Zombie games!

Recently, I've been playing zombie games... mostly Left for Dead and Killing floor, two very similar FPS games where a team of people are attempting to survive against waves of zombies including various elite zombies that wreck your shit if you're not careful...

The main difference between these two games are the production values, and a few of the details.

Left for Dead has a huge production value advantage over Killing floor, but both are good, simple zombie mashing fun.

In left for dead you're trying to escape some location with a few other survivors, there's a sense of desperation and the reason behind the zombie plague is unknown. The only explanation of anything I've heard in game is that the player characters are "immune" to zombification apparently, which suggests this is a standard zombie virus scenario. The main goal of players is to "not die" and reach some escape point; with various traps and secondary objectives along the way each scenario feels different, although not different enough to prevent stagnation after repeated plays, LFDs only weakness.

Killing floor is a similar game, but it's story is different, instead of a standard viral outbreak or whatnot, the "zombies" are actually biological constructs called "Zeds", cloned biorobots created for war by crazed scientists... it's an interesting twist on the zombie story. The player characters are very different too, being mostly military types sent in to find survivors, search and destroy or block the Zed advance. In this game the only real goal is to kill everything without dying yourselves, every game ends with the Patriach, a Zed with a combi-missile launcher/minigun for an arm and a melee attacking chest arms thing... and he can stealth.

Despite the crazyness of the patriach, I never feel scared or horrified by Killing floor, it's just too out there and over the top, despite that it is a fun game especially on harder difficulties with good teammates. Left for Dead on the other hand actually feels creepy; the musical score, realistic environments, sudden ambushes, eerily realistic zombies and the good voice acting of the various characters in the game, including player characters, make a much more engaging game.

In short, buy both of these games if you love zombie killin' and enjoy multiplayer shooters...

A caveat: If you're Australian, avoid LFD2, it's been butchered at the request of the Australian ratings people; I won't review because it's not fair to the developers.

Consoles, and why I don't like 'em

I don't like consoles... that is, the gaming consoles. I don't like any of 'em; Wii, Xbox, Playstation, Atari, whatever. I don't like 'em. I have respect for the older consoles in the sense that those were the foundations for modern gaming, but for me consoles have always been something less than what I already have, a fully functional Personal Computer. Not necessarily an IBM PC, but others such as the Commodore 64, Apple 2e (I hate Mac's and iPhones with a passion, but this is a story for another time) and Z80s.

Why don't I like Consoles? Well... there are a few reasons...

1. Console ports of PC games are bad
2. PC ports of Console games are worse
3. Console controls are bad for no good reason
4. Consoles are the home of stupid gimmicks (Wii, Project Natal, PS move... Virtual Boy)
5. Consoles allow companies too much control over your gaming (Fallout 3 for example, I can mod it on the PC so it sucks less, try that on XBox!)
6. Consoles suddenly become obsolete, got a working Dreamcast? TOO BAD MOFO!!! It's time to buy a newer console! YAY
   

For these reasons, I've never gotten a console. Perhaps once my career improves, I'll have enough disposable income to get a console and not care... but even now I could afford one and a bunch of games... instead I'm thinking of getting a new PC. Strange that... Heck, I'd rather buy myself a copy of Windows 7 (I'm still on WinXP, definitely skipping Vista!) than get a console.

Does that mean that gaming consoles suck?

Well... that Wii is pretty lacklustre... and the other two don't exactly wow me. Then again, PC gaming is kinda "meh" of late, with dozens of samey "realistic" shooters and repetitive sequel-age being spat out...

Despite my anti console position, it's more about the games than the platform... it's why I almost bought an XBox so I could play Red Dead Redemption (gonna wait for PC version... it will come!)... because the game attracted me.

...but I still don't like consoles. :P

Quick updates

In my Starcraft 2 Rant I stated mods might be awesome, I was correct. The sheer level of creativity from these "custom maps" is staggering and lots of fun. Even if you despise the idea of starcraft multiplayer, the custom maps are enough to keep you coming back.

In my MMO rant I mentioned DDO, I've stopped playing DDO and I'm on LOTRO now, which is better but eh. I'll be doing a post on this one soon. Oh, and Cataclysm is coming in December... yay?

Fallout New Vegas is coming soon, I can't wait to rip that game a new one... though a small naive and trusting part of me is hoping it will be better than fallout 3.

I'm playing Dawn of War 2 atm, it's good. I likes it, but it's not really a sequel to the original game, the mechanics are too different. I can see why fans didn't like it. More on this later.

Metro2033 still sucks hardcore... and is still full price.

Goldeneye - best FPS ever (canned laughter)

Recently, I've come across some articles gushing over the re-release of Goldeneye64 on the Wii... calling it the "Best First Person Shooter Ever!"

Best orly Evar.

Before I run into a long spiel about what I think about this claim, let me say this. Goldeneye for the N64 was a good shooter, definitely the best you could get for the N64 from my experience and worth a look if you like FPS games and have access to a N64.

But "BEST EVAR SHOOTER!!!11!1!eleven"? I wish I had been drinking something when I first saw this, I would have definitely done a spit-take before roaring with laughter, which I did anyway before saying "that is good joke!" in a poor Heavy Weapons Guy style accent.

The controls are horrible, it's on a console... Need I say more?
The pace of the game is slooooooow... compare it to quake and you'll see what I mean.
The graphics were "ok", mostly flat colours with minimal textures.
Enemies were just soldiers most of the time "yawn"
Single player was repeditive, see above
Multiplayer was repeditive, see above as well as local only

Awesome graphics! *cough*

I've played this game, unusual for me due to my anti-console stance but a cousin of mine had it way back in the 90's once when I visited; so I gave it a shot. My immediate reaction was "man, I'm glad this game is slower than a roadkill turtle, because these controls are making me act like I'm as slow as a roadkill turtle!". And what was really funny is when I played split-screen multiplayer with my cuz... I ripped him a new one so hard, he refused to play against me after about a half-hour claiming that I "cheated". :)

You know why people think this is the best shooter ever? It's what I call fanboi syndrome, it's the late 90's, you haven't seen any good shooters because you're a Nintendo fanboi, you play goldeneye and then you declare it the "BEST EVAR SHOOTER!!!11!1!eleven", satisfied that your declaration is truth, you tell your friends and the interwebs. But once it's on the interwebs, bastards like myself call you out on your narrow view of the genre and casually point to a dozen or so better games than your "BEST EVAR SHOOTER!!!11!1!eleven" with an arrogant smile on their face... kinda like I do now.

Half Life: Better graphics, better game.

Thank you, btw, I haven't laughed this hard since someone told me that WoW takes skill about 8 months back.

You want a shooter that's better? Try Quake, Half life, Unreal Tournament or Duke3D. These are all better games from the same period and each one is better on almost every score and Half Life is definately better in every way. Some would say the story of Goldeneye is better than Half Lifes strange Sci-Fi mixed with myth... I'd respond by saying that Valve actually worked for their story, and managed to make gameplay that fit with it instead of making a movie tie in game that changed 007 from a super spy into a mass murdering stock standard FPS protagonist. Heck, you want a shooter where you're more like a spy? Try Thief and Thief 2 or Deus Ex!

Goldeneye for the N64 is not the best FPS ever, it's not even the best of it's time, it's not even all that special. It's popularity is powered by the mystical energy of fanboiz, nothing more. When the remake comes out I predict that the fanboiz will split into two groups, the one that feels the new Goldeneye sucks ass, and one where the new one is sooo good they want to give it a tounge bath.... and the rest of us will say "it looks mediocre" and move on.

Fanboiz - 'nuff said.

I find it hilarious that Nintendo aren't even hiding their incapacity to come up with new ideas, I thought this Wii version of golden was just going to be a cheap port, but it's a full priced "new" game... but with the same levels, story, etc; but that's a rant for another time.

Goldeneye, for the Wii or the N64, is not the best of anything... Give it up fanboiz.

Metro 2033 - Most unoriginal First Person shooter ever or just trying too hard?

Metro2033 is a fairly lacklustre FPS that rips its story verbatim from a book of the same name. The story is the best part of Metro2033, and even that is kinda boring stock standard Post Apocalyptic dire future schlock ala' Fallout 3.

And we all know what I think of Fallout 3.

The environments are repetitive, mostly train tunnels or above ground bombed out ruins. Some of the enemies are interesting, such as these little electro-dudes that kill anything that moves. But most are just amorphous monsters that want to eat you or random humans. One of the better parts of the game is a section where you have to get past a group of Fascists fighting a group of Communists and neither like you. But it all goes downhill from there...

Especially when you meet the librarians; I hate these fucking things. The game throws you a string of forced stealth sections with these librarians, invincible ugly Ape like mofos that seem to be able to spot you no matter what anyway... When this happened, I went from "Metro 2033 is OK" to "RARGH!!! HAT YOU METRO2033!!! HAT YOU 4A GAMES!!!!". Heck, I didn't bother stealthing, it didn't work! I just ran through and died repeatedly until I got through... And I love stealth games done right... like Thief 2. Man that game rocked, I'd play that over Metro 2033 anyday.

Ultimately, what sets this game apart from any random FPS?

...it's Russian? No wait, there's STALKER.

...it's got train tunnels? ROFL! Like every FPS made in the last 10 years!

...it uses bullets as currency? Who cares, it's annoying anyway.

It's sad, because a game with it's setting all done on a silver platter should be able to present the setting well, and encourage us to pick up the book it's based on. Maybe what they should have done, was not make us the protagonist of the book, but a supporting character doing our own thing but in the same setting. That might have been better... give us a game where we can just explore and do quests and kill stuff (like fallout 3 except hopefully better) instead of dragged along like a puppy through more and more kilometers of boring arse train tunnels! What makes an enjoyable story in a book and an engaging story in a game are two different things!

Metro 2033 is still full priced ($79.99 USD) at time of writing... and it's not even a budget title.

Stay away from this boring PoS!

ps the russian sounding voice actors were kinda cool.... not 80 bucks cool, but they're something.

MMO's; WoW, DDO, others and why I'm burnt out.

I like to reflect on MMO's a lot lately... more than I like to play them recently anyways. What is it that makes them compelling? Why do I want that next level so bad? How is WoW still going so strong when the dev team seems to be intellectually on par with retarded monkeys?!?

*cough*

Anyway, what are the essential ingredients that make an MMO good or bad? How did WoW get to be so big while seemingly better games (from a certain PoV) lag far behind? I think there's several reasons...

1. WoW was made by Blizzard
Let's not ignore this Elephant in the room, I may have overstated this in my Starcraft rant but Blizzard has a rather massive reputation from their early games that may only now be starting to tarnish slightly for those on the fringe only just waking up from their fanboy(girl?)ish haze. Blizzard cashes in on this reputation every time they put look over function, fan service over real innovation in new releases.

But only a little, like a rain slowly eroding a mountain range.

2. WoW was made by Blizzard
I'm not cheating here, WoW was essentially the beginning of the end of my belief in Blizzard as an amazing company in terms of innovation in gaming, but WoW in of itself was a great example of it in some forms. No one can claim a better MMO around that time, and that I place other games over it now could be considered opinion... or attributed to burnout. We had the practically trademarked Blizzard cut scenes, (initially) great story & lore and a fairly friendly support staff (not so much now).

3. WoW is easy to understand
...almost pick up and play, and when the next expansion, Cataclysm, comes out... it'll be even easier. This is something I don't like now, but when I got into WoW it was my first MMO and I'll admit I was noobsauce; this is perhapes the most important thing. Most other games have a steep learning curve, and often the veteren players of these other games; often ex-wow players themselves, can be very negative to WoW players that join their game.

4. Warcraft strategy games
The awesomeness and story of these games built the world for WoW to exist in, while I believe the story has been modified slightly(read: raped) to suit the game mechanics and encounters Blizzard brought in over time, it's still fairly good overall and often the big bosses are compelling threats that you can feel need to die. Sometimes this feeling was dulled after killing a boss a hundred times... sometimes this feeling was amplified when a boss wouldn't drop your loot after said 100 kills.

So... I'm burnt out; why?

I guess the formula is no longer all that engaging, not all that interesting. I'm enjoying DDO though; I think that it's not WoW and has a lot more thought and freedom in defining my character.

Then again; I'm hoping to have a legendary soon, so mebbe I'll stick with WoW long enough to swing it at something! :D

P.S. I apologise to any retarded monkeys that may be reading this blog.

Starcraft (2) Sucks

It's been a while, but I can't allow myself to miss the opportunity to rag on starcraft and the recent sequel: Starcraft 2; Wind of the Fanboys.

Before I really start to lay it in, let me say that both starcraft games are good strategy games and both have pretty good storylines with SC2 giving us the practically trademarked amazing cutscenes that we expect of Blizzard...

But here's the question: is it fun?

And I came out of playing the single player with this answer "meh".

I was driven to finish the campaign because of the cutscenes and the story... but I'll never touch it again for several reasons...

1. Achievements blow
   
2. The strategy for every mission is "Here's a new unit for your arsenal, build crap tons of it and WIN!" with few exceptions
3. The "branching storylines" claim is, as always, a plate of bullshit and chips.

Hey, games industry, you want to give us a true "branching" storyline? That means a story that can have remarkably different endings. Having one or two facets of the story slightly different does not count! Oh look, I chose mission B instead of mission A, I HAS GREEN BOOTS INSTEAD OF BLUE!!! GO ME!!!

*sigh*

A lot of people have been drooling over this game, and the reason they invariably give me is "SC was the best strategy game ever", when I ask why that is I get this response "It's perfectly balanced". All I have to say to that is zerg rush; and SC2 appears to have taken the safe route when it comes to sequels and pretty well transplanted the units and game system from it's predecessor almost unchanged, although they did throw in a few new units and the system has been tweaked within an inch of it's life...

I'm not interested.

Of course, you might have heard of the stupid rearrangement of battle net that apparently Activision has pushed on players, I have no comment because I'm not playing this online. If playing the original taught me anything it's that some korean kid will be my first challenger and he'll be sporting top end units while I'm still building my first barracks. Fuck no!

(and yes, I know about the ranking system and I don't care :P)

However, there is a glimmer of hope: mods. Apparently you can do quite a lot with user made content, this is something I haven't even looked at but a friend told me that you can get complete mods that will turn your SC2 into Warcraft 3, american football and all sorts.

Might be worth a look... but Blizzard, next time take a bloody risk and shake it up a little, eh?

Oh, and anyone looking for a GOOD strategy game, I point towards the amusing Dawn Of War... which reminds me, I should pick up DoW2 sometime.