds, units, etc. find their way to the forefront (which is fine for the strictly competitive leagues, not for the general population). In this scramble of metagaming and competition, the game loses its' original, true form and is stripped down to the bones. I will look at a variety of examples where I find this frustratingly true while continuing my discussion.

By genre, let's take a look:


First person shooters-

Around the introduction of the original Xbox, (Note: As Chilly P has mentioned before, this is Xbox-leaning blog, sorry Playstationers) console players were introduced to a flood of new games that were all revolutionary and exceptional in their own ways. Gamers were delighted to get running riots in Halo 1, snipe off heads in Unreal Championship with the lightning rifle, slink around the brush in Ghost Recon, or even leave the keyboard and dabble with Counterstrike on the sticks. Those days were glorious in my mind, because the gaming was seemingly innocent and pure. There was little attention given to any running statistic, and people generally played what they enjoyed playing... because it was fun. Hell, even if you drop back a generation, how many games of “Slappers only!” or “throwing knives” did you and your friends play because it was fucking hilarious and entertaining? Many, I would guess.

Somewhere around the release of Halo 2, I seemed to notice a trend in players that I had failed to see prior. People were absolutely obsessed with leveling up, and would do almost anything to do it. Boosting, cheesing, etc. were all strategies employed so that people could get their level up so people could see their apparent ability. I think anyone who played Halo 2 can fondly remember the days of “standby” and the like. All for a little number quaintly placed in some geometric shape to signify questionable progress and ability.

In the more modern gaming climate, each game seems to introduce new ways for players to become addicted to their stats or relative level. Halo 3 seemed to lure in their players with different ranks and level achievements that people would beat small children for (like super bouncing, standby again, etc.). When players were discussing whether or not people enjoyed the game, the inevitable question of, “What level are you?” always flew forth as if to create a hierarchy of those who were and were not worthy of speaking about the game. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare continued the trend and also took it to new levels by introducing a system of “prestiging” that players would pursue. Players would do almost anything to move up the prestige ladder as quickly as possible, so it seemed as if only a handful of the “awesome/insane” guns were used to ensure fast leveling. (For those of you about to say, “I used other guns to get more points” that is fine, but we all know where your bread was buttered...P90, M16, etc.)

Recently, Modern Warfare 2 was dropped on the world, and the masses devoured it like a fat kid with cake. Infinity ward laced this little beauty with constant achievements and status symbols (all of the little funny sayings), as well as tracking almost all of each player's stats. What did this do for the game? Well, it began with a variety of broken items being discovered rather quickly so that people would advance through their prestiges as fast ( and annoyingly) as possible. The javelin glitch, a handful of akimbo problems (fuck the 1887), the “one man army” bullshit, the “care package” problems, getting out of maps, etc. were all annoying as hell, and caused flocks of players to leave the MW2 bandwagon. Assholes would join opposing teams to assist each others quest for some pointless title or getting a certain kill-streak. Why? To experience the nuke firsthand? No, so that they could “achieve” the title and have it so they could display it for all to see. Complete nonsense.


Real Time Strats-

In order to keep this post reasonable in size, I will go with one popular game to discuss here. Warcraft 3 had a system of leveling up which brought in crowds for years (still does), but unfortunately if you want to enjoy the game nowadays, you better know which heroes aren't “broken” and which are. You really cannot just hop onto Battle.net to enjoy a fun game anymore. There are a select few of functional “first heroes” that you need to use, or you are putting yourself at a serious disadvantage. Why is this important here, you might ask: People are almost forced to use around 5 of over 20 heroes because they want to win more than their desire for ingenuity and their own cleverness. Not to knock those desiring to win, but the days of playing the game to have fun and thinking of your own strategies seem to be gone. Death Knight, Fiends, Lich, Stats, destros, and wyrms please! Demon hunter and mass talons baby ! Blade master and tech! Yada yada...


Sports-

Want to play NCAA online these days? Great, make sure you choose one of about 3-4 top 10 teams that have an extremely unfair player! If not, be prepared to severely alter a realistic game plan in order to stop the bullshit that is about to come your way. I think the best example of this would be last year's NCAA, where the university of florida was the ultimate cheese factory. Want insane speed? Great, Percy Harvin, demps or whoever else in the backfield, and one of their DEs had sufficient amounts of it to run about 3 plays in order to win. Awesome! Football at its finest. Go back three years in NCAA, and there were broken plays that snapped the ball directly to the wide receiver, or a blitz that always allowed the middle linebacker to penetrate the O-line. The running trend here? You will find these problems almost always hanging around the “ranked” games. Regardless of the year, these football games leave you wanting more... much more.

Well, what about FIFA you might inquire. Certainly the “Beautiful Game” cannot be tainted by the cheesefest that infects most sports gaming. Wrong. Here again people will only use the teams that have the fastest, most unfair player in order to win. Never mind the fact that game makers and designers took the time to put loads of teams into the game, make sure you stick to Real Madrid, Manchester United, Chelsea, and Barcelona. Screw those other teams! This type of attitude plagues online Fifa, and you will be hard-pressed to find an opponent that won't immediately select one of the powerhouses because they refuse to play any other team (even if they have a favorite team that is different from their powerhouse.)

Moral of the story here: People, once again, want to win (in order to up their level or ranking) bad enough to completely bypass hoards of entertaining teams because they are blind.

Online RPGS/MMORPGS-

Haha, assholes. I don't delve into these.

Conclusion:

How would I go about fixing most of this? Well, I would first get rid of most of the online stats for games. If people want to win, great, allow them to do it without rewarding them like a needy five year old with an achievement, title, or rank to satisfy this OCD like obsession for verification. For clarification, I don't actually mean you do away with the stats permanently; I think they do serve a crucial purpose by allowing the game to fit opponents together semi-appropriately. Rather, hide these stats from the players so they have absolutely no idea what their kill to death ratio is, or what their win to loss percentage is. I think you would quickly see players breaking the mold and using guns they enjoy because the game would become remarkably less life and death, and more fun. Losses wouldn't seem so bad, and wins wouldn't be such a big deal. Game types like “Slappers only!” or “throwing knives” would emerge once again, and people would loosen up.

I think this post has gone on long enough, but the list of nonsense could go on for a while. This type of playing, if allowed to continue, will produce a generation of rank-hungry assholes, who will do anything for a cheap victory. If that means using the imbalanced guns or accessories, units and builds, players and teams, plays or personnel packages, etc. then so be it. If there is a way for players to experience success by doing very little and relying on unfair aspects to games... then they will be on it like flies on poop.

A final thought- Some of you might think: “It sounds like you are just bitter because you are losing to these superior (sic) strategies!!!!!!!111oneone1!” or “ You must suck at competitive games and are taking it out on all of these heroes who play to win the game!”. Wrong, on both accounts. I rarely am consistently outclassed in the competitive video game realm, and I don't bring that up to beat my own chest, only to show how petty and trivial the opposition is to these sorts of discussions.

So go forth my tan faced children, use the FAL in MW2, proudly select the Richmond Spiders in NCAA, get lost in the magic that is the Seattle Sounders in FIFA, and by all means, have fun with the damn games.

SC

Blas Mo Fo Is My Bitch

I am simply loving my time with Bad Company 2 so far. Granted, I loved Modern Warfare 2 when it first came out, but one can only take so many knifers and n00b-tubers before the experience begins to ware on them. I'm not saying I don't like that game anymore--it's still a great game--I just currently have no urge to play it. It has been replaced.

Now, as for that title, I said I would publicly humiliate the first person to thrice surrender me their tags, and that unfortunate sap is none other than Blas Mo Fo. Blas, you got owned, go play PSP.

Back to my general impressions. I took that screen shot (sorry for the low res, I used my iPhone) during one of the single player levels. Take a look at it. Gorgeous, no? I really wish they made a multiplayer map out of that set. There's that sweet water fall, the hill you have to run down before bottle-necked at the bridge, and sniper posts everywhere...okay, it might make a shit map, but it's just so damn pretty that I want to see it more often. In a time when most games use only three colors (brown, gray, and muzzle flash), it's so nice to play a game with such lush landscapes, even if I do shoot them to shit with a Bradley.

I've been playing through the single player, and I've been moderately impressed. It's nothing to write home about, but the campaign does have its moments (sniping during thunder claps, running between houses in a blizzard trying not to freeze). As exemplified by that picture I took, the graphics are just jaw-dropping. Hell, light even filters in through canopies in a natural-looking way (and when you destroy the trees, the effect goes away as it should). The only gripe in that department is the fire effects, which look very Xbox 1 compared to everything else. The campaign has been pretty fun for the most part, but after a few hours I was already ready for it to end. The vehicle levels are not very fun. I just want to blow shit up in the jungle. I also just kind of miss the feel of the first game's campaign. It was funnier, and I liked the plot a whole lot better. That said, it's still nice to get more time with these characters.

Multiplayer has been a blast. The game just feels so different than anything else I've played (including BC1). The squad-based gameplay makes you feel like you're part of a war with a scope beyond your play experience. I can't really describe it better than that. It just feels like the game is bigger than you. What's really fun is just going on adventures with your squad mates. You know, little side operations. A friend and I decided that it was crucial that we knife the opposing team's UAV pilot, so we had a race to the offense's spawn area (avoiding enemy contact, of course). I got there first because my friend had to take a detour to C4 an enemy tank. It may not sound hilarious in text, but let me just promise you this: the more you just focus on you squad, the more fun you'll have. I've never laughed so much while playing an online shooter.

In terms of the game's balance, the only aspect that stands out as a little over-powered is the Hind (particularly on the last leg of Isla Inocentes). It's really tough to drive, but when someone is good with it, it's a bitch to take down. I'm sure there has to be some tried-and-true method of taking down one of these things, but we have yet to find it.
[Update]: Nevermind, the Hind is not hard to drive, and I think the only Rush level where it appears is Isla Inocentes. The Apache on Port Valdez is very similar, but that map has plenty of mounted guns and a Bakcha AA which are more than capable of taking it down.

Anyway, I need to wrap this post up so I can go play some more. Last thing: I've read some bitching about the game not allowing a squad larger than four people. The game will let you have your full Xbox LIVE Party of 8 in a game on the same team, but you'll be split into two groups of four. Why not let you have a squad of 8? It's quite simple. In a game of 12 on 12, if you have a party of 8, you can have one guy go way around to back of the other team's base and have them spawn their 7 squad mates. That would be terribly broken. To have squads of 8, you'd have to allow games with ~48 people, and based on the reviews MAG is getting, maybe more is not always better.

[Addendum]: I like that they have dedicated servers because games are almost never laggy (and with 24-player games on huge, expansive maps, I imagine you have to have dedicated servers), but they have got to get that shit working on a more consistent basis.

--Chilly P

Portal 2 Confirmed; Chilly P Needs New Shorts

I just saw on Joystiq (yeah, I used the same picture, what of it?) that the new Game Informer has confirmed Portal 2. I got talked into a Game Informer subscription recently (damn Gamestop employees) so I'll give my impressions after I read the article (probably three times). I just got to say, I am so PUMPED! Still Alive was my ringtone for, like, a year, and I endured the awkward looks from people who didn't get it because when someone did recognize it, we would then have a mutual understanding of each other's awesomeness.

There are five games that have just blown my socks right off and made me completely reevaluate how I perceive the entire medium: Metroid Prime, Super Mario 64, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, Resident Evil 4, and Portal. There are some similarities among those games. A) None of them were over-hyped (at least not to me). I wasn't really expecting all that much from them, and with the exception of RE4, I expected them all to be sub-par. B) Only Portal has been released this generation, and it is by far the shortest of them. C) Excluding Portal, all of these games have had sequels that were extremely underwhelming (Let's face it, RE4 was its own game and RE5 was really RE4-2. Same goes for Mario 64).

I'm just really hoping this game doesn't disappoint. I never felt the game needed a sequel, but damnit, as time's gone on, I've wanted it more and more. And hell, even if the game doesn't live up to the first one, there's no use crying over every mistake...

--Chilly P