You may thin that is an odd title, but it is very true. Europe needs to man up! Now this is an odd statement but it is founded in pure liquid fact and of course it is to do with video games. So what does Europe need to man up about, well the main reason is Ratchet and Clank. I consider myself to be a Ratchet and Clank fan, I’ve played the two PS3 games and really enjoyed them and I was considering looking into playing the previous PS2 ones. That was until I realised that I didn’t want the European versions. Ratchet and Clank are famous for their innuendo game titles that cause people like me to giggle with childish glee. These games are really funny games and the titles really capture the silly essence of Ratchet and Clank. In many places the second Ratchet and Clank is called Ratchet and Clank- Going Commando. That is a funny name, in Europe however it is simply called Ratchet and Clank 2. Why? Why change the name, we British invented humour and we are part of Europe why can’t we have humorous game titles? Our comedy is full of innuendo and double entendre yet we can’t have a video game with a slightly smutty title, again why? The sad thing is it gets worse, the third Ratchet and Clank game has one of the best titles in video game history. Ratchet and Clank- Up Your Arsenal. That title is so great it got it’s own dedicated sentence space! But what is this game called in Europe? Why Ratchet and Clank 3 of course. That really sucks, Up Your Arsenal is just too great for us apparently.
However I have good news, Europe has manned up as far as Ratchet goes, we have taken to using the American titles, only problem is the titles aren’t as good. Tools of Destruction, that’s not even a double entendre (if it is, I don’t get it) and Quest for Booty- is that the best you can do? We get the not funny and not so funny names but we don’t get the super cool ones. The fault here is of course with insomniac who should name their PS3 games better. Imaginative game titling hasn’t been their strong suit on the PS3 thus far. Resistance: Fall of Man being the closest they’ve got and that just sounds a bit cheesy, it’s a better title than the imaginatively named Resistance 2 however. Really, just Resistance 2, even the first one had a subheading, how long did it take to think of that one insomniac (the irony here is Resistance 2 is a much better game). The third resistance game was accidentally announced recently. Some clever so and so saw a massive bill board sporting its name. The billboard was on a film set and was apparently part of some clever marketing campaign, which was that when people saw said film they would see the Resistance 3 poster and thus the announcement was made. That is a really awesome idea, but then they made the mistake of putting it next to a road! So what was the game called, yeah-just Resistance 3. Instead of giving the games subtitles they just put landmarks in the A of Resistance, which represent where the game was set. Resistance: Fall of Man had Big Ben in the A; signifying it took place in the UK (so the UK and Europe fall to the ‘aliens’ first, oh man up Europe!). Resistance 2 had Golden Gate Bridge (you can figure that one out yourself) and Resistance 3 has…. The statue of liberty. New York? You’re going to do America twice in a row; I wanted the Sydney Opera house.
So to summarise, insomniac needs to get better names and Europe needs to man up. Luckily they are getting back on form, the new Ratchet game is going to be called ‘A Crack in Time’- pretty funny! Plus Europe get that title- however it is no way near as good as the title they decided was too suggestive, Clock Blockers.
Monday 26 October 2009
Saturday 24 October 2009
Why we love Valve!
Valve are pretty damn awesome! The best thing about them is that they obviously care for the community and that they make awesome games, an example of this care just happened. Because Gordon Freeman won GameSpot's greatest video game character competiton by 55.8% Valve have taken 55.8% off the price of all games including Gordon Freeman. These are fantastic games so check them out, we love you Valve and we love the Freeman!
Music video made of 100% pure WIN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Plhgyp0KNQQ
Best music video ever.
ps see how many retro games you can spot, ive spotted at least 5
Best music video ever.
ps see how many retro games you can spot, ive spotted at least 5
Monday 19 October 2009
The verdict on Uncharted 2: Among Thieves (Stephen Gillespie)
It's the moment of truth for Nate, is his game any good? Uncharted 2, possibly the best PS3 exclusive of the year, is out but is it any good? Hell yes, this is not only the PS3 exclusive of the year but the finest game of the year on any platform. My copy of this game arrived last Wednesday, two days before the official release date, and really the highest praise I can give it is that by late Thursday evening I had finished it. This is not because it is a short game, I got about 9-10 hours out of the sublime single player experience on the normal difficulty but that was just one blast through. The reason why I completed it so quickly was because the gameplay is so addictive; Uncharted 2 is just full of amazing moments that just make you want to keep playing. Every few minutes something so amazing happens or is about to happen and to put the controller down for just a second would just be criminal. The game is not just a cover-based shooter, and an amazing one at that but a fantastic platformer. Nathan Drake’s climbing skills are second only to Altair and Cole McGrath and the platforming sections in Uncharted 2 give it fantastic pacing and keep you playing. It should be noted however that this game is not Assassin’s Creed or inFamous, you play as an acrobatic fellow capable of climbing up walls but it is not every wall. Instead of looking for features on buildings like windows and doors Nathan Drake is happier looking for pointy bricks or obvious footholds. This may not be as deep a climbing mechanic but it fits the game perfectly, this is not an open world game, it is level based and therefore it’s purpose is to keep you moving to the end of the level. So instead of being able to climb up any random building which would make things overly confusing there is usually one main path. The climbing may be simple put planning your ascent is still really fun. You have to look out for ledges and pretty much decide where you’re going before you do it. This makes the climbing a welcome challenge without it becoming to confusing or to linear.
Nathan Drake, midget hater! Now Uncharted 2 is a cover based shooter but no it is not Gears of War. In Gears of War you play as a fleshy tank in Uncharted you are the agile Nathan Drake and it’s hardly stop and pop because the varied gameplay keeps you moving. You get your usual enemies that you can take out from a distance but then you get enemies that are hard to kill and you need to keep moving to finally fell them. Also the gameplay just keeps changing and keeps getting better. The best example I can think of is the train level. This is one of Uncharted 2’s best moments. You are fighting on a moving train, how cool is that? You jump from carriage to carriage, leap inside, hang off edges to avoid low signs whilst your enemies get some overhanging metal to the face. Also you have to run from helicopters, leap from an exploding carriage shot by the very same helicopter and get in a tank attached to one of the carriages and blow up that damn helicopter alongside some pesky missiles sent your way. That is just one level, and then there’s even more to that level and the ending of that very level is even cooler. That is the essence of Uncharted 2, insane and awesome variety. One minute your gunning down nameless enemies and the next your hanging from a giant statue of a Tibetan ritual dagger, jumping onto massive face sculptures all in order to move some mirrors around in order to get to your next clue to the fabled treasure you seek. Yes it’s another treasure hunt, but come on it’s a treasure hunt that involves jumping from moving truck to moving truck because they keep exploding, that’s one cool treasure hunt. This game really just has so much and everything is just fantastic but really the best bit is the characters. Uncharted 1 had more personality than any game I’ve ever played, the dialogue was superbly executed and every burst of conversation was incredibly natural. This is the same for the second, the characters have some depth to them but mostly they have so much character, which seems obvious but it’s rare in gaming. It is one of the very few games where you watch a cutscene and you think this is actually acting, and damn good acting. The dialogue is snappy and genuinely funny at can get very emotional without ever over doing it.
If you run out of missiles then maybe a hug would tame that damn helicopter!
If you run out of missiles then maybe a hug would tame that damn helicopter!I mentioned cutscenes second ago so I would like to point out that unlike most games the cutscenes are pretty much just story, all the really cool action you do! You never feel like man that looks so cool but I wish I could do it because you are doing everything, and it looks amazing. The game is just a work of art. It has the finest graphics on the system and the animations are flawless, the hand to hand takedowns are delightfully brutal and every character movement looks spot on. You will constantly find yourself marvelling at the visuals and the best thing is, when Nathan goes swimming he comes out wet, this was in the first game but it’s so awesome it needs mentioning again. Also there is snow in this game and when you roll in it you get snowy, which is so cool.
Trains are awesome!This game is almost flawless; in fact I only have one complaint. The controls can be unresponsive, apart from that it is perfect in every way. Should you check this out? You need to check this out!
p.s- despite how it looks this game is not just helicopters, infact there may only be two of them. They just look so damn cool and where so awesome, it may sound like I hated them but they were really, really great!
Saturday 17 October 2009
Friday 16 October 2009
Top 5 Superior Sequels (Faith Westlake)
A special thanks to Jo Clarkson and Stephen Gillespie who filled the multiple gaps in my knowledge. Enjoy.
5. Kill Bill Vol. 2
Quentin Tarentino ranks pretty high when it comes to my favourite directors and the first Tarentino film I saw was Kill Bill Vol.2. One of the criticisms of the Kill Bill films is that Kill Bill Vol.1 seems to be based almost completely on action and violence and then pretty much all the story is crammed into Vol. 2. It’s for this reason that I generally try to watch them both together but with a combined running time of over 4 hours this can be very inconvenient. The films were given a cinematic release a year apart to break up the length and maximise revenue with both feature films averaging about 2 hours each. It’s easy to say that my favourite fight scenes are in Vol. 1 but the best dialogue, build up and character development is in Vol. 2. Speaking of suspense I don’t actually think we see Bill’s face until Vol.2… This would probably have ranked a lot higher on this list if I didn’t advocate seeing the two as one long feature. Also how could I not love a tribute to B-Movies, spaghetti westerns and classic martial arts movies?
4.
The Last Crusade is probably my favourite of the Indiana Jones series. This film gives us as insight into Indy’s youth, as played by River Phoenix, and introduces us to his fath
er Henry Sr. (brilliant played by Sean Connery). The dialogue between Henry and Indy is some of the best in the series and their interactions are a delight to watch. As with any great sequel the characters and story are better developed and the inclusion of Nazi’s as villains sets up the film’s context and sticks closer to the foundations of the Raiders of the Lost Arc. Also if you’ve watched Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull you’ll definitely appreciate how great of a sequel this is.
3. Terminator 2: Rise of the Machines
Terminator 2: Rise of the Machines is widely regarded as one of the greatest movie sequels and is the only one of the Terminator sequels to be directed by the original director James Cameron. There’s a shift in focus here and as this films focus a lot more on John Connor himself. This film has a lot of character development here such as Sarah Connor’s moving from a damsel in distress to a strong and independent fighter (despite being semi-psychotic…) The villain of the first film becomes the hero here in an interesting and inspired move. One of the biggest changes has to be the terminator upgrade which leaves us with the liquid metal T-100 shows great special effects and innovation. Some of the effects in this film are better than some of the stuff we see today despite it being 18 years old. A great piece of modern sci-fi.
2. Star Wars: Empire Strikes Back
The Empire Strikes Back is arguable the best of all the Star Wars films. The story is improved and has a lot more depth. The tone of this film is much darker than that of its predecessor and has less cliché moments which has helped the Star Wars films to become cult movie classics and essential viewing. The dialogue is great and memorable. Character development is also a great part of this film with the characters beginning somewhere and finishing somewhere different, they all change in some way. The cult favourite Boba Fett is giving a much larger role in this film and the relationship between Leia and Han blossoms. Also it contains one the greatest twists of all time. The film ends on a pretty bleak note which was a gutsy move for Lucas for a summer blockbuster but we couldn’t imagine it any other way.
1. X-Men 2
I have to admit I have a soft spot for the X-Men…
X-Men 2 doesn’t aim to fit in as many mutants as possibly to appease fan boys (X-Men Origins Wolverine…) but instead really only focuses on one new mutant, Nightcrawler who is well acted and developed. Despites the X-Men being a large team each character gets a fair bit of screen time to move them forward but really the main focus is, as always, on Wolverine. Although he is a really interesting character and the insights and clues into his past really make you want to keep watching to find out the truth. Director Bryan Singer set up the basic story and characters in X-Men so here he has a bit more license to focus on deeper stories and themes such as the conflict between mutants and humans, the prejudice in their world and the corrupt branch of government that Stryker leads. X-Men 2 probably has some of the most memorable scenes of the series; mutant storms the Whitehouse, Magneto’s escape from the plastic prison and the fight between Wolverine and Deathstrike. It’s well written, well acted and well directed and, along with
EDIT: When getting the pictures for this I remembered how great the Star Wars and Indiana Jones film posters are... Nice one Drew Struzan
Thanks for the read, Faith Westlake
wasd_blog@hotmail.co.uk
Wednesday 14 October 2009
A tale of three RPG’s. Part two.
In the kingdom of video games, there was another publisher by the name of Bioware, who also decided – “hey, wouldn’t it be great to make a Space RPG with lots of moral choices, great dialogue and an epic story? Its certainly like nothing we’ve ever done before…”
Mass effect is a game which blew me away from the very moments I loaded up the menu screen. The game radiates with deep narratives and excellently conceived video-game lore. Even from the first menu that you enter, it is clear that Bioware has focused on totally immersing the player into their rich tapestry of fiction. This is unsurprising taking into account the reputation Bioware has for video-game fiction (KOTOR <3). However, the game is not without its faults either.
I will first expand on Mass effects good qualities. The main quality that really stands out in Mass effect is how deep the game is. By this, I do not mean in a philosophical sense (although it is in some ways), I mean that the amount of content is quite literally overwhelming. The game takes place across the Milky Way. At least 10 clusters are accessible to the player. Each cluster has 2 or three solar systems. Each solar system has around 5 planets, most of which are playable. You get my point. To illustrate Mass effect’s scale I will mention my side quests panel. At around half way through the game it was swarmed with entries, most of them uncompleted, as almost every character you meet gives you a side quest. One of the great features of Mass effect is that these side quests are actually good. Unlike a few unnamed *cough* Assassins creed *cough* … RPG’s Ive played recently. The side quests in Mass effect range from bounty hunting across the galaxy, to simply interacting in the social world (you even get to meet a fan), and this is why they are so great – they are varied and complex. In essence, they’re not linear.
The feeling of depth is not without an immersive and excellent narrative. The voice acting and dialogue system are excellent, the character progression and social interaction is fantastic, and the characters motivation is also well presented. However, one minor drawback was that despite being able to start primary missions at any time, I found myself racing through the storyline because of my curiosity to reveal the next instalment of the story. Before I knew it, I had completed the game – which meant I had missed out on a ton of side quests. Granted, this adds to replayability, but it would have been nice to be able to enter side quests after the main missions were completed.
So, now on to the combat. Oh no. Mass effect is clearly not geared towards a genre which it tries to imitate – that genre is FPS. Unfortunately, the main missions are strictly linear and very repetitive, often leaving the player to platformer type gameplay. The enemies are not varied, neither are the levels. However, there are some saving graces to the combat. The special abilities are fun, and the ability to customise weapons and also buy/find upgrades keeps a sense of achievement present. Another negative point to add would be your squad mates. Why Bioware, why? Often, I would find myself using these guys as cannon fodder and completing the mission by myself because of how un-intuitive these guys are. They don’t look for cover, run into combat alone, and are considerably weaker; sometimes they even get in your line of sight!
Despite the combat, this game is a game of quality, often surprising you with what it offers, so don’t necessarily be put off by it because of one issue - and take it as an RPG which dares to cross genres. For better and for worse.
That will be all in this week’s instalment of Albert Bezman’s WASD blog. And remember, if you see me. You’re probably in, the twilight zone.
Mass effect is a game which blew me away from the very moments I loaded up the menu screen. The game radiates with deep narratives and excellently conceived video-game lore. Even from the first menu that you enter, it is clear that Bioware has focused on totally immersing the player into their rich tapestry of fiction. This is unsurprising taking into account the reputation Bioware has for video-game fiction (KOTOR <3). However, the game is not without its faults either.
I will first expand on Mass effects good qualities. The main quality that really stands out in Mass effect is how deep the game is. By this, I do not mean in a philosophical sense (although it is in some ways), I mean that the amount of content is quite literally overwhelming. The game takes place across the Milky Way. At least 10 clusters are accessible to the player. Each cluster has 2 or three solar systems. Each solar system has around 5 planets, most of which are playable. You get my point. To illustrate Mass effect’s scale I will mention my side quests panel. At around half way through the game it was swarmed with entries, most of them uncompleted, as almost every character you meet gives you a side quest. One of the great features of Mass effect is that these side quests are actually good. Unlike a few unnamed *cough* Assassins creed *cough* … RPG’s Ive played recently. The side quests in Mass effect range from bounty hunting across the galaxy, to simply interacting in the social world (you even get to meet a fan), and this is why they are so great – they are varied and complex. In essence, they’re not linear.
The feeling of depth is not without an immersive and excellent narrative. The voice acting and dialogue system are excellent, the character progression and social interaction is fantastic, and the characters motivation is also well presented. However, one minor drawback was that despite being able to start primary missions at any time, I found myself racing through the storyline because of my curiosity to reveal the next instalment of the story. Before I knew it, I had completed the game – which meant I had missed out on a ton of side quests. Granted, this adds to replayability, but it would have been nice to be able to enter side quests after the main missions were completed.
So, now on to the combat. Oh no. Mass effect is clearly not geared towards a genre which it tries to imitate – that genre is FPS. Unfortunately, the main missions are strictly linear and very repetitive, often leaving the player to platformer type gameplay. The enemies are not varied, neither are the levels. However, there are some saving graces to the combat. The special abilities are fun, and the ability to customise weapons and also buy/find upgrades keeps a sense of achievement present. Another negative point to add would be your squad mates. Why Bioware, why? Often, I would find myself using these guys as cannon fodder and completing the mission by myself because of how un-intuitive these guys are. They don’t look for cover, run into combat alone, and are considerably weaker; sometimes they even get in your line of sight!
Despite the combat, this game is a game of quality, often surprising you with what it offers, so don’t necessarily be put off by it because of one issue - and take it as an RPG which dares to cross genres. For better and for worse.
That will be all in this week’s instalment of Albert Bezman’s WASD blog. And remember, if you see me. You’re probably in, the twilight zone.
Monday 12 October 2009
Uncharted 2 Multiplayer Beta impressions (Stephen Gillespie)
The Uncharted 2 demo is over and tears have filled the eyes of Playstation users everywhere, where will we get our super polished free online shooting action now? So the question is was it any good, well let’s look at the statistics first. In the short period when the beta was working over twenty-seven years were spent in it worldwide. That is twenty-seven human years, that is over a quarter of a century spent playing one beta, that’s pretty impressive for the sequel to one of the most under appreciated games ever. Now I loved Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune, I think it is the second best game to grace this console (and computer) generation (second to Metal Gear Solid 4). What made it so good was the platforming and the cover based shooting which flowed so seamlessly. This made one great single player experience but when they announced that the second Uncharted was going to have multiplayer and not campaign co-op I was sceptical to say the least. It is a system that works so well in the campaign but is it really suited to multiplayer, can you pull off that balance without it feeling like gimmicky tacked on multi-player? Now I didn’t think it was going to work but I was definitely interested so as soon as I saw the beta up I nabbed it.
I have already pre-ordered the special edition of Uncharted 2 (that is how excited about this game I am) and was so excited about the single player and was hoping that the trophies were not multiplayer focused because I couldn’t imagine myself playing much online. Man was I wrong, I have already sunk lots of hours into the online. I have already tried to level myself up as much as I can and investing heavily in the addictive perk system. So what is it that makes Uncharted 2 online so special. Well let me start by saying I’m not a big online gamer. I used to play a lot of a certain MMO I have recently recovered from (it wasn’t WoW, I can’t afford monthly fees) but I only really online game if something really grips me. I love resistance 2 online and I played a lot of world at war Wii online but apart from that I am very picky about my online shooters. I just couldn’t get into Metal Gear Online and Resistance 1 online is just dead, only the elite ten people remain in maps made for about forty. So when I like an online shooter that is really high praise, and if I start sinking hours into it you know it is something special. In fact I am so impressed with uncharted 2 that I feel no need to get the latest Call of Duty when it comes out.
One thing which sets Uncharted apart is that it is just so different, for starters it is third person which cancels out all CoD parallels and leaves you with the next best in class: Gears of War. However this is once again a poor comparison, Gears of War is slow and heavy, you get in cover and you stay there. Uncharted 2 plays out at an insane pace, you are always moving and the movement is so fast. It is cover based but you can’t just sit in cover like you can in Gears of War and just have overly long stop and pop gunfights. In Uncharted you have to constantly think about verticality, I mentioned earlier about the sublime platforming in the original game and this is in the online. If you just stay in cover then somebody will climb up a building behind you and BAM! Either take you out from behind with a brilliantly animated brutal stealth kill with his bare hands (a personal highlight) or simply shoot you. This makes sure you keep moving and this makes for some intense gameplay. So the core gameplay is really solid, team death match is stupidly fun and the mix of platforming and crazy weapons around everywhere means pure awesomeness. So the core gameplay is just superb, but what about variety?
The variety in Uncharted’s multiplayer is actually its strongest suit, and this is only the beta. You have deathmatches; objective based gameplay and co-op modes. The deathmatches are all team based but the weapon set is always mixed up. When you are through with matchmaking and are all teamed up and ready it is time for the usual map voting. Now this is a multiplayer standard but the interesting bit here is the other options it gives you. You can have a match with just pistols and grenades which is another favourite, because pistols were possibly the best weapons in the original game- headshots aplenty- and grenades plus multiplayer equals ten gallons of pure win. You can also have a match of sniper rifles and over powered pistols (one shot kill fest also equal a whole lot of win) and the most fun mode which is just RPGs, nothing else. This mode is insane and if you’re like me you will laugh your whole way through the whole game until you accidentally kill a team-mate and they send you a personal message with the subject name PRICK but no actual message, which seemed a tad harsh. These modes add variety to the simple deathmatch and all of them are fun, you will get normal usually and all modes are voted for so you won'’ get things forced upon you.
The objective based gameplay is really awesome, unfortunately I didn’t get to play chain reaction and I have no idea what it is. I did play plunder though, which is capture the flag, with treasure! The treasure is heavy but it can be thrown and you can shoot with a pistol while holding it. This mode encourages co-operation, which doesn’t always happen and is really hard but really fun. It is so tense when you are limping along with the treasure and you realise the whole other team is aiming at you. Scary stuff but amazing stuff. The last part of the package is the co-op; I only tried one co-op mode, which was plunder against waves of enemies getting harder every time. Co-operation is needed, so hard but oh so fun! I played this with a mate and there was a lot of death but a lot of fun and ‘OH SNAP’ moments. A particular highlight being my friend running around snapping necks whilst I went on a sniper rifle rampage of perfect headshots.
So the gameplay is just phenomenal and the presentation is just awesome. The graphics are just so good; the naughty dog engine 2.0 really shines. This is one pretty looking game! So the gameplay is varied but how much customisability is there? Quite a lot, you can chose different player skins from the two sides, heroes and villains, and then battle it out. I chose Sully to start with for comedy value but now use newcomer Tanzin because he has one sweet hat. You can buy new skins with experience gained. Because Uncharted is all treasure hunting stuff you don’t gain experience you get money, which is super cool. You can chose to buy the perks you want when you unlock them at the correct level and you can buy co-op weapon upgrades and of course more skins. This just adds another addicting layer to the already overly addictive online. This is one online experience that PS3 gamers should not miss! If you have a PS3 and you like games get Uncharted 2 because the campaign will be superb and the online is about as good as online gets. This multiplayer comes with a gleaming WASD recommendation. Now Uncharted 2 is coming out this week, so look out for more impressions here, on WASD!
Thanks,
Stephen Gillespie
Email us at wasd_blog@hotmail.co.uk
I have already pre-ordered the special edition of Uncharted 2 (that is how excited about this game I am) and was so excited about the single player and was hoping that the trophies were not multiplayer focused because I couldn’t imagine myself playing much online. Man was I wrong, I have already sunk lots of hours into the online. I have already tried to level myself up as much as I can and investing heavily in the addictive perk system. So what is it that makes Uncharted 2 online so special. Well let me start by saying I’m not a big online gamer. I used to play a lot of a certain MMO I have recently recovered from (it wasn’t WoW, I can’t afford monthly fees) but I only really online game if something really grips me. I love resistance 2 online and I played a lot of world at war Wii online but apart from that I am very picky about my online shooters. I just couldn’t get into Metal Gear Online and Resistance 1 online is just dead, only the elite ten people remain in maps made for about forty. So when I like an online shooter that is really high praise, and if I start sinking hours into it you know it is something special. In fact I am so impressed with uncharted 2 that I feel no need to get the latest Call of Duty when it comes out.
One thing which sets Uncharted apart is that it is just so different, for starters it is third person which cancels out all CoD parallels and leaves you with the next best in class: Gears of War. However this is once again a poor comparison, Gears of War is slow and heavy, you get in cover and you stay there. Uncharted 2 plays out at an insane pace, you are always moving and the movement is so fast. It is cover based but you can’t just sit in cover like you can in Gears of War and just have overly long stop and pop gunfights. In Uncharted you have to constantly think about verticality, I mentioned earlier about the sublime platforming in the original game and this is in the online. If you just stay in cover then somebody will climb up a building behind you and BAM! Either take you out from behind with a brilliantly animated brutal stealth kill with his bare hands (a personal highlight) or simply shoot you. This makes sure you keep moving and this makes for some intense gameplay. So the core gameplay is really solid, team death match is stupidly fun and the mix of platforming and crazy weapons around everywhere means pure awesomeness. So the core gameplay is just superb, but what about variety?
The variety in Uncharted’s multiplayer is actually its strongest suit, and this is only the beta. You have deathmatches; objective based gameplay and co-op modes. The deathmatches are all team based but the weapon set is always mixed up. When you are through with matchmaking and are all teamed up and ready it is time for the usual map voting. Now this is a multiplayer standard but the interesting bit here is the other options it gives you. You can have a match with just pistols and grenades which is another favourite, because pistols were possibly the best weapons in the original game- headshots aplenty- and grenades plus multiplayer equals ten gallons of pure win. You can also have a match of sniper rifles and over powered pistols (one shot kill fest also equal a whole lot of win) and the most fun mode which is just RPGs, nothing else. This mode is insane and if you’re like me you will laugh your whole way through the whole game until you accidentally kill a team-mate and they send you a personal message with the subject name PRICK but no actual message, which seemed a tad harsh. These modes add variety to the simple deathmatch and all of them are fun, you will get normal usually and all modes are voted for so you won'’ get things forced upon you.
The objective based gameplay is really awesome, unfortunately I didn’t get to play chain reaction and I have no idea what it is. I did play plunder though, which is capture the flag, with treasure! The treasure is heavy but it can be thrown and you can shoot with a pistol while holding it. This mode encourages co-operation, which doesn’t always happen and is really hard but really fun. It is so tense when you are limping along with the treasure and you realise the whole other team is aiming at you. Scary stuff but amazing stuff. The last part of the package is the co-op; I only tried one co-op mode, which was plunder against waves of enemies getting harder every time. Co-operation is needed, so hard but oh so fun! I played this with a mate and there was a lot of death but a lot of fun and ‘OH SNAP’ moments. A particular highlight being my friend running around snapping necks whilst I went on a sniper rifle rampage of perfect headshots.
So the gameplay is just phenomenal and the presentation is just awesome. The graphics are just so good; the naughty dog engine 2.0 really shines. This is one pretty looking game! So the gameplay is varied but how much customisability is there? Quite a lot, you can chose different player skins from the two sides, heroes and villains, and then battle it out. I chose Sully to start with for comedy value but now use newcomer Tanzin because he has one sweet hat. You can buy new skins with experience gained. Because Uncharted is all treasure hunting stuff you don’t gain experience you get money, which is super cool. You can chose to buy the perks you want when you unlock them at the correct level and you can buy co-op weapon upgrades and of course more skins. This just adds another addicting layer to the already overly addictive online. This is one online experience that PS3 gamers should not miss! If you have a PS3 and you like games get Uncharted 2 because the campaign will be superb and the online is about as good as online gets. This multiplayer comes with a gleaming WASD recommendation. Now Uncharted 2 is coming out this week, so look out for more impressions here, on WASD!
Thanks,
Stephen Gillespie
Email us at wasd_blog@hotmail.co.uk
Friday 9 October 2009
The last word...
Not so long ago some crazy Russian started an arguement about the state of the PC, now him and that Stephen fellow both voiced their opinions but we promised to leave the last word to the readers so here it is.
This time it is the view of Ashley Dorsett who emailed us on the subject:
'Had a whole essay's worth about this but couldn't copy and paste it over...
Basically I don't understand why people say PC is dead and console is king. There are several reasons I know why they say it buts its useless. I agree with what you said, and a big thing about the PC is it has the flexablity and creativity in which the consoles don't have. They tried but in my eyes failed with little big planet. If you compare this game to other simular games on the PC E.g. Garry's Mod, it just doesn't compare. Ok in little big planet you get set items to make set things and play in side scroller. Where as with garry's mod you can put other source based games into it then do anything you want with the characters, then you can download other things like cars etc and make your own tracks like from need for speed (Quite fun doing that actually). Seeing as that game is only £5, came out years ago and was orginally a free mod, and yet it still beats current games.
FPS, well you are correct again, analog is not as good as mouse and keyboard, its fluant and easy to move around. also when you are aiming you don't zoom past the enemy 7 times before hitting them once with a bullet. I don't get how some console players say the amount of buttons put PC at a disadvantage, its easier.
But this one might just be me because I have been playing Doom & Quake since I was like 5 on the PC.
Theres are some style games that PC doesn't win at but they don't release a lot of them, these being adventure/action games such as "Batman: Arkham Asylum" and sidescroller games. These types of games normally come out as download only off steam.
Finally the cost aspect. Xbox players normally bring this up most because there whole £150 cheaply made console. This is true that it is the cheapest beating the PC by far, having to spend around £500 for a good one but you can get one for around £300 which is ok.They also bring up the fact that PC needs to be updated every 1 to 3 years and rant about that. But even though this is true it does not mean its still more expensive. What they care to forget about is the fact that PC gets its updates 100% free and do not have to pay for xbox live. One years worth of saving via this way means you can easily buy that needed graphics card. But then finally the games themself are £10 cheaper. You can now buy Bioshock, Elderscroll, Team Fortress 2, Half Life 2 episode 1, Portal, Mirrors Edge, Prince of Persia and Fallout 3 for under £60 on PC if you look in the right places. Where as it would cost around £100 for xbox's cheap ways. Theres no need to mention PS3 because we know it is more expensive than Xbox. So through all these little costs that Xbox requires it actually costs more to run.
PC can only do 1 thing as a mistake and this is to make the games so advance that the general public cant play the games. This was seen with crysis, if you wanna spend a lot of money on your computer theres nothing stopping you but not everyone does. Those types of games are for people who want to "Flex their computers muscles". So they need to target major audiences like Activision have with Call of Duty and Like Maxis did with The Sims 3.
PC is seen as the dying grandad but it truely isn't. I'd say its the young farther who knows best and all. It would also be very naive and gets confused at some things but everyone does. This being action adventures and sidescrollers. But I also see consoles as the teenager who thinks he knows best and all. Much like its fanboys (Mainly xbox ones).
PC still has more to show and will be king of the game for a long time with releases like CoD4:MW2, L4D2 being released. (Can't wait... they look so good...). It is the way it is and always was and will be for a long time. Online wise, faster, easier, cheaper, better, more updates and with Microsoft's greedy ways they will get money out of you in anyway possiable.
P.s. Well I guess it turned into an Essay @.@ Sorry about that. Plus I'm too lazy to read through it all for errors, so I might have gone off track and missed the point in the way I was writing, just wrote what came to mind.
P.s.s. Also what Steam games you play, other than counter strike.
Ashley D.'
This time it is the view of Ashley Dorsett who emailed us on the subject:
'Had a whole essay's worth about this but couldn't copy and paste it over...
Basically I don't understand why people say PC is dead and console is king. There are several reasons I know why they say it buts its useless. I agree with what you said, and a big thing about the PC is it has the flexablity and creativity in which the consoles don't have. They tried but in my eyes failed with little big planet. If you compare this game to other simular games on the PC E.g. Garry's Mod, it just doesn't compare. Ok in little big planet you get set items to make set things and play in side scroller. Where as with garry's mod you can put other source based games into it then do anything you want with the characters, then you can download other things like cars etc and make your own tracks like from need for speed (Quite fun doing that actually). Seeing as that game is only £5, came out years ago and was orginally a free mod, and yet it still beats current games.
FPS, well you are correct again, analog is not as good as mouse and keyboard, its fluant and easy to move around. also when you are aiming you don't zoom past the enemy 7 times before hitting them once with a bullet. I don't get how some console players say the amount of buttons put PC at a disadvantage, its easier.
But this one might just be me because I have been playing Doom & Quake since I was like 5 on the PC.
Theres are some style games that PC doesn't win at but they don't release a lot of them, these being adventure/action games such as "Batman: Arkham Asylum" and sidescroller games. These types of games normally come out as download only off steam.
Finally the cost aspect. Xbox players normally bring this up most because there whole £150 cheaply made console. This is true that it is the cheapest beating the PC by far, having to spend around £500 for a good one but you can get one for around £300 which is ok.They also bring up the fact that PC needs to be updated every 1 to 3 years and rant about that. But even though this is true it does not mean its still more expensive. What they care to forget about is the fact that PC gets its updates 100% free and do not have to pay for xbox live. One years worth of saving via this way means you can easily buy that needed graphics card. But then finally the games themself are £10 cheaper. You can now buy Bioshock, Elderscroll, Team Fortress 2, Half Life 2 episode 1, Portal, Mirrors Edge, Prince of Persia and Fallout 3 for under £60 on PC if you look in the right places. Where as it would cost around £100 for xbox's cheap ways. Theres no need to mention PS3 because we know it is more expensive than Xbox. So through all these little costs that Xbox requires it actually costs more to run.
PC can only do 1 thing as a mistake and this is to make the games so advance that the general public cant play the games. This was seen with crysis, if you wanna spend a lot of money on your computer theres nothing stopping you but not everyone does. Those types of games are for people who want to "Flex their computers muscles". So they need to target major audiences like Activision have with Call of Duty and Like Maxis did with The Sims 3.
PC is seen as the dying grandad but it truely isn't. I'd say its the young farther who knows best and all. It would also be very naive and gets confused at some things but everyone does. This being action adventures and sidescrollers. But I also see consoles as the teenager who thinks he knows best and all. Much like its fanboys (Mainly xbox ones).
PC still has more to show and will be king of the game for a long time with releases like CoD4:MW2, L4D2 being released. (Can't wait... they look so good...). It is the way it is and always was and will be for a long time. Online wise, faster, easier, cheaper, better, more updates and with Microsoft's greedy ways they will get money out of you in anyway possiable.
P.s. Well I guess it turned into an Essay @.@ Sorry about that. Plus I'm too lazy to read through it all for errors, so I might have gone off track and missed the point in the way I was writing, just wrote what came to mind.
P.s.s. Also what Steam games you play, other than counter strike.
Ashley D.'
Thursday 8 October 2009
Is imagination dead? (Faith Westlake)
After trips to the cinema recently and a blog about book to film adaptations I stopped to take a think about original ideas in Hollywood. Here's a list of the current film releases (08.10.09)
(500) Days of Summer (Original Screenplay…grr)
Aliens in the Attic (Original Screenplay)
Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs (Based on a book)
Creation (Based on the biography of Darwin written by Randal Keynes)
District 9 (Original Screenplay)
Dorian Gray (Based on a book)
Driving Aphrodite (Original Screenplay)
Fame (Remake)
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (Based on a book)
The Invention of Lying (Original Screenplay)
Julie & Julia (Based on a book)
Pandorum (Original Screenplay)
The Soloist (Based on a true story)
Surrogates (Based on a comic)
Zombieland (Original Screenplay)
Using my GCSE grade maths skills I’ve managed to work out that 46% (PLEASE correct me if I’m wrong) of the films listed above are based on original screenplays. Honestly that’s a lot more than I thought as it seems that whenever I go to the cinema seems to be dominated by remakes and adaptations with the only original ideas being rom-coms and horrors and it’s debatable over how original those really are …
It is understandable that, as we are in a recession, larger studios are more focused on bringing the money in than investing in new ideas and greater quality. Sadly it is much easier and safer to bank in on an already successful franchise and make a film where you are almost certain you will make a profit. Although, amid the mass-produced nonsense we’ve endured this year, some films have managed to break this mould namely the best film of the year so far Moon. Moon is based on an original idea by the film’s director Duncan Jones and the screenplay was written by Nathan Parker and is an independent film. Independent films act as a glow of light over the commercial trash which plagues our cinemas every year. Independent films, most of the time, seems to be based on an idea that the director/writer is very passionate about and as it can be difficult to get people to share your enthusiasm and get these films made. Although sometimes films based on original screenplay can still be lame (see (500) Days of Summer whose writer’s wrote the screenplay for the stellar Pink Panther 2…) Moon is based on intelligent sci-fi classics such as 2001: A Space Odyssey and Soylent Green and easily deserves a place in their ranks (Steve’s Review: http://wasd-blog.blogspot.com/2009/08/film-review-moon-stephen-gillespie.html)
As you can most gather from my last post there are some films that aren’t based on original ideas that are still fantastic. There’s nothing wrong with adaptations but they can be extremely annoying if it’s just another go at milking the cash cow.
A much shorter post today (trying to cut down) but on an ending note…. My favourite film, American Beauty, is an Original Screenplay. So I’m asking what’s your favourite film and is it an original idea or an adaptation?
(500) Days of Summer (Original Screenplay…grr)
Aliens in the Attic (Original Screenplay)
Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs (Based on a book)
Creation (Based on the biography of Darwin written by Randal Keynes)
District 9 (Original Screenplay)
Dorian Gray (Based on a book)
Driving Aphrodite (Original Screenplay)
Fame (Remake)
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (Based on a book)
The Invention of Lying (Original Screenplay)
Julie & Julia (Based on a book)
Pandorum (Original Screenplay)
The Soloist (Based on a true story)
Surrogates (Based on a comic)
Zombieland (Original Screenplay)
Using my GCSE grade maths skills I’ve managed to work out that 46% (PLEASE correct me if I’m wrong) of the films listed above are based on original screenplays. Honestly that’s a lot more than I thought as it seems that whenever I go to the cinema seems to be dominated by remakes and adaptations with the only original ideas being rom-coms and horrors and it’s debatable over how original those really are …
It is understandable that, as we are in a recession, larger studios are more focused on bringing the money in than investing in new ideas and greater quality. Sadly it is much easier and safer to bank in on an already successful franchise and make a film where you are almost certain you will make a profit. Although, amid the mass-produced nonsense we’ve endured this year, some films have managed to break this mould namely the best film of the year so far Moon. Moon is based on an original idea by the film’s director Duncan Jones and the screenplay was written by Nathan Parker and is an independent film. Independent films act as a glow of light over the commercial trash which plagues our cinemas every year. Independent films, most of the time, seems to be based on an idea that the director/writer is very passionate about and as it can be difficult to get people to share your enthusiasm and get these films made. Although sometimes films based on original screenplay can still be lame (see (500) Days of Summer whose writer’s wrote the screenplay for the stellar Pink Panther 2…) Moon is based on intelligent sci-fi classics such as 2001: A Space Odyssey and Soylent Green and easily deserves a place in their ranks (Steve’s Review: http://wasd-blog.blogspot.com/2009/08/film-review-moon-stephen-gillespie.html)
As you can most gather from my last post there are some films that aren’t based on original ideas that are still fantastic. There’s nothing wrong with adaptations but they can be extremely annoying if it’s just another go at milking the cash cow.
A much shorter post today (trying to cut down) but on an ending note…. My favourite film, American Beauty, is an Original Screenplay. So I’m asking what’s your favourite film and is it an original idea or an adaptation?
Wednesday 7 October 2009
Great RPG's (Albert Bezman)
Disclaimer: Ok, before I start, I just want to expand upon the title a little. As much as I would love to, I haven’t played every single (good) RPG ever made, so just bear with me a little.
A tale of three RPG’s. Part One.
There once was a publisher named Ubisoft Montreal, who one day decided – “hey, wouldn’t it be a great idea if we made a GTA/holy land/Ninja assassin crossover game?”. And so, the next day, after a lot of smoking and garlic-eating, Assassin’s Creed was born.
A little while later came along a young man by the name of Albert ‘PC OWNS CONSOLES ALL THE WAY’ Bezman, and he saw this GTA/holy land/ninja assassin crossover game and said
“Wow, this GTA/holy land/ninja assassin crossover game looks fun”.
And so he played as Altair, and these are his thoughts.
Assassin’s creed is a truly narrative driven game. If I had to sum it up in one word, it would be: different. This is because it removes many of the archetypal elements of RPG’s and replaces them with a focus on narrative. For example, the only way Altair can obtain new equipment is by advancing the story, and even then, there is no system to manually upgrade your gear, and you can’t pick up equipment either. This essentially has two influences on game play. One is that you aren’t going to be grinding the same old NPC’s looking around for gear to sell to a merchant NPC which will enable you to obtain that level 80 adamantium armour. This can be both a good thing and a bad thing, as lack of an item tree definitely makes this game feel shallow, and certainly impacts playing time and replayability. On the other hand, it keeps the focus on the action, and ensures that you are never bored. This is particularly relevant to big open RPG’s like Oblivion and Fallout, as often, scouring the land for bounty is somewhat a menial task. Another way lack of items alters gameplay is the gamer’s perception of the hero. A big selling point of RPG’s has always been customization. The fact that the player can make so many decisions has often emulated a kind of matrix for the player to interact with. Essentially, because the player is in charge of the characters actions, it feels like they are conducting them instead of a distant protagonist. And because Assassin’s creed has very little choice when it comes to gameplay, it feels like playing a movie, where every scene is narrated by an outsider, instead of letting the player call the shots.
Saying this, some parts that Ubisoft Montreal do are absolutely fantastic. One example is free-running. Without a doubt, after playing this game with so much freedom, I found other games limiting because I could not scale everything in sight. Before I had played the game, I thought that this was just a gimmick, but after experiencing it for myself I have to say that it is truly amazing and is as revolutionary to game-play movement as GTA 3 was.
Another awesome part of Assassins creed is the narrative itself. The story is fantastic, and the way it is executed is great too. The pace is well kept, with revelations and twists awaiting you at every turn. This makes this game a ‘one play through’ kind of game. However, I can guarantee you that this one play through will be fantastic!
One last thing that I will mention is the graphics. I played it on a mid-range DX10 PC with the graphics turned all the way up, and there was little lag with stunning visuals. Well done Ubisoft!
Stay tuned for next week’s article which will bring us into the mysterious (and freaking awesome) world of Mass effect.
That’s all for this week, B man signin out.
Sunday 4 October 2009
Playstation Network Demo impressions 2 (Stephen Gillespie)
Today we have to interesting games, both movie based (well Clone Wars is more TV based but it's based off a movie franchise), both based on CGI products and both very different from yesterday's demos-they were really good.
Now in order to start this off its important to point out that I am a massive Star Wars fan. The Empire Strikes back is, factually speaking, the greatest cinematic achievement of all time and if anything has Star Wars in the title I am automatically interested. So, obviously, when I see a demo for the latest Star Wars game on the PlayStation Network I think, 'AWESOME!' This was a huge mistake, this game is an insult to Star Wars. Let me start with the good however... the series it is based on is fantastic. The bad is pretty much everything, you get the choice of a Jedi level or a Clone level so to start with I chose clone (the infantry battles in star wars games are usually the most fun, Battlefront 2 anyone?). Soon my television screen was assaulted by bad graphics and what is pretty much a top down shooter, but not quite, with an absolutely terrible control scheme. Moving around was confusing because your a darn clone and you all look the same, and when the camera is not focused on you you could be any of them. Also the demo seemed to randomly make me swap characters, maybe it was me doing it but it was bloody confusing. The controls make moving feel awkward and are just really unresponsive, clones are supposed to be tactical soldiers but all that happens is that you run around in circles whilst being gunned to death by droids who just stand there. You can try and shoot them but the aiming is just so bad that you will get hit way more than you hit them. The cover system is really odd also, you crouch behind a random obstacle and you are pretty much exposed from the waist up. You can shoot over the cover without moving yet the enemies can't shoot you, really quite odd. So the camera, graphics, controls and general game play is just so terrible. Also the attempts at story, now I know it is a demo but at the end of the level it tries to do an emotional scene which is yawn inducing, predictable and falls flat on its face. Avoid this at all costs.
But of course there are Jedi levels, are they any better? No, apparently Jedi can take control of droids if they double jump on their heads. No they cannot, they have a freaking light saber. Also they can block blaster bolts but not reflect them, that is half the fun! Also once again the camera, controls and level design are so bad that you may find yourself falling off when trying to execute a precise jump. The camera is put at a really weird place which makes even simple platforming a nuisance.
Honestly, this game is pretty much pure awfulness. Avoid at all costs! Lucas Arts have betrayed me for the last time [initiate force choke!].
Worth a download? Not even if they payed you! This game will offender any gamer but being a fan of the franchise makes it even more heart breaking.
PS3 graphics? Really?
Now in order to start this off its important to point out that I am a massive Star Wars fan. The Empire Strikes back is, factually speaking, the greatest cinematic achievement of all time and if anything has Star Wars in the title I am automatically interested. So, obviously, when I see a demo for the latest Star Wars game on the PlayStation Network I think, 'AWESOME!' This was a huge mistake, this game is an insult to Star Wars. Let me start with the good however... the series it is based on is fantastic. The bad is pretty much everything, you get the choice of a Jedi level or a Clone level so to start with I chose clone (the infantry battles in star wars games are usually the most fun, Battlefront 2 anyone?). Soon my television screen was assaulted by bad graphics and what is pretty much a top down shooter, but not quite, with an absolutely terrible control scheme. Moving around was confusing because your a darn clone and you all look the same, and when the camera is not focused on you you could be any of them. Also the demo seemed to randomly make me swap characters, maybe it was me doing it but it was bloody confusing. The controls make moving feel awkward and are just really unresponsive, clones are supposed to be tactical soldiers but all that happens is that you run around in circles whilst being gunned to death by droids who just stand there. You can try and shoot them but the aiming is just so bad that you will get hit way more than you hit them. The cover system is really odd also, you crouch behind a random obstacle and you are pretty much exposed from the waist up. You can shoot over the cover without moving yet the enemies can't shoot you, really quite odd. So the camera, graphics, controls and general game play is just so terrible. Also the attempts at story, now I know it is a demo but at the end of the level it tries to do an emotional scene which is yawn inducing, predictable and falls flat on its face. Avoid this at all costs.
But of course there are Jedi levels, are they any better? No, apparently Jedi can take control of droids if they double jump on their heads. No they cannot, they have a freaking light saber. Also they can block blaster bolts but not reflect them, that is half the fun! Also once again the camera, controls and level design are so bad that you may find yourself falling off when trying to execute a precise jump. The camera is put at a really weird place which makes even simple platforming a nuisance.
Honestly, this game is pretty much pure awfulness. Avoid at all costs! Lucas Arts have betrayed me for the last time [initiate force choke!].
Worth a download? Not even if they payed you! This game will offender any gamer but being a fan of the franchise makes it even more heart breaking.
PS3 graphics? Really?
Up is quite hard to write about because the problem with it is, it is just so unremarkable. Nothing stands out, the gameplay is repeitive and overly simple, you will solve the same stupidly simple puzzle many times and just generally stroll around a boring looking environment in a bored fashion. The game is just very bland and will provide no challenge for anyone. This may be a good thing because it is obviously a very co-op focused game, good for you to play with the kids. But admit it, you don't have kids! You're reading a gaming blog! Even if you do though your kid will even get bored, the game got repitative in the demo and I looked up a review of the full 360 version which said pretty much the same thing about the whole game. More rushed out bland movie games, it will sell alot and it really shouldn't, not worth a look.
Worth a download? No- boring, easy and plain. Exact opposites of what a good platformer should be.
Worth a download? No- boring, easy and plain. Exact opposites of what a good platformer should be.
The characters faces sum it up, even being stalked by a giant water snake is boring in this game
Saturday 3 October 2009
Playstation Network Demo impressions (Stephen Gillespie)
This is the first blog of a new feature, hands on impressions of all the latest demos on the playstation network. I will start with a blast form the very recent past
Brutal Legend is the latest game from gaming legend Tim Schafer (and if you don't know who he is, why are you on a gaming blog? Well I suppose you could read Faith's articles because they are very good but seriously you don't know of Tim Schafer, you cannot read on until you hath visited the mighty wikipedia!). The concept of Brutal Legend is of course insane, it's a Tim Schafer game after all. You are a roadie who when he bleeds on his belt he accidently makes a crazy motorhead style giant demon bull thing come to life on stage and decapitate the tweeny pop metal band playing. This of course makes Eddie (the roadie) get sent to a nightmarish hellscape that could have been ripped from the front cover of any classic heavy metal album. The game is really funny and the gameplay is super fun. You soon get an axe for decapitations, which are gratifyingly bloody, and a guitar that sends down lightning on your foes. Soon you are slicing up foes left right and centre mixed up with crazy lightning and lots of blood, sure it gives you the option to turn off gore and profanities but who would want to? This was the most fun demo I've played for a long time, it included slicing up metal priests, fighting monstrous nuns and driving a hot rod through both. To top off the demo you get to fight a boss, which is a giant worm with a massive mouth that tries to tongue you, the game even makes the french kissing joke for me. This looks like it is going to be a definite purchase on ROCKTOBER 16th!
Worth a downlaod? Hell yes!
So that's two down, come back next time for the low down 'Star Wars the Clone Wars- Republic Heroes' and 'Disney Pixar's Up'.
Thanks for readin,
Stephen Gillespie
The Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2 demo is awesome. Definately check it out if you like Ninjas and dismemberment. The dismemberment may not be as bloody as its 360 counterpart Ninja Gaiden 2 but Sigma 2 has an improved graphics engine, three more playable characters (all top heavy lady folk) and multiplayer. The game play is really great and really fun but not as insanely hard as the original. The difficulty may have been slightly toned down and more difficulty choices are available but the main difference is the game has been made less cheap, you will no longer die thinking the game cheated. Instead you will die because your just not darn ninja enough and you should stop all that going outdoors you do and just sit and play more darned video game- do you get me!!
Worth a download? If you're ninja enough!
Worth a download? If you're ninja enough!
Ryu and his new possy (minus the new leather clad one)
Warning, the sixaxis is used to make the... ahem... bosoms jiggle
Plus or minus? You decide.
Warning, the sixaxis is used to make the... ahem... bosoms jiggle
Plus or minus? You decide.
Brutal Legend is the latest game from gaming legend Tim Schafer (and if you don't know who he is, why are you on a gaming blog? Well I suppose you could read Faith's articles because they are very good but seriously you don't know of Tim Schafer, you cannot read on until you hath visited the mighty wikipedia!). The concept of Brutal Legend is of course insane, it's a Tim Schafer game after all. You are a roadie who when he bleeds on his belt he accidently makes a crazy motorhead style giant demon bull thing come to life on stage and decapitate the tweeny pop metal band playing. This of course makes Eddie (the roadie) get sent to a nightmarish hellscape that could have been ripped from the front cover of any classic heavy metal album. The game is really funny and the gameplay is super fun. You soon get an axe for decapitations, which are gratifyingly bloody, and a guitar that sends down lightning on your foes. Soon you are slicing up foes left right and centre mixed up with crazy lightning and lots of blood, sure it gives you the option to turn off gore and profanities but who would want to? This was the most fun demo I've played for a long time, it included slicing up metal priests, fighting monstrous nuns and driving a hot rod through both. To top off the demo you get to fight a boss, which is a giant worm with a massive mouth that tries to tongue you, the game even makes the french kissing joke for me. This looks like it is going to be a definite purchase on ROCKTOBER 16th!
Worth a downlaod? Hell yes!
So that's two down, come back next time for the low down 'Star Wars the Clone Wars- Republic Heroes' and 'Disney Pixar's Up'.
Thanks for readin,
Stephen Gillespie
Thursday 1 October 2009
Films Vs. Books (Faith Westlake)
One of the few things that equal my love of films is my love of books. 99.9% of the time when I decide to watch film adaptations of my favourite books I’m one of those annoying people who comes out of the cinema with a whole list of things they’ve done wrong but when making criticism it has to be remembered that literature and film are two extremely different art forms. A scene that is subtle but vital in a novel can be lost in a film adaption as it doesn’t have the same cinematic qualities needed for a big screen adaption. Film makers have been drawing inspiration from books for decades. In fact Margaret Mitchell’s “Gone with the Wind” is regarded as the first real blockbuster when it was shown in 1939. I love films, I love books but when the two mediums collide is it just a recipe for disaster?
Let’s start with a good adaption….
Anybody who has spoken to me for more than five minutes should know how much I love Stephen King. God only knows how awful some on Stephen King’s adaptations can be (Children of the Corn V: Fields of Terror anyone?) but two of the novellas from the “Different Seasons” collection, dare I say it, are better films that books. I would go with Rob Reiner’s “Stand by Me” as adapted from the novella “The Body” but that adaption is so faithful with most of the dialogue kept exactly the same that they are too similar really to point out the differences which improve that film so I’m going for one of the best films ever made: The Shawshank Redemption.
Frank Darabount knows his Stephen King. His first major break was his adaption of King’s short story “The Woman in the Room” into a short film. Stephen King has always supported aspiring young film makers and famously sold Darabount the rights to his “Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption” novella for just $1. Darabount has gone on to direct such other King based classics as “The Green Mile” and the more recent “The Mist”. Although I touched upon the differences in the presentation of the wardens in my “Top 5 Movie Villains”, a change for the better by the way, there are other essential changes that were made from page to screen.
If I had to pick the quintessential scene in this film it just has to be the record scene. A beautifully scripted, acted and directed scene which really sets the tone for the movie (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=se8TM696HRY) but yet this classic piece of modern cinema was never included in the book but on screen it is perfection. If you were to read about Andy defying the warden with classic opera it just wouldn’t have the same effect as hearing the song and seeing the defiant look in his eyes as he turns up the record player.
In the novel the character of Red is a red-haired Irishman but Darabount was sure from the start that he wanted Morgan Freeman for the role. If I’m honest I can’t understand how he could have read the novella and thought Morgan Freeman should play this guy but the choice was truly inspired and now there’s no other Red in my mind. *SPOILERS* Another change is that in the film Tommy (the man who knows the truth about Andy) is ordered to be shot by the Warden but in the film he is just transferred. Although the shooting shows those who are watching the film that Andy’s false conviction is absolute and also reinforces how evil the warden really is. Great change, great scene, great movie. The Shawshank Redemption still rates #1 on IMDB’s Top 250 and rightly so. If you haven’t seen this film then DO as it’s great. If you haven’t read the novella…well maybe if you’re a Stephen King fan but other than that no worries. I could talk about this film for ages but really if you’ve seen it and if you haven’t then get busy.
Now a bad adaptation…
In February 2002 after great critical and financial success with Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring New Line Cinema decided “Hmm what book trilogy can we slaughter, gut and market as good ole family fun” and they stumbled upon Phillip Pullman’s Dark Materials trilogy. The Dark Materials is one of the more interesting and intelligent children’s series written in modern times and has a massive fan base. The film adaptation resulted in the truly awful “Golden Compass”. Don’t be fooled by the fact that this film is “Academy Award Winning” as it’s for the Best Special Effects which really should have gone to Transformers…
So why do I hate this film so much, well number one is drains all the good elements of the books and leaves a naked, soulless film and number two I am a gigantic film snob. So who is there to blame for this monstrosity? Northern Lights is primarily a philosophical novel and the Magisterium is a representation of organised religion, regarded to be the equivalent to the Catholic Church that has strayed far from its roots. So in order to increase revenue from America’s religious communities the whole debate between philosophy and religion is glanced over at best but really what was the point? The Catholic League called for a boycott of the film anyway and said it doesn’t matter that the film has been cut as it will encourage children to read the books?!? Oh well that’s cool, I mean reading a child’s series of books will obviously cause me to renounce God, better send round the book burning mobile. Let’s watch the Chronicles of Narnia instead… Obviously this doesn’t represent the view of all Catholics and I’m sure there weren’t objections for the everyday believer although some religious groups have a tendency to complain about films they haven’t even seem *ahem* Angels and Demons *ahem*. Also the revenue from the USA was disappointing anyway so these changes just seem completely ill-advised.
The acting in this film is perfectly fine. It doesn’t lower the film in any way although Jason Isaacs as Lord Ariel would have been very fun… So acting isn’t a problem. Well what about direction? Well Chris Weitz (soon to be of New Moon fame) directed About a Boy and that’s a good film and this film is well shot. So direction seems all good… Ok so screenplay. I have already mentioned that I think diluting the themes from the book is just ridiculous this film was made purely for a quick buck which is all well and good but couldn’t you have settled for a nice commercial action thriller New Line rather that pillaging this series? Although despite the screenplay the thing that really gets me going has to be the editing. The book has a perfect cliff hanger ending *SPOILERS* Lord Asriel cuts the bond between Roger and his dæmon creating a portal to other worlds. The novel ends with Lyra walks through not knowing what awaits her on the other side. Dramatic huh? Oh well not according to New Line who end the thing with Lyra and Roger in a hot air balloon bigging up Lord Asriel. Oh well that be great at the start of the next film when he kills you in the first 10 minutes eh Roger? Chris Weitz says that some areas of development had been “an awful experience” due to the editing that the studio insisted on and in fact Weitz did shot the original ending but the scenes will be used at the beginning of The Subtle Knife (if it ever gets made) despite that making no sense.
I mean its all well and good “alluding” to certain aspects of the novel but these books only get deeper as they go on so good luck there. At the moment there are no plans set in stone to adapt the rest of the series although rumours all flying around. I'm sure some people enjoyed this movie and it didn't do badly at the world box office, maybe my views are jaded because of the love I have for the books but it can not be desputed that "The Golden Compass", whatever you think of the film, isn't a good adaptation of the book.
So on an ending note, in my opinion film adaptions struggle to be better than the books but there are some fine example of film out there which rival or beat the novel they're based on (Bladerunner, American Pyscho, Fight Club)
I think I’ll end this there before it turns into any more of a rant but if you’d like to defend or recommend any film or just post general feedback I’d love to hear from you at wasd_blog@hotmail.co.uk. Just whack “Faith” in the subject. Enjoy.
Sony epic fail
Hey guys (and probably only guys *sigh*), I know its not my day, but these sony ad's just have to be shown....
http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/29/chilean-ps3-ads-show-gamer-giving-blood-tranfusion-to-a-nazi/
And it's not your first time either is it Sony?
http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/06/sony-under-fire-for-racist-advertising/
http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/warning-psp-ads-can-kill-you/
WTF?
Console's aren't so great now are they eh?
PC FTW!
Albie
http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/29/chilean-ps3-ads-show-gamer-giving-blood-tranfusion-to-a-nazi/
And it's not your first time either is it Sony?
http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/06/sony-under-fire-for-racist-advertising/
http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/warning-psp-ads-can-kill-you/
WTF?
Console's aren't so great now are they eh?
PC FTW!
Albie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
