Sword of the stars 2

Also known as "Patch of the updates 2: Fix day"

I bought Sots2 on release day... they still haven't delivered the finished game... the news page on steam is a list of patches longer than a bad day on WoW after a major fix and it's just ridiculous. The game was UNPLAYABLE and I contend that Steam and the developers have essentially committed fraud and cost many people time and bandwidth for little gain.

I wanted to do a review of a game, not a failed attempt at delivering one.

Keeper3, just because there isn't a game yet, doesn't mean I can't hate it.

Rogue Warrior

More like "Rogue yawnior".

I thought about writing a huge post, listing the things I liked and disliked about this game when it boils down to one, simple thing.

There's no effort here... nothing beyond basic mechanics, basic story, basic graphics. It's a D- game, barely passable with only one interesting feature: the voice acting treads into "so bad it's good" territory, though it's never Laugh Out Loud the insipid dialogue and the deadpan delivery do make me chuckle from time to time.

That's it, I refuse to put more effort into a commentary on this game than was put into its development cycle.

Keeper3
So bad, it's really bad.

Rage; also, RAAAAAAAAAAAGE!

So, ID software recently release a game called "Rage", and ironically there's plenty of rage surrounding it. I'm mostly indifferent, although somewhat amused at Rage. I just don't care about it... to me it looks like a rehash of the Fallout setting and, worst of all, the PC version is essentially a port.

I was all set to ignore Rage and allow it's existence to fade away from my memory and slip into my subconscious... until I saw this.

John Carmack "We do not see the PC as the leading platform for games."

...

"That statement will enrage some people,"

No, really?

"but it is hard to characterize it otherwise; both console versions will have larger audiences than the PC version."

He goes on about focusing on consoles for the development of rage, and that while PCs are 10 times more powerful, it means that 10 times the effort is required to make use of that power and other complete bullshit.

PCs may not be the leading platform for games, but they should be. Why? Because everyone has a PC. EVERYONE! So when you make a good PC game, your audience is EVERYONE, not the fraction of people that own a certain console, every household in the western world... If developers could actually sit down and make games that would bring the punters in and use what the PC has they would know this.

But no, it's easier to develop for consoles, so let's just ignore the PC.

It's a self fulfilling prophecy, if they make SHIT for PC, no one will play games on the PC... and if you can get exactly the same damned game on console or PC, why would you deal with the technically more difficult PC unless you're good with technology? On top of that, the PC has the worst restrictions when it come to copy protection, is it any wonder there are those that want to avoid it?!?

Carmack, you are a disgrace, once you were a pioneer in gaming development, your company essentially created the online FPS genre, now you're just another hack using his past efforts and his companies brand to sell mediocre rubbish. Like Lucas, Spielberg and any number of greats that have been laid low by their own fame, confident that only they can be right about their field and ignorant of the epic failures of their most recent projects.

I'm going to go play a better game than rage... Like Quake.

Keeper3, Raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaage!

PS Oh, and the release of the bloody game on PC was atrocious, mister "multi-platform" developer.

Quake 4

Subtitle: What the FUCK happened here?

Let's back up a bit...

Quake was landmark title, it was so good that despite us being in the age of Modern Company of Honour*, where sequels of the 'big names' of the modern shooter genre are just tiny incremental improvements, there are still people playing Quake, Quake 2 and Quake 3.

So... what's wrong with Quake 4?

Well... Unfortunately it is essentially of the modern age... and it's shit, thus the subtitle.

It's strange really, Duke Nukem Forever comes out with all this fanfare... and disappoinment. Quake 4 barely rated a mention... I didn't even know it had come out until I got it on special on....

WAIT FOR IT!

Steam.

It's funny because it uses imagery from a comic about child abuse...

This game is essentially a bad modern warfare... it's like taking the obsession of realism from modern warfare and mixing it up with over the top movie US Marine bravado and bullshit gears of war Space Marine gorilla men.

Oh, and the ending is stupidly bad.

That's really all I can say... this game shouldn't exist, it's like a squibs fart at the end of a series with an otherwise great pedigree. It takes away from the series. I mean, if I show this to someone that hasn't played any quake game before, would it make them want to play the others?

NO!

And even if it did... it would be under false pretenses... because it is soooo unlike any of the other quake games! Even quake 2 which has a similar story and setting, plays it in a much more sobre and subtle way.

Play something else... I know I did. That's right, I didn't finish the game, I looked up the ending on youtube. Glad I did or I might have snapped my keyboard in frustration at the time I wasted to reach that ending!

...bloody useless game. I don't even remember what made me play it as long as I did. Oh, there was one section that was interesting; at one point your character gets captured, and partly converted into a Strogg Trooper (mind control, cybernetic enhancement, etc), but you're rescued before you mind control is turned on. Up to that point, you really do feel kinda helpless and it was actually pretty engaging... then it ended and all that really happened is that you were now stronger and had more health.

Meh. Wasted opportunity for some really dark story telling.

Keeper3,
Oh how the mighty have fallen, ID... just die gracefully.

*Modern Warfare, Bad Company, Medal of Honour... and it is 'honour' NOT 'honor'! I speak and spell the Queens English!

DLCs and the death of the expansion pack...

DLCs are interesting... In essence, the DLC is a replacement for the old idea of an expansion pack... How many "expansion packs" have you seen in the last few years? Beyond the next sack of insipid content for your chosen poison of the MMO variety I can't remember any.

Sooo... is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Well, ultimately it doesn't matter. The slow, unstoppable change to electronic distribution won't be stopped by our complaints or any misstep by any random company. But let's look at it anyway!

Positives:
DLCs allow you to buy only the content you want! Each DLC can be a bite sized bit of content that is both easy to download and install yet give you plenty of enjoyment for your money and bandwidth.
DLCs are easier to make than an expansion, meaning more content will be available (on average) compared to what we used to see.

DLCs are a less risky method to providing content, allowing developers and publishers to release more experimental types of material that in our modern profit driven existence might not otherwise see the light of day.

Negatives:
DLCs are the next stage of non-complete-release-itis; back when games were on cartridges or floppy disks (that were actually floppy! *gasp*) it was bad practice, worthy of flogging, to release a game with any notable bugs... let alone leaving the game unfinished! These days incomplete games are sadly common, with endings that show a lack of care and game killing bugs, poor design... etc. DLCs are often promised to fix various issues, a DLC pack should not be considered a good way to deliver bug fixes.

Stupid ideas for DLC! E.g. Horse armour... FUCK YOU BETHESDA!!! Simple model and skin changes, stupid boosters to your characters for no good reason... Essentially pay to win booster packs for your game.

And finally, Day One DLC; this has a special place in my cold, dead heart, Day one DLC covers any 'content' that is either used as a stick to flog people who buy a game second hand or as a way pretend a game is cheaper than it actually is and sell important game content at an inflated price. EA are especially guilty of this practice and seem to have elevated it to a level of an art form providing BOTH TYPES of day one DLC for their most recent opus, Mass Effect 3 (Oh, and a review is coming for that one folks!).

Conclusion:
DLCs are good overall, but it's clear that just as any game that comes out can be a piece of garbage fodder or the best thing since sliced bread DLC content isn't necessarily good or bad so my advice? If you love a game and it's got DLC have a look, otherwise ignore.

Keeper3 - Ooooh... there's DLC for fallout 3 that makes it NOT CRAP!!! Oh wait, that was a mod, nevermind.

EvE Online

Soooo I've quit WoW, as those who read my blog would know, and to fill the void I've been playing EvE; a game once described as "A game for those people who are to nerds, as nerds are to normal people".. essentially people who are nerds squared.

Is this true?

Well, yes and no, EvE does require more patience, more research and math than say WoW. It's a weird little game with a small community consisting of many little factions, alliances and mobs each with their own slightly different spin on what the game is about. PvP, missioning, pirating, industry, Planet Interaction or all of the above and more.

It's a broad yet deep game, it's almost too much and can scare new players away... though there are plenty in the community that don't mind.

Ultimately it's a niche game, a niche full of amusing nerdy stuff about flying through space and doing almost whatever you want... a little like elite.

...the physics are kinda fucked though; it's like flying a submarine.

Keeper3; I likey my space ship... it goes zapzap!

Brought to the Brink...

So, Brink. This one has been beaten into the ground, hell I wouldn't have bought it but it was sooooo cheap on Steam (Damn you Steam!!) I had to have a go.

Look Brothers! It is the great Double Penis Tower of the ARK!

It's a somewhat pretty game, and it runs fairly well so I think it balances graphics and performance... it didn't crash often, only once during my clearing of the campaign that I remember.

I actually kind of like that all the classes can essentially use all the weapons, meaning classes are separated by their specific skills alone.

The game modes are competent...

Uh... things went boom?

I think the main problem with Brink, is that it was advertised as something AMAZING-ING-ING... and it's not. It's alright. Mediocre. Average... with little to recommend it.

My biggest problem is that the single player story attempts to make both sides look good based on the rhetoric of the side you're playing at the time... with no resolution. The way the story is told one or both sides MUST be lying in their briefings to the player in some of the missions and it's not revealed when you're finished the game. Which annoys me, it's bloody sequel bait (Ha!).

...and that's it. It's mediocre.

Don't buy, or if you must, buy it on special... like I did.

Keeper3; developers, stop promising the earth then delivering a candied turd!

PS ...the English-y voices were kinda cool.

Diablo 3

Yes, yes... I know Diablo 3 isn't out yet. And no, I haven't been to the future to play it... but I came to a realisation a few days ago.

I don't care about Diablo 3.

meh

But why? I enjoyed Diablo; it was a fun little game that twisted the old dungeon crawler concept and had good graphics.

Diablo 2 improved on the original with a better interface, graphics and gameplay.

Diablo 3 seems to continue on this tangent... but I just... don't... care.

Is it the real money Auction House?
Is it the Permanent online software protection?
Is it that Activision will find some way to fuck the online experience?
Is it that Blizzard cannot balance their way out of a paper bag and a random class will dominate from week to week?
Is it that it's likely that cheaters will find a way to break the game?

...let's say it could be any number, or all of them.

Oh well, one less game to even consider having to pay for.

Keeper3 - Blizzard have overdrawn on their account of fan-dollars, and the Bank of Keeper3 has closed their account...

It's been a while... Also; SPACE SHIPS!!!

Soooo... it's been a while. There are several reasons for this but it can be summarised thusly: lol RL lol.

My review of the Dungeon Keepers will come soon, but technical difficulties have stopped me from properly playing these games... which makes me very sad. :(

Anyways, let's talk about a game that I haven't had technical issues with... A game in a genre close to my cold, unfeeling heart.

Sword of the Stars...

This isn't a new game, though it's not old either, but somehow this one snuck under my radar. Regardless, I've just finished a few single player games and I have a few thoughts...

First, ultimately, SoTS is good; quite good... though there are a few things I would change this is just tinkering with an otherwise great game.

The graphics are great, the music is atmospheric, combat is visceral and the loss of each ship feels like a punch in the gut, or the nuts if it's a particularly valuable ship. The only thing missing is a few cut scenes when you're victorious or defeated at the end of the game... ATM all you get an image saying "YOU WINNAR" specific to your race... which really lacks the awesomeness that matches the quality of the rest of the game. Something like the intros using in game space combat with a voice over would be sufficient... and kind of awesome.

If you like strategy games, turn based games like Lords of the Realm 2, Master of Orion 2, etc... you'll like this one; a lot. Get the expansions too.

Keeper3; IMMA FIRING MUH LAZAR (at yur planets)!!!

Need for Speed Hot Pursuit...

...also known as "Need for More Stupid Cut Scenes".

Before I get into a rant about a few small things that NfS:HP did that bothered me... slightly. Let me say that the basic game here is fine, quite amusing actually. Even though NfS: Hot Pursuit is not new I found myself reasonably impressed with the graphics, it ran well and the gameplay was mostly solid though the physics seem a bit weak at times...

So it's good... but.

THE CUTSCENES ARE GOD-DAMN FUCKING IRRITATING!!!!

Every race has a cutscene to start, every new car you 'earn' gets a cutscene, every time you 'rank up' there's a cutscene, there's a bullshit splashscreen that pops up after every race acting like there's some huge issue because I'm not logged into the stupid online ranking system, the game tried to force me to watch an advertisement when I ran it for the first time, it lasted 8 minutes... I alt-tabbed and watched youtube.

I SHOULDN'T FEEL THE NEED TO ENTERTAIN MYSELF BECAUSE EA DECIDED TO JERK OFF ABOUT THEIR OTHER GAMES FOR 10 MINUTES!!!

...in short, NfS:hot pursuit is like a delicious chocolate with a filling that isn't perfect... coated in EA's love spunk.

You might want the chocolate, but you've got to wipe all the spunk off first. Hope you have a lot of tissues.

Actually, that's a better name for the game... "Need for Tissues: EA spanks it all over you..."

...ultimately, it's a side complaint, but I just don't get why we need all these tiny cutscenes breaking up the gameplay, wasting time and being unskippable. That's the big thing for me, the vast majority of these things are unskippable and that just amplifies the irritation...

Keeper3, EA have some really fucking stupid ideas sometimes.

I remember the original test drive... in that game you just drove in races and no stupid cutscenes! ZOMG!!!

GoldenEye revisited

Not too long ago, I laughed at claim that Goldeneye for the N64 was the BEST FPS EVAR!!! And I ended my review with a prediction that there would be 3 camps for the release of it's reboot; GoldenEye for the Wii,

1. Fanboiz that love it for no apparent reason
2. Fanboiz that would hate it for no apparent reason
3. Everyone else that wouldn't care.

Let's see if I was right.

WIKIPEDIA POWAHS ACTIVATE!
"Reviews for GoldenEye 007 have been mostly positive."
Oooh, first blow against me...
"Frankly, I haven't seen a more impressive Wii shooter."
Note the use of 'Wii' there? That means there is better, but not on the Wii (just like GoldenEye for N64!)
"a lackluster game that fails to hit the same high notes of the original, or keep pace with modern shooters"

Huh, looks like I lost the first round but won the match, how about Metacritic?

Current score is 81, which is lower than the original by around 13 points... Highest score was 100; Lowest score was 58% which suggests a broad range of opinions. Innnnnnteresting. I'll take that as a point in my favour.

The comments I'm reading on various reviewer pages (metacritic and others) seem to roughly fall into two groups, those that like the wii version, and those that compare it to the N64 version and find it lacking. Another point in my favour.

...of course, it's hard to prove a lot of people don't care about it... or is it?

Let's look at sales numbers of the old and new game; based on this site (Goldeneye Wii, Goldeneye N64)

GoldenEye N64: 8Million+
GoldenEye Wii: 1,085,651

Granted, the older version has been out for a loooong time, but the Wii version has had nearly 6 months, I would think with the larger player base out there would make a great game sell a lot more copies, as a comparison, over roughly the same length of time Modern Warfare sold over 10 million copies on the XBox 360 alone (source).

Modern Warfare 2 (XBox360)GoldenEye(wii)

Not hard to see why, is it?

Though, I should point out that I'm not fond of Modern Warfare either, but that is a story for another time...

Regardless, I claim victory, my only prize is the fuzzy feeling of rightness... or perhaps righteousness?

Let me say though, that I would have been happy to have been wrong; I want nothing more than good games to come out and for people to be entertained rather than disappointed, but before that can happen we as consumers must start refusing inferior products and demand more for our money.

Keeper3, I love being right, and I hate being right.

Next up, Dungeon Keeper.

Magicka - and other stuff

Magicka is awesome... Just don't expect it to be serious. :)

Oh, and if you were scared off this game because of all the complaints about bugs, don't worry about that now, the game is pretty good with only one bug I've noticed so far.

Play it! Play it NAOW!!! It's silly and crazy and every character sounds like the chef from the mupput show! DOO EEET!!!

Anyway, this post isn't really about Magicka (it's hard to make a long post about a good game) it's more about something I've noticed recently... and that is the realisation that I started this silly little soap box blog almost a year ago on April the 20th, 2010. So, I'm gonna do what I was always meant to do... I'm going to review Dungeon Keeper, Dungeon Keeper 2 and as many DK rip-offs as I can find in order to celebrate this waste of time I like to engage in.

So you may ask... "Why Dungeon Keeper? Why now? Who cares?!? What's dungeon keeper again?" All reasonable questions (except the last one!), however my answer to all these questions is: I love these games and it's my blog.

...alright, alright! There is more to it than just that. I think I really need to put down in words exactly why I like these games; why I can play these games despite the age and the flaws I know that each one of these games contain... Dungeon Keeper 2 for example, has pretty aweful AI at times to the point where the closest to intelligence the AI keepers or the heroes show is from scripts... There's more, much more... The first game has weak AI as well, but not as pronounced (that I remember).

I only know of one DK rip off thus far, something called "Dungeons"... Overlord doesn't count, it's in the same spirit but it's not a strategy game, it's more RPG/tactical. Dungeons is a bad game based on the accounts I've found thus far... this won't stop me playing it.

If anyone has any ideas on a good (or bad) Dungeon Keeper style game, lemme know.

Keeper3 - If only my name meant there was a third dungeon keeper game... Oh well. PLAY MAGICKA!

Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood

Sooo... I was gonna bash the shit out of this game, but recently I had an epiphany.

It was late one night, I was trying to sleep and a thought popped into my head "man... I should finish watching that western movie thing..." It took me a minute in my sleepy state to realise that I was thinking of the game, not a movie.

It was this game in fact, Call of Juarez. While this CoJ:BiB has it's fair share of flaws; rushed story, plot holes, barely average voice acting, boring weapons, etc... it manages to be competent in it's western setting and it's flaws don't bring the game down just irritate.

So what we have here is a decent western game on the PC, not amazing, not bad... just ok.

But it's just so nice not to have to deal with yet another modern or futuristic fucking solder/space marine idiot with exaggerated bravado that it elevates what is otherwise fairly forgettable.

In short: if you like westerns and shooters, you'll have fun with this flawed gem.

Also: FUCK YOU ROCKSTAR!!! RELEASE RED DEAD REDEMPTION ON PC ALREADY!!!

...and don't do a shitty port, implement proper PC controls.

Keeper3: I don't ask too much, gimme a game I'll play and I'll give you money; that's fair.

Bulletstorm... bah.

Ah... Bulletstorm... what can I say that hasn't already been said?

It's childish, overreliant on swearing (fucking distracting when the bastards swear so much eh?), hyperactive story, silly guns, etc etc...

...and I don't like it.

But; the above description could also be Duke Nukem 3D, and I loved that game!

Sooo... what's happened here? Have my standards increased? I am seeing TEH DUKE through nostalgia goggles? Have I matured?!? (say it ain't so!)

Nah, it's none of those things! It's that Bulletstorm has all of the gimmicks, all of the stupid with none of the carefree spirit of Duke Nukem or any of the shooters of that age.

As an example, in Bulletstorm you have this skillshot thing, you kill stuff in strange and amusing ways to get points... is this fun? Interesting? Funny? It would be if it wasn't shoehorned into the story and forced upon you...

You know what the skillshot system is? It's just what you do in all shooters when you get a little bored, stuffing around with guns to see how many dudes you can gib at once, or how many enemies you can impale with one shot of your tree cannon... or whatever. Just formalised, and given rules... and you have to do it all the time.

Fuck that. Next time you put skillshots in take away the need to make these skillshots and try to have cool shots give points, rankings or whatever; not currency. And make them based on loose rules rather than fully defined so the player can just create their own shots either by accident or by design.

...otherwise Bulletstorm is a competent, if short, shooter. Skip it unless you're really into shooters and you need a fix that isn't another bloody "modern" shooter like modern warfare 23, bordom ops or Battlefield elite bad company good day 7.

Bulletstorm; proving the old adage "Any fun activity can be ruined when it becomes necessary and bound by rules." (like driving! :D)

Keeper3; my car goes Brum brum! My car goes Vrooom!

WAAAAAAAAGH!!!

I love warhammer, especially Warhammer 40k... so you'd think when Warhammer comes to the PC I'd be all over it, right?

Weeeeeell... the problem is I love the story of warhammer, the ideas the characters the philosophy of it... the "fluff" as it's called I find is the best of warhammer; never really liked the tabletop thing. So a game is only good if the fluff comes through the game intact and the game itself is competently made...

No one gets any points for guessing a good Warhammer game, just look at Dawn of War or one of it's many expansions or sequels; except soulfire or whatever it was called, what a PoS that was; sisters of battle? What a gyp! Buggy as 'eck... and ugly too! Dragged DoW down the plug 'ole that did.

Hrm, where was I? Oh yeah... I was saying good things.

So Dawn of war is good, warhammer online is pretty good (not to my taste), I'm sure there's a few other solid games around... but hang on, what's missing there? We have strategy and RPG, but we don't have a good shooter.

I LOVE a shooter with a good story with strong gameplay elements ripped right from said story... Have there been any warhammer shooters? Well... there have been a few I'm sure... but the only one I've found is Warhammer 40K: Firewarrior. (space hulk doesn't count, it's more strategy than shooter... though it is awesome)

I played the PC version of Firewarrior... and I can safely say that without the Warhammer franchise behind it, it would simply be a bland, poorly crafted shooter. The fluff keeps you in the game long after you would otherwise drop it like the piece of shit that it is...

Just as an example: the AI sucks horribly... you're a tau warrior, a soldier that focuses on long range shooting and is terrible at melee, your main enemy is the imperial guard and a few space marines. There are enemies that ambush you with a chain sword... we're talking your biggest weakness, close quarters fighting with no warning... and the fuckers just seem to dance around you swinging their swords impotently! The only way you'd get hurt is if you jumped into their flailing... It was retarded; and that is just the dumbest thing not the worst; the graphics sucked and the game was ugly, the sound was boring, the difficulty curve was schiztophrenic, maps uninspiring and confusing, etc, etc, etc...

What was sad, REALLY sad is that the story was actually pretty good; it was all that kept me going though what was otherwise a horrible experience in every way until I finally lost interest and deleted the game unfinished.

Sooo... gaming industry, Games Workshop... find someone that'll do Warhammer justice and give us an AWESOME FPS set in the Warhammer40k world... or the fantasy setting, we could have a hack and slash game too. That'd be nice.

...it's a setting begging for someone to run around shooting and/or slashing things. :D

Also: DoW 2 is awesome, buy it if you like strategy and Single player campaigns that don't feel tacked on (*cough* Starcraft2 *cough*).

Keeper3 - Man, I really do have a hate on for Blizzard these days, eh?

Gah! Steam!

Sooo... remembering how much I lurv steam... I recently got this "recommended" to me...

Oh god... why do you hate me so Steam?

The rest of this post about games I've bought on Steam recently, but I couldn't help but show yet another piece of evidence that Steam is evil. Hmph... if Kane & Lynch 2 is similar to anything I play, please tell me so I can get a refund for those games. >.<

Moving on...

Sam & Max 3 (Episode 1-5)

If you like Sam and Max at all, this will amuse you. It has all of the humor of any of the previous games, clever writing and excessive cartoon violence you would expect of Sam & Max and more! My only complaint is that it was, at times, too easy. But really, to make an adventure game truly hard normally means a trip down adventure game logic alley, where up is blue and green is subatomic particle.

If that sentence made sense then you have a long career ahead of you in bad adventure games.

Dues Ex: Game of the Year Edition

Good game, shitty release. Steam gives you the old game with no apparent acknowledgement of the obvious compatibility issues... if you're willing to deal with these issues, and these are surmountable, then it's Dues Ex... Good stuff.

Bully: Scholarship edition

Think Grand Theft Auto... with more restraint in a school setting. Essentially you run around, do missions, attempt to pass classes and stay just within the rules of Bullsworth Academy just enough to avoid expulsion.

Definitely worth a look.

Super Meat Boy

A very arcardy platformer that is quite good... though overrated imo. You run around levels as a meat-thing attempting to rescue your girlfriend while attempting to avoid a gruesome death. Pretty fun.

And that's all for games from Steam... remember, the games might be alright, but interacting with steam is like receiving an enema from the devil. :)

Keeper3 - I'll use Steam, but I don't have to like it.

It's a new year...

...and we're still playing the same games.

I've been sitting on this post for a while, I blame my new job... but I said in my last post I would say "more" about Cataclysm and it's been long enough; let's begin.

First, the good:
The old 'vanilla' WoW from mid 2000's is gone... replaced with a world that uses some of the technology from the expansions since it's release. This is awesome, no more NPC's sitting there complaining about the same shit as when you rolled your toon in 2006. The world changes and progresses with your quest completions... it feels more alive!

The graphics are better, while still not requiring a beast of a computer to run. Good graphics don't make a good game, but WoW was starting to look very dated... although the character models could do with an update.

The game is hard* again. Wrath made the game way too easy... but there's still some tweaking to be done. Some bosses slap you around like a bully is stealing your lunch money, while others essentially just fall over and die the moment you draw your weapons.
*...a little bit anyway.

Archeology is cool... kinda?

GET DIGGIN' MOFOS

The Bad...
Blizzard changed too much, my personal favorite spec, the Retribution Paladin changed completely such that it feels like a different toon. Hunters would know this feeling well. We're in a situation where some classes and specs seem dead compared to others... This is a classic case of overreach on Blizzard's part, changing too much and not listening to the players during beta. Why have a beta and then release the game without making changes the beta made obvious?

Healers have it too hard (imo); healers are giving up from what I'm hearing, they've perhaps dialed up the difficulty a bit too much for them...
...as a result, melee characters tend to die from the increased overall difficulty and stressed healers; I don't die as much as I'm a ret and can self heal. This is hardly an ideal situation though.


The Ugly...
Blizz put in a change that forces you to level in your "proper" areas... ie, once you hit level 60, you are hit with a 90% penalty to your XP if you stay in the old world... the nice new old world... so you move onto the now quite old Burning Crusade content... Why? WHY?!?

WTF BLIZZARD?!?

I could have a few more levels in the brand new revitalised old world zones... I could explore areas revealed by the cataclysm and enjoy the new stories... but no, some moron at Blizzard decided to hit us with a massive disincentive so we'll leave the new content and go be bored for the next 15-20 levels. Good show.

Also the new pre loader fucks up every second time I open it for no apparent reason...

Failed is the right word...

Conclusion:
Ultimately, if you like WoW, Cataclysm is a safe bet; if only because of the revived old world but prepare to hit a brick wall as soon as you enter the new Cataclysm heroic dungeons... especially if you're a healer.

...of course, for those old boys who liked the elite feel you got when epics were actually kind of hard, well... that might just attract you.

Next time, ima talk about some new games I bought from Steam (...I still hate Steam though).