Joystiq

IGN responds to concerns over exclusive GTA IV review

Kyle Orland — 2008-05-02T12:15:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Hacks, Sony PlayStation 3, Microsoft Xbox 360

Earlier this week, Variety's Ben Fritz expressed concern over IGN's exclusive first review of Grand Theft Auto IV, asking rhetorically, "How can we trust a videogame review when the outlet running it has been given a major commercial favor ... from the publisher of the game?" Well, GameDaily Media Coverage Columnist Gus Mastrapa went the extra mile and asked that very question to some people at IGN. And he even got an answer!

"We in no way trade scores for an exclusive," said IGN VP Tal Blevins, adding that publishers have no access to or say in the text of a review before it goes live. That doesn't mean IGN didn't make any concessions to secure the exclusive, though. IGN Xbox editor Hilary Goldstein admitted the site used promotional placement on the site's top feature bar to secure the exclusive. "Our bargaining chip is to basically say, 'I will put it here if you let me have this,'" Goldstein said. Mastrapa likened the practice to an "exclusive cover story" in a game magazine.

As for Variety and Fritz, Goldstein seemed unimpressed with with his journalism bona fides. "Nobody from Variety called us and said, 'Hey, would you like to comment about this?'" he said. "He says in blog post, 'If I had the game right now I would have broken the embargo.' To me that goes against your ethics." Nothing like an I'm-more-ethical-than-thou battle to get your heart racing in the morning.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

IGN: First web GTA IV review, another perfect 10

Griffin McElroy — 2008-04-26T15:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Sony PlayStation 3, Microsoft Xbox 360, Action

Is it too early to say that we're beginning to see a pattern develop here? We know that a mere handful of reviews for Rockstar's latest opus have been published, but should the current trend continue, Grand Theft Auto IV could be the subject of more perfect scores than 1976 Olympic gymnast Nadia Comaneci. Yes, IGN recently dropped the suspiciously non-embargoed first online review for the title, giving it a 10 out of 10 (on both platforms) and evoking the wrath of the Nintendo Defense Force, calling GTA IV "the best game since Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time."

The seven-page, five-thousand word review (and accompanying video review, after the jump) praises the game's art style, the immersive backdrop of Liberty City, the "Oscar quality" story and the "refined" gameplay. The enamored reviewer even commends some of the quirky extra features included by Rockstar, such as Niko's multipuropse cellphone, or the in-game use of alcohol: "You don't have to drive drunk," the reviewer exclaims, "but it's fun to give it a try." Great, now we can look forward to public backlash towards the game's DUI-endorsing write-ups, as well.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Comparison shows significant edits to Gerstmann's Kane & Lynch review

Kyle Orland — 2007-12-05T08:50:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Hacks

The editor's note at the bottom of Jeff Gerstmann's controversial review of Kane & Lynch: Dead Men notes that "this review has been updated to include differences between the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions and a clarification on the game's multiplayer mode." While this is true, a comparison between the original and edited versions of the review shows that the edits went significantly further than that.

An archived version of the review found in a Google cache of an EBGames page shows that, while the review's overall determination remained the same, significant changes were made to its tone and focus. Nowhere is this more apparent than the very first paragraph, which was changed whole cloth to remove references calling the game "ugly" and the artificial intelligence "clunky." While the new introduction still says the game "squanders much of its potential and just doesn't come together as well as it probably should have," the new version is unquestionably less harsh than the original.

Some edits to the text seem shoehorned in to point out potential positives for the game. Consider a post-edit addition that specifically notes the game "does a good job of moving the action around, and you'll see a variety of different environments ..." and another that suggests, "if you've been waiting patiently for a game to really dive into the whole 'crew-based heist tale' concept, you might be able to look past some of the story flaws."

Then again, there are other additions that specifically point out negatives, such as one that says the multiplayer mode "doesn't translate into a great or long-lasting experience," and another that calls the disappointing multiplayer a "bummer." But there are further edits that circumstantially seem designed specifically to placate Eidos, such as one clause that points out "how well this same sort of stuff worked in the developer's previous squad-based game, Freedom Fighters," and another that asks readers to consider "the somewhat unique nature of its story."

While the edits are interesting in and of themselves, it should be noted that they are not proof of any wrongdoing on either CNET or Eidos' parts. Many questions remain, such as whether or not Gerstmann himself was involved with the edits, whether Eidos specifically requested any of the edits, and whether or not CNET executives intervened in the editing process. Neither Gerstmann, nor CNET or Eidos representatives were immediately available to respond to requests for comment on this matter, but we will let you know if and when they do (A CNET spokesperson made an oblique reference to the edits in a previous public comment).

A full accounting of the differences between the original review and the edited version appears after the break. Read it over and decide for yourself whether the changes were justified and suitably covered by the editor's note that appears at the end.

[Key: Regular, unformatted text appeared in both versions of the review. Bracketed portions in italics were in the original review but removed from the edited version. Bracketed portions in bold were added to the edited review.]

Gamespot's Kane & Lynch Review
By Jeff Gerstmann

Kane & Lynch: Dead Men has a lot of promise, but nothing in this game works out nearly as well as you'd hope.

[Removed from original: Kane & Lynch: Dead Men is an ugly game, and we're not necessarily talking about the graphics. This criminal tale is packed with a collection of completely unlikable characters with no redeeming value whatsoever. It's impossible to even root for them as antiheroes. Once you get past the messy, meaningless story, things don't get too much better because you're saddled with clunky artificial intelligence on the part of your allies and your enemies, as well as a core shooting mechanic that simply doesn't satisfy. The unfortunate part is that the game does have a few bright points and feels like it had a lot of potential that just didn't come together as well as anyone must have hoped.]

[Added in edits: Io Interactive is best known for its stealth-focused Hitman series, but there's nothing quiet and sneaky about its latest release, Kane & Lynch: Dead Men. This time around, the developer put together a crime-themed shooter that starts out with a couple of simple, heist-like objectives and then rapidly spins out of control until, without much warning, you're gunning down soldiers in the middle of a foreign revolution. While the journey sounds interesting at first, and has a few bright points, it's weighed down by bad storytelling, a real lack of character development, and a host of gameplay-related issues. The end result is a game that squanders much of its potential and just doesn't come together as well as it probably should have.]

The story mode opens with you in the role of Kane, a death row inmate on his way to his execution, apparently convicted of being a very savage criminal as part of a notorious gang called The7. You're on your last ride with a quirky guy named Lynch who tells you to cover your head. After an explosion, you're both busted out and on the run. That might sound great, but it's a fate worse than death. The surviving members of The7 have busted you out to force you to recover something they think you stole from them. They consider you a traitor and will kill Kane's family if he doesn't comply. Lynch is sent along for the ride to watch over Kane and report in if anything weird happens. Circumstances change over time and the back half plays out like a revenge tale, but it's a revenge tale where you don't actually care if anyone actually gets their revenge. Every single person you play as or encounter is despicable and wholly abrasive; thus, [it's extremely difficult to care about anything that's happening to them.] [it'll probably be tough for you to find anyone to latch onto and care about, even if you typically go for this sort of crime drama on TV or in movies.] You can play through this story alone or with a friend in co-op mode, though this mode is only available locally and takes place on a vertically split screen that makes it difficult to follow the action, even on a widescreen TV.

The core gameplay in Kane & Lynch is your standard third-person shooter with cover elements and a light dusting of squad tactics. You can fire from the hip, but it's somewhat more accurate to fire while aiming. Unfortunately, even when you're aiming, hitting your targets is more difficult than it should be because your automatic fire has a wide spread on it. Kane is supposedly a badass arch-criminal; he should be able to hit his targets with short, controlled bursts. You're able to get behind cover and either blindfire or pop out for aimed shots, but there's no easy way to stick to walls. You don't press a button or anything; instead you sort of get up against a wall and turn sideways. Then after jiggling the controls back and forth a bit, you'll eventually snap into place to get behind cover. It's such a pain that you'll rarely want to use it, and it seems like you're always snapping into cover behind something at the most inopportune times, making the game quite frustrating. There's no health meter, but if you go down, you don't die immediately either. You can be revived by one of your teammates with an adrenaline shot. If you get that shot too frequently, you'll overdose and die. If your teammates don't reach you in time, you'll die too. Also, if one of the guys on your crew gets dropped, you have to make sure he gets revived. If he dies, the game ends. Between your poor accuracy, the enemy's sharp accuracy, and the boneheaded AI from your squadmates, this all adds up to you keeping your squad on a very short leash.
When you've got a team with you, you can order team members around individually or order the team all at once by telling it to regroup to your location, move to a specific spot, or attack specific targets. Telling team members to move to locations is the most effective move because you can keep them close and revive them when they get shot down. Sending them after targets results in your squad running around aimlessly and trying to get too close to targets. That leads to them getting dropped in the line of fire, where you probably won't be able to rescue them. So whether you're doing the shooting yourself or hanging back and letting your men do the dirty work, the game is a real [letdown.] [disappointment, especially when you consider how well this same sort of stuff worked in the developer's previous squad-based game, Freedom Fighters.]

There's only one multiplayer mode in Kane & Lynch, and it's a great idea. [Unfortunately, the idea doesn't translate into a great or long-lasting experience.] It's called Fragile Alliance and puts up to eight players in one team of criminals. Then, it sets the team off to steal money, cocaine, and jewels from various locations seen in the single-player game. So you might start out in front of a bank, run in, collect a bunch of cash, and then escape from in a van out back. The catch is the way the money is split up among teammates. If you all work together, the money is split evenly. But at any point, a player can go rogue and gun down one of his teammates. This brands you a traitor; thus, any money you collect and escape with is yours to keep. Of course, this also means that other players who are still part of the team will try to waste you before you escape with their hard-stolen loot. So every round is a tentative affair where you always expect the worst--you're just never sure when someone's going to finally turn on you. When you die, whether it's from the AI that opposes you or another player, you respawn on the other side of the heist. Now you need to stop the heist by eliminating the other players and you earn money by collecting it before the criminals collect.

[It's a great idea that's] [It's a bummer that the multiplayer is] mucked up by a few different things. First, you're still playing Kane & Lynch, so all of the inaccurate firing issues and poor cover tactics from the single-player still apply. But another problem is that you can see the names of the other players over their heads from a distance and through walls, even if they're on the other side. While you can run while crouched to make your name disappear, it's pretty weak that you can see the names of the police team members as they head your way. There's no element of surprise. Also, there are only a handful of different scenarios for this, and they play out the same way every single time. The security guards are always in the same positions in the bank and the cops are always waiting for you right outside, so it gets old fast.

[Technically,] [While it might seem like a basic heist game, Kane & Lynch does a good job of moving the action around, and you'll see a variety of different environments and situations, ranging from banks, to prison breaks, to full-scale conflicts in the middle of illicit poppy fields. It also has some] good-looking player models, with Kane and Lynch both looking appropriate as over-the-hill criminals. And even though their faces don't animate much in-game, they still look good. Most of the animation isn't so hot, though, and you'll see a few ugly textures here and there too. Some of it looks a bit unfinished, like the way you see guys go through the motion of hitting you with an adrenaline shot, but their hands are actually empty.

[The multiplayer mode is a really cool idea that leaves you wondering who's going to turn traitor on you, but it isn't strong enough to make you forget the game's other problems.]

The soundtrack is probably the best part of the whole game, delivering some tense music when the game calls for it. There's a lot of voice acting in the game. The voices are appropriate for the characters, but the dialogue is hokey and filled with [lazy] [gratuitous] cursing. The good ol' F word is certainly appropriate, given the nature of what these guys are doing, but when it's every third word out of every character's mouth, it comes across as a crutch that drags down the rest of the game a bit. Lynch frequently responds to your squad-orders by just shouting "F*** you!" [That's just lame.] [Things like that just make the game feel purposely abrasive, and not in a "gritty" or "cool" sort of way.]

[The game is available on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 as of this writing, and the differences between the two versions are minimal. Both games have occasional frame rate issues and the control issues with finding cover and hitting targets are noticeable in both. The only real difference is that the PlayStation 3 version doesn't seem to have voice chat support. The multiplayer mode only really clicks when you can talk things out with other players and try to convince them that you're not going to turn traitor--only to turn traitor on them and then laugh about it. Without that, the whole experience feels a little dry. The Xbox 360 version also has the standard set of 1,000 achievement points, a few of which reward you for specific moments in co-op, like having the player controlling Lynch put a few cops out of their misery, rather than leaving them to writhe on the ground.]

Kane & Lynch: Dead Men is a premise with promise, [but the gameplay isn't sound while the story and characters go nowhere. And it's got enough random AI-based glitches to make you want to scream. Considering] [and if you've been waiting patiently for a game to really dive into the whole "crew-based heist tale" concept, you might be able to look past some of the story flaws. But when you consider] the nearly ridiculous number of extremely high-quality shooters available recently, there's not much room for something like Kane & Lynch, [but] [even taking into account the somewhat unique nature of its story. That said,] the multiplayer is a smart idea that's worth seeing, even if playing it makes you wish that it was used in another, better game.

[Editor's Note: This review has been updated to include differences between the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions and a clarification on the game's multiplayer mode.]

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Joystiq review: The Eye of Judgment (PS3)

Jason Dobson — 2007-10-16T10:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Sony PlayStation 3, Reviews, Online, Simulations, Competitive Gaming

It's not uncommon for video games to feature gameplay dependent upon gimmicks and peripherals, from early 8-bit examples like Gyromite to more modern releases such as Guitar Hero and Dance Dance Revolution, each of which changed the gaming experience by altering how we interact with the games we play.

In this way, Sony and SCE Studios Japan's The Eye of Judgment is one of the most ambitious experiments with game design to date, and in leveraging off of the considerable card game experience of Hasbro and its Wizards of the Coast subsidiary, best known for the Magic: The Gathering and Star Wars collectible card games, The Eye of Judgment's pedigree is certainly not one to be taken lightly. Marrying a tabletop card game with the PlayStation 3 has created an experience that is if nothing else unique; unfortunately the lynchpin in this union, the newly launched PlayStation Eye camera, is also the game's Achilles' heel, oftentimes bringing an unwelcome sense of frustration to players gaming in anything but the most ideal settings, something which we covered in much greater detail previously.

Gallery: Eye of Judgment

In The Eye of Judgment, players take turns summoning creatures and casting spells as they vie for dominance over nine elementally aligned fields arranged into a 3x3 grid. Drawing from a deck of 30 cards, the game itself is won once a player ends his or her turn controlling five different fields, and while this can sometimes mean that games can go by very quickly, this isn't always the case. For skilled players the first few turns can simply be setup for the hard fought, arduous struggle for that fifth and final field.

As cards are played on the mat, they are read by the PlayStation Eye camera, and their affects are then recreated in 3D on the screen, sometimes overcoming the fourth wall in fantastic fashion, while other times manging only to slam a player's face into the bricks as a stern reminder of imperfect design.

Everything here hinges on the Eye's successful recognition of cards as they are played, though in our experience it was not uncommon to have to adjust settings or ambient lighting in order to get the camera to read the cards on the table. One card that we found the camera to have a particularly difficult time with was the ritual Parmetic Holy Feast, which lets you discard a creature in order to add 2 extra mana to your available pool; unfortunately most times the camera would fail to read the discarded creature card, in effect wasting both the spell card and our turn together as we spent the entirety of our alloted time limit fighting with the camera and pulling at our hair while trying to get the thing to do its job. This is just one example, but it wasn't alone in driving up our blood pressure, though it speaks volumes to The Eye of Judgment's charms that we were able and willing to come back to the game time and again for just one more battle.

Success in The Eye of Judgment either against the computer or another player often requires equal parts cleverness, strategy, and luck; the game's surprising amount of depth will no doubt be daunting for some, especially those unaccustomed to more traditional CCGs. Thankfully, however, Sony has included a collection of very helpful tutorial videos on the disc that go over everything from simple game setup and card types to more advanced gameplay techniques. These videos won't make anyone an expert, but they'll go a long way towards easing players into the tumultuous waters of card-based warfare.

Also impressive are the lengths to which the game goes to prevent cheating. For instance, no more than three copies of any one card are permitted in a given deck, while some cards, such as the mighty Sciondar Fire God, can only be included in a deck once; the game keeps track of what has been played and will not allow cards that are not valid to be used. In addition, decks must be throughly scanned and registered using the Eye prior to playing online, and cards are randomly drawn by the computer during play as well. While this does open the door for players to theoretically scan in cards they might not have in reality, this is a welcome concession to the alternative of wondering if the player on the other end of the connection is secretly drawing from the bottom of the deck.

Beyond this, the game also includes helpful tools for deck building, as well a completely useless Judgment rock-paper-scissors mini-game that feels more like a hold over from the game's tech demo debut at E3 whereby creatures can be prodded and manipulated on camera, but even here it lacks some features from that demonstration - touching creatures no longer makes them attack or react in any way. Really, this mode serves no convincing point other than to fill out another option on the main menu.

Altogether, The Eye of Judgment is certainly an interesting curiosity designed to appeal to a niche audience, but it is not without its flaws, though admittedly most of our frustrations stemmed not from the game itself, but rather from the camera. However, when The Eye of Judgment worked, many of us here had a great deal of fun battling for the title of resident overlord. What remains to be seen now is how the game will be embraced by those players willing to stick with the game for the long term, trading cards, buying booster packs, and keeping interest alive for the months following the game's release. The crux of any CCG are the cards, and with a varied collection of creatures and spells offered in this initial set, and promises of other sets to follow in the months following the game's debut, it seems as if Sony is banking on The Eye of Judgment to keep players coming back for more.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Getting deep on Dead Rising

Alexander Sliwinski — 2007-05-22T22:25:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Microsoft Xbox 360

GameCareerGuide.com gives Dead Rising a New Yorker Magazine-style treatment and goes all highbrow in reminiscing about the title. Dead Rising occupies a very strange place in gaming. It was obviously a hit and talks of a sequel were already in the works a week after the game premiered. But, putting aside the tiny-text and the punishing save system, those horrors were eclipsed by Otis and that walkie-talkie.

There's plenty of "drinks at the Palm" moments in the piece. Like you'll have to read all three pages to understand what this quote actually means, "Dead Rising has, as you might put it, a profoundly 'old-school' sensibility -- a pre-Miyamoto one, even. Its goal is to recapture what once made video games entertaining, by getting rid of many of the institutionalized assumptions that have made them boring, or frustrating, or arbitrary."

Highbrow analysis aside, Dead Rising certainly was a game where the concept was in the right place, along with the writing, the heart, the brains -- mmmm, brains. It was the structure of the game that hurt, especially the menacing way you failed for missing one of those picky, picky case files. The GCG piece actually explains that one should think of Dead Rising as a classic game where you should expect to play it through on one life. Fail? Well, then you should start over. Yeah, the piece gets weird, but that's because you have "institutionalized assumptions" about what to expect from a game. Read the piece and then come back to let us know what you think -- we know you will.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

BBPS calls out rewritten preview as review

Alexander Sliwinski — 2007-05-07T22:15:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture

Bits Bytes Pixels and Sprites is calling out PGNx media and writer Jose Liz for writing reviews based on previews. In the piece, Andrew Hayward of BBPS, says that the Spider-Man 3 "review" is based on a demo he saw with this writer while on an Activision junket. He believes the writer made up the review based on the preview information as evidence by lines like "These interactive cinematics provided some of the demo's (emphasis ours) biggest 'wow' moments such as struggling in the air against the Green Goblin (while playing as Peter) and jumping through lasers as Spider-Man." Oops, helps to double-check that stuff before posting. Coincidentally, the DS review by the same writer ends with, "We're very excited to review the full version when it is released in early May." Double d'oh!

Hayward says, "The writer seemed like a really nice guy, but the more I interact with some of the writers at these independent gaming websites, the more I sense a general lack of knowledge pertaining to ethics and correctness in reporting." Of course, this statement would just be soaking in the juices of irony if Hayward had his airfare, hotel and other incidentals paid for by Activision as part of this junket.

This certainly isn't the most high-ranking screw-up in recent memory (frankly we've never heard of PGNx Media), but it does make an interesting footnote in the world of preview and review game writing. In the eyes of a PR company though, it doesn't matter how the review is written, as long as the writer says good things about the game.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Harvard club gets all snooty about games

Kyle Orland — 2007-04-10T18:59:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Fashion

The Harvard Crimson has the story about the recently created Harvard Interactive Media Group, a fancy-sounding club that makes talking about video games into a legitimate extracurricular gathering as only the Ivy League can. Member Alexander Li says the group started simply as a way to find more Civilization IV players on campus, but has since split into four scholarly subgroups that all endeavor "to explore the form and impact of interactive media" according to their mission statement.

There are plans for an academic review and a theory-soaked colloquium, but not everything is super-serious -- the group managed to attract 100 students to a gaming tournament in March. Nice to see these academic types haven't forgotten that games are meant to be played, not just talked about.

Previously: Rhode Island's gaming convention and the college gaming scene

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Gaming mice get objective rankings

Kyle Orland — 2006-12-12T14:15:00+00:00

Filed under: PC, First Person Shooters, Peripherals

Evaluating high-end gaming mice has always been a somewhat subjective process, relying more on a reviewer's opinion of the mouse's "feel" than any quantifiable measures of performance. Now, a writer at ESReality seems to have solved this problem with an inventive setup that can compare mice objectively on their own merits.

By clamping a mouse over a controlled-speed turntable, the author has created a system to accurately gauge the exact speed at which a mouse goes from "perfect control" to malfunctioning randomness. How much sensitivity is necessary depends largely on your play style, but it goes without saying that a higher top-speed is generally preferable to a lower one.

When the final results were tabulated and weighted the overclocked Logitech MX500 reigned supreme, giving perfect control even when zipped along the surface at a blazing meter per second. If you're moving your mouse any faster than that, may we suggest looking into some sort of program for caffeine addiction.

[Via Digg]

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Okami marred by excess, concludes review

James Ransom-Wiley — 2006-10-26T20:50:00+00:00

Filed under: Sony PlayStation 2, Action, Adventure

The New Gamer has posted a provocative take on Clover's Okami that's worth considering. The review suggests that the game is built on a seesaw of excess, teetering between gorgeously overworked themes and useless redundancies, concluding:

"[When] the excess doesn't add to the characters, when it doesn't showcase the story or the world design, when it just causes me to mindlessly increase quantities of items I'll never need, then I can't help but remark that not all of Okami is as rich as it could have been."

Okami easily stretches 30 hours of gameplay, but a huge chunk of New Gamer's time was spent hoarding unnecessary items. Would Clover's game have benefited from trimming the fat?

[Via Game Set Watch]

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

The DS Lite is "smaller than a brick"

Conrad Quilty-Harper — 2006-06-12T17:25:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Nintendo DS, Business

Arstechnica has posted a comprehensive five page review of the DS Lite, with a large portion dedicated to comparisons with the DS Phat. This isn't the first review of the DS Lite, but it could possibly be the most well thought out. Here are the key points of the review:

The screens

Greater viewing angle - "it's now possible to watch someone else playing the system and actually see the screen"
Brighter - "the upgraded screen may be worth the price of an upgrade alone"
Dead pixels - "my unit has a stuck pixel on the top screen"
Flimsy? - "the bottom screen seems to be floating in the system case, not held down tight like the DS [Phat]"

The feel

Lighter - "the system is lighter, making it easier for me to cradle it using the tips of my fingers"
Buttons - "The D-pad is a touch smaller... and a bit less satisfying in the click department" although "the buttons on both DS products are a little bit on the small side"
Central microphone "makes games that use voice recognition easier to play."

The battery

Six hours usually, although "it's not hard to get eight hours of battery life as long as you don't continually keep the system on its brightest setting."

The overall feeling from the review is that if you're a DS virgin and have been mulling a purchase, now is the time to jump in. If, however, you're a DS Phat owner and haven't decided whether it's worth trading in for the updated hardware, the suggestion from this review is go for it. "If you're a casual gamer or a hardcore fan who takes your portable everywhere, you'll like the way your games play and look on the DS Lite".

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Joystiq Review: Tomb Raider: Legend (Xbox 360)

Jennie Lees — 2006-04-27T08:55:00+00:00

Filed under: PC, Sony PlayStation 2, Reviews, Microsoft Xbox, Microsoft Xbox 360, Action, Adventure

There are moments in our gaming pasts that stand out with clarity from the mass of bygone levels, saves, high scores and kill counts. One of mine is a first date of epic proportions, one which launched a thousand clones and broke a million hearts. It was my first date with Lara.

Lady Croft and I have a lot in common. The novelty of playing as a girl who looks great and sounds normal grabbed me back in 1996 and hasn't let me go since.

A decade later, in Tomb Raider: Legend, Lara still looks the part; she hasn't put on a pound, though her poly count's up. As I put the disc in, her iconic face stares at me. This revamped Lara looks more human, more real, less like a creature from some stylised midnight fantasy. Her face is soft, her lips slightly curled in a welcoming smile -- her eyes measure me up. It's been a while.

I've not spent much time with her, these past few years. Disappointed in our recent adventures together, I pulled the "it's not you, it's me" line and flirted with a medley of characters -- from Master Chief to Joanna Dark -- who owe much of their existence to Lady Croft's legacy. But when she called asking me for help, I jumped at the chance. She's changed, after all.

Jump, Jump, Left, Left, Grapple

Lara's back. Running around a deserted ruin is a comfortable, familiar experience. The lady herself is smoother -- almost plasticky -- and beautifully shaded, her ponytail swinging as I move her lithe body around poles, ledges and ropes. The environments are lushly detailed, well-lit and textured, and I occasionally stop what I'm doing to have a look around. The HUD fades away, and the screen is frequently clear. The game runs smoothly, though the framerate stutters once or twice in larger environments.

Controlling Lara feels like second nature; helpful prompts pop up, making the manual redundant. Mis-presses aren't fatal -- most of the time. The camera is movable and the controls respond quickly, with well-timed vibration which is especially noticeable during tense moments.

With high-tech binoculars that help identify key items, figuring out puzzles is straightforward, although there are aimless moments. Some challenges rely on spotting one glinting item in a large area, or positioning blocks in a certain way, which can be frustrating. The in-game PDA provides objectives, but they rarely help -- throwing the grapple at everything generally works.

Various bronze, silver and gold rewards are strewn throughout the levels, with Xbox Live achievements linked to their collection. There are moments when rewards are visible but seemingly impossible to reach -- patience is key, but it's easier to come back later.

A Fate Worse Than Healthpacks

Death is the worst that can happen, but luckily there are frequent checkpoints -- dying means repeating a jump or three, not restarting an entire level. The generous healthpacks mean that it mostly happens when plunging clumsily from a tall building.

It's usually easy to plot the best course across a room, although sometimes the camera is stubborn. An interesting hybrid of cut-scenes and Dance Dance Revolution results in slow-motion cinematics; large icons flash on the screen, corresponding to timed button presses. Fail to react quickly and it's back to the start -- they're mercifully short, for the error-prone among us. This isn't new -- we've seen it in Resident Evil 4 -- but it's nicely interactive.

Of course, life isn't all running and jumping. There are enemies to shoot -- Lara survives frantic firefights quite easily, cutting through an endless stream of identical men, no questions asked. Grenades and marked destructible scenery provide some variety, but encounters are usually tedious rather than adrenaline-filled. One can simply mash the fire button and indiscriminately toss grenades to win just about any firefight. There's a lack of finesse here that most FPS fans will scoff at.

The occasional level bosses require a little more cunning and skill. The balance seems just right between impossible frustration and a walk in the park -- on medium difficulty, most bosses take a few tries, but once the strategy's clear they become easy.

Another change in pace occurs when Lara encounters a motorbike and starts tearing up the scenery. The motorbike sections are fairly repetitive, peppered with checkpoints, health packs and enemies. It's a useful way to get from A to B, but a tedious one.

After a few levels, I get a feeling of déja vu -- haven't I done this run, jump, shoot routine before a thousand times? Are the enemies and artifacts I'm tracking down any different from those of the past? There's no real novelty in this outing, but the gameplay's smoothness and the ever-dangling microrewards (next checkpoint, next reward, next level) keep me going. Original or not, exploring Bolivian ruins and Kazakhstani laboratories is just plain fun.

Hours of enjoyment?

Each level takes up to an hour to complete first time, which makes for seven to nine hours' total gameplay. There's more to Tomb Raider: Legend, though; if you're shooting for achievements, try the tricky 'time trial' mode. Collecting silver and gold rewards is also a reason to replay.

Finally, there's a set of extras, the most impressive of which is Croft Manor. You can visit Lara's home and explore the formidable surroundings, practice in the gym and try on outfits. It's worth doing for the rewards, but it's also a relaxing distraction -- they say an Englishman's home is his castle, and that's almost literally the case here.

Conclusion

Tomb Raider: Legend is a refreshing return to the Lara of old; you won't regret picking Lady Croft up again, and she won't reprimand you for not calling. The Xbox 360 version is differentiated from the other formats by an added graphical sheen and Xbox Live Achievements. The gameplay is as engrossing as Tomb Raider ever was, with a moderately interesting plot, decent voice acting and intuitive controls, although the motorbike sequences are a low point.

The game's strength -- it's Tomb Raider -- turns into a weakness -- it's another Tomb Raider. Nothing new to see here, move along. Push-button cut-scenes and the explorable Croft Manor give the game some class, but at a time where multiplayer is becoming king, Lara shows her age. It's over quickly, and you might not want a second date; renting for a weekend will show you much, if not all, of what Tomb Raider: Legend has to offer.

Overall Rating: 7.0/10

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Joystiq Review: Silent Hill (the movie) [Update 2]

Ross Miller — 2006-04-21T23:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Reviews

I just got back from checking out Silent Hill, the latest game-to-film adaptation, and I have to say ... it wasn't that great. Sure, it is pretty and has some great audio, but the story and acting are lame. Here is quick and dirty of the film (warning: a few minor spoilers lie ahead):

Best line: "Look at me, I'm burning!"

What Works:

The audio: ... and by audio, we mean everything that was not dialogue. The music, while cheesy at parts, really fits the movie well. The sound effects are very creepy, and the filtering is effective when used (although we would have loved for the sound to be more disturbed).
Pyramid Head: In what little time he was on screen, Pyramid Head really stole the show.
The Setting: As we have seen
The previews: Seeing glimpses of The DaVinci Code and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest made us giddy.

What Doesn't Work:

The dialogue: Laughable at best. We feel sorry for everyone with a speaking role -- especially Sean Bean (but we will get to that in a second).
The introduction: Instead of trying to actually explain the situation (or why we should care), the film begins with a melodramatic scene involving the main actress in scantily clad clothing. We could have used a 10-minute prologue showing what brought about this trip to a haunted town.
Too Long: Even without an introduction, the film clocks in at 120 minutes -- we can think of at least 112 minutes that one might have cut out.
Needs more Boromir: Seriously, Sean Bean had no point in the movie at all. If they had given him a long sword and the Horn of Gondor, to ride into Silent Hill and behead all demons in heroic vigilance, it just might've saved the film.

See Also:
Silent Hill Film by Centralia, PA
Silent Hill director is a gamer, fo' real
Silent Hill billboard welcomes you to ... Culver City
Cinematical's (more positive) review of Silent Hill

Update 1: mixed up 'epi' and 'pro' -- fix-ed

Update 2: My experience with the Silent Hill series is, admittedly, minimal -- I watched a bunch of friends beat the first game years ago, but have never myself played it. I judged it as a horror movie more than a game-to-film adaptation, so in that regard I thought it was pretty bad. However, the group of people with whom I saw the movie also chipped in to help with this review, and here is what they said (all names have been replaced by slasher-film stereotypes:

Military dude who is too eager to kill something: Having been a Resident Evil fan, he thought the movie wasn't that bad. However, he also enjoys Catwoman.
Conspiracy theorist: Having played all the Silent Hill titles (prefers the second game overall), thought the movie's dialogue ruined the entire experience. He was happy to see Pyramid Head, though, despite the continuity issues with the game's plot.
Damsel in distress: As a big fan of horror films, she thought it was disappointing.
Weakling who manages to survive 90 minutes into the film: Horror buff and Silent HIll fan. All he could say was "baaaaaad."

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Something Awful picks worst five game reviews

Jennie Lees — 2006-01-03T12:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture

According to Something Awful, 2005 was not a good year for gaming journalism. In fact, they reckon it was a terrible year, and they've picked the five worst gaming articles to exemplify just how abysmal game journalism has become. Not limiting themselves to 2005, the two worst articles in their lineup are both by the same author and neither is actually from 2005; in Something Awful's words, the reviews are so "horrible that they have transcended the limitations of linear time".

Among the lineup is Kieron Gillen, who's responded to the article on his own site. The traits identified by Something Awful that make these particular reviews so bad include, but are not limited to: rampant fanboyism, an awful sense of humour, pretentiousness, spending much of the review not talking about the actual game, spending the entire review failing to describe the game, and being Tim Rogers. A useful checklist of things to avoid when reviewing games.

[Thanks, anonymous]

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments