Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Dear Sega, please stop.

Dear Sega,

Please stop killing Sonic the Hedgehog. The Sonic franchise came from strong and humble beginnings as one of the platforming staples of the early generation of consoles, and has gone through so many revisionings and devolutions that the true essence of Sonic, running fast, has almost been entirely lost to poorly executed gimmicks and lack of proper testing.

Sonic the Hedgehog used to be billed as "the fastest thing alive." We as gamers were treated to Sonic 2 for Genesis, Sonic 3, Sonic and Knuckles, the fantastic Sonic Rush, the fun Game Gear iterations and Sonic Spinball...but something happened. It feels like you lost sight. Let's focus on the latest title though: Sonic Unleashed.

While talking with a friend of mine about the game (which we've almost beaten), we decided that if you were to make the Werehog into Knuckles, and CHIP into Tails, the game would be passable. But by stripping Sonic of what makes it fun to be Sonic, the game falters yet again (one of many hiccups on its road.) The Day stages are fun, fast and twitchy. They're rife with action and destruction and multiple paths and it feels like FINALLY we're playing a Sonic game! Then we have the overworld, the hub cities, and finally the hub cities hubs. Overcomplicated and messy. Collecting the Sun and Moon medals feels tacked on, and forced me to grind stages. I should never have to grind anything but rails in Sonic. If we could only get rid of the overworld, the inventory system, the lame interactions with the camera...the game's score would rise. That's right: by deleting features the game would be better.

Sonic Unleashed is not a bad game. It's an unfortunate one. The Day levels are fun, and if the Night levels were Knuckles they'd be fun too. But all that extra fluff, and the annoying game features makes it plod and drag itself along. I want someone to give me a hacked copy of the game, that's all the day levels from start to finish with the boss battles. That's all I really want from Sonic Unleashed.

Here's the plan, Sega: Open a division called Sonic Team America, and let them develop the next Sonic title. Take a hint from Miyamoto, who says Mario isn't about story. Sonic isn't about story. It's not about the Werehog and it's not about CHIP and it's not about the Black Knight. Sonic is about collecting rings, running damn fast, and saving the planet form Doctor Eggman with the power of the Chaos Emeralds, that's ALL. Sonic Team America will make one game, and if it fails, close'em. You've got the funds to do it, you've got the full ability to fund an American dev team, and you'll see the sales from their Sonic title top the sales of ALL previous next gen Sonic titles. You took a shot with Bioware, and it came out fun and interesting. Take a shot with a fresh team. They won't lost sight of what made, and will make, Sonic great.

Thank you for your time.

-Joe Locastro

PS: After hearing criticism for the Werehog, saying that you just "didn't do it right," is lame. Consider why people didn't like it. The Werehog levels aren't a Sonic game. They're a seperate entity, and they don't belong in a Sonic game. Don't "do it better", cut it. And focus on the speed levels.

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Red Faction Guerilla


So I made a mistake, and by the end of this review you'll be very aware of it.

Red Faction came in the darkness of the night on the wings of stellar reviews. Metacritic reports amazingly high scores for the first few pages, all mostly lauding the games destructibility and fun factor. Let's break it down.

Game play: The gameplay of RF:G is a tough fence for me to walk. On the Pros side of things there is the incredibly fun and rewarding destruction system. Placing charges, using your madly over-powered hammer and rocket launcher to tear buildings to shreds is great fun. It's satisfying to hear the creak as you can tell as building is about to fall on its own, then book it out as the girders tumble down around you. It's a rush.

Then there's everything else.

The controls for vehicles are sticky, making for a very doable but rigid driving experience. (To get really nitpicky: the character you pick up in your truck react to its movements but Mason doesn't even move his arms when he turns the wheels, he's more of an intelligent obelisk at that point.) Bailing from a vehicle is a hard to gauge action and picking up your teammates can be a crapshoot. But the real kicker is the mission layout. The game gives you a map to choose a location from to perform guerilla actions or story missions (which you have the option to do at any point). The main issue is that once you get to the mission's location you are just briefed on the mission, the actual mission is elsewhere. Back in the car, and you're off. Each mission takes two trips to reach, and that really started to irk me. I could never get my hands on appropriate ammo, or plot good routes, because each mission would result in me criss-crossing the map multiple times. To make a long tirade short: the game got boring (Plus, the guerillas never get mad when you kill them all or blow up their hangar I noticed...strange). 2/5

Graphics: The first thing I said when I looked at this game was "It looks like Mass Effect." The lighting is perfect, the character models are well made and it handles me blowing the living hell out of the environment very well. I didn't notice any slowdown at all. It's a beautiful game to look at, even if it is just the dusty red surface of Mars. One silly graphical note is that all NPCs seem to be packing heat, regardless whether they're guerillas or not. 5/5

Sound: The music was second fiddle, orchestral and sweeping as is fitting a sci-fi action game, but the sounds of the explosions and the bullets hitting flesh were spot on. Each explosion was fresh sounding, lingering in the air. Give it a better soundtrack and you'd really be cookin. 3/5

Lasting Appeal: Multiplayer. Without it, this game is Mercenaries 2 meets...Mercenaries 2. It's not a lot different. It's an open world game based on a pretty neat gimmick, and as a result it falls on it's face in other areas. The online multiplayer however is fun and fast for the most part, with destructable cover adding to the confusion and chaos. But it's not enough to hold me over with it, I traded the game in today. 2/5

Final Word: The mistake I made was buying a game without getting my hands on some real first impressions. The story mode left me yawning almost immediately, then overwhelmed me and left me yawning again. I couldn't get excited about the cookie cutter story and the lame mission layout, it really drove the experience of the game down. To solve this little hiccup: give me the GeoMod engine in a game that's not focused on it, like GTAIV or another open-world sandbox. Having the mod system as a side effect to my actions will give high action games even more depth. Right now this red rock adventure is leaving me a little spaced...

...

...someone shoot me.

Score: 12/20

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Game Design Journal #5 -or- Categorizing Game Designers

When it comes to categorizing the "Experiencisticalism" that I've sort of coined, I absolutely cannot place it on a chart comparing it to other types of design.  Here's why:

It's too fluid to be categorized.  If a narratologist doesn't create "Holy shit" experiences their game is boring.  If a ludologist doesn't do it, their game is boring.  All game designers use this style whether they think they are or not.  I just tend to focus on it, and bounce between styles depending on what the game needs.  

The reason I drew a big circle encompasing the triangle because it's not on the same level as other styles.  Not ABOVE it by any means but not held to the same categorization as the others.  Making a game without considering moments that will entice the player to keep playing is a recipe for disaster.  Your game could have the tightest controls, the best story, the greatest purpose, the awesomemest graphics...but if there's not meat in that bun you're wasting time and money.  ExperienceasticHolyShitism is everywhere.

I feel that in trying to categorize and label myself through online tests and surveys I move away from what I really am as a designer.  Design itself is a fluid art, an ebb and flow of many ideas and types and designs.  If Hideo Kojima can make Metal Gear Solid, then turn around and make comedy with it, and about it, and make several successful spin offs, then what does that make him?  All the games play different, place different emphasis on story, some have virtually zero purpose...but every game has gamers coming back for more.

Design isn't solid, not for the true greats at least.  If it was, we'd all be making the same game over and over again, and never really excelling.  As we learn more about making games, and work with our friends and peers we will break down the boundaries of our design types rapidly.  People inspire people way too quickly for them to not be affected.  By labeling someone, you limit them in your eyes to what you expect of them, and you limit them in their own mind because they know everything they do will fall within that label.  But, when we realize that each and every person in the room has the potential to create their own form of design, and that they usually will, we can begin to explore design from many, and much more open minded standpoints.

The chart that holds my style (Experiencismalisticology), and other styles in it looks like this: A big round table, at which all styles are sharing a meal of discovery and innovation, inviting new members to sit with them all and enjoy the lovely day on planet GameDesign.  If it were anything other it just wouldn't make any sense to me.

I feel rebellious, of course, writing this in my game journal, as it criticizes the very class I'm taking...but if I can't do this at Columbia College Chicago then I feel I may have made some misconceptions about the school along the way.

Bangorang,

Joe Locastro

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Space Marine Psychic Soldier X

I am tired of first-person shooter games featuring a cookie cutter main character. I can see why some would need to, and I can understand given a context of fighting soldiers and what not you'd need to have a character that fit the bill, but I raise this counter argument.

Name the main character of Pariah. Good, now name the main character of F.E.A.R.. Excellent. Now, name the main character of Half-Life 2. Well done.

Gordon Freeman is lauded as one of the best examples of the FPS protagonist in gaming history. He's a non-military man, a physicist. We as a gamer connect to him better, he makes more of an impact on us, I think. One other great example is Riddick. "Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay" is considered one of the best Xbox games ever made. Riddick isn't a a trained military man, but he is naturally talented and his world is much more interesting than one filled with super soldiers and the like.

Give me a game where the protagonist actually seems more human, maybe even cheerful at times? I'm tired of all this "My name is Blah-dy McBlahperson, and I know the truth/I used to be like you/I remember when it started."

Maybe I'm flowing a lot of hot air, but we've got a lot of room to grow as designers right now, and we need to take advantage of it. The new game coming out of Hi-Voltage Studios, "The Conduit," sure looks interesting and all, pushing the Wii to it's graphical best, but the story/aesthetic looks so boring/done/trite that I'm really not interested in the game at all. I feel like all I'd need to do is watch a video of someone playing for 10 minutes, nod at the great graphics, and go play something else. I'm sure I'll play it eventually, but they could have done so much more with story and development and character, but instead it looks like an amalgam of "Psychic Soldier Battles Aliens from Dimension X". I'm more interested in Capcom's Dark Void, and I've only seen a few screens/videos from it.

A note to any developer trying to press the limits of graphics and graphic capabilities on consoles: Don't let the story lag behind. Tacking on a story that's full of particles and normal maps won't leave a mark. Take the time to fill the world. It needs love too.

Saturday, December 13, 2008

Starring Me: My Final Paper for Game Culture

I began to play Second Life as a passing hobby while healing from my surgery, and I am a cyborg named Hibiki.  I began playing Left 4 Dead as a hobby with my roommates, where I am a survivor named Louis.  I play WoW to connect with friends from across the country and enjoy the world of Azeroth, in which I am a Blood Elf Hunter named Lacierda.  I move between these characters instantly, leaving behind a set of rules and inheriting another.  My world is divided into avatars, and I couldn’t be happier.

The avatar is the extension of the player in the game/world they decide to become a part of.  In this case, I will use the example of Second Life.  Due to my illness I was bedridden for a lot of time back in September.  I was sick and unwell, but thanks to my computer I had access to a world where I wasn’t sick or unwell, I was just fine.  Second Life filled a small gap within me, and I gave back tenfold with social commitments and promises towards social excellence.  Second Life, and indeed most social games, demand a level of respect in order for the players to understand each other.  In a world where your only representation is a 3D model you “speak” through, you need to be aware that you, and the people on the other end, are agreeing to disbelieve in each other for a while.  Sharing stories of your day, talking about out-of-game topics and even using voice chat all crack the edges of that, but in the end you still refer to that person by their avatar name, remember them by their avatar shape.  They’re as human as Gordon Freeman.

As I grew into a gamer, I began to get into my avatars.  Even avatars with voices or stories assigned to them like Mario or Sonic began to impress upon me a sense of self; I didn’t want Sonic to die/drown cause I would then be dead.  Through that thin paranoia I became a more aware gamer and player, and soon my gaming skills increased.  My mind would look for clues to stay alive, to keep moving in the world. 

Jumping forwards through the world of the silent protagonist (A concept where the hero of the story does not speak, in order to aide in the immersion of the gamer into the game world), I became Link from The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time.  Suddenly I wasn’t a hedgehog with a ‘tude, and people in the game world were speaking to me.  They would ask me questions and I would mentally answer, though Link would say nothing but his occasional “ki-ai” shout.  This presented me with even more opportunity to get into the character I was playing.  I had to put words in their mouth, and take their action into the third dimension.  I had choice.  Sonic has no choices.  If you don’t finish a level in ten minutes you die.  Link could stand still for hours if I wanted to, he could smash pots till the cows came home, and the world would continue to exist. 

I was drawn in even further with games like Half-Life, where the previously mentioned Gordon Freeman never spoke a word of protest as everything he met tried to kill him.  Even more interesting is that in Half-Life there are no cut scenes, Gordon is free to move through the world while people talk to him and around him.  I never felt outside of the situation, looking in.  I was using Gordon’s eyes to see the world, and his legs to move through it.  The movie “Being John Malkovich” is an excellent example of what it’s like to play a well made silent protagonist game: You are that person, but not forever.

As a gamer I grew attached to the idea of being the character.  It was light role-playing, solo role-playing, but it was and still is fun.  Soon a world was opened up to me though that allowed me to become a character with other people intent on the same end: the World of Warcraft.  I was using proprietary images and animations and a very set out list of rules in the game world to facilitate my presence in a true virtual world.  This was engrossing and terrifying all at the same time.  Suddenly my actions mattered to other people, even if it was only in terms of the game.  Instead of being Gordon Freeman and breaking crates, or using my partner Alyx Vance as cannon fodder for comedic effect I was Lacierda Delanoria, and I had to obey a set of social rules and graces I agreed upon entering the world.  My avatar became so much closer to becoming a true, virtual “me”.  But as I ventured into WoW, I was still developing other selves too, and the use of a handy function called “Play in windowed mode” allowed me to develop across many platforms at the same time.

Here was a situation where I could be using Trillian, Steam, WoW itself and browse my e-mail all at the same time.  I was able to effectively multiply myself over multiple systems with little effort, thanks to my development in the information age.  The author Sherry Turkle writes “Windows have become a powerful metaphor for thinking about the self as a multiple, distributed system,”(1) which perfectly jives with my mode of existence.  However, her thoughts go on to state that the result of this world of windows is a “decentered self that exists in many worlds,”(1) and I disagree.  As I use WoW and all of these other programs simultaneously I am not losing my center, much the same way a computer’s processor doesn’t live in each separate part of the computer, or a server doesn’t exist in the real world somewhere.  I become the hub: a pathway for information to flow in and out of and through me I filter the data, decide which “me” needs to have the information, generate the information and output it in microseconds.  Sure, from the other end, if you had windows open that merely showed the result of what I was doing all you’d see is four completely different conversations by four seemingly different people; But taking a look at my screen reveals me alt-tabbing through the windows, typing, moving, clicking the mouse and facilitating these outputs with extreme accuracy and efficiency.  My avatar wrangling skills are honed to a level beyond what I think Turkle would believe possible at the time of her writing.

The most recent technological step for the development of the avatar was the ultimate ability to control and manage all physical features of your avatar and how they affect the virtual world they’re in.  The program Second Life facilitates this by allowing us that control.  In Second Life, users (called “residents”) can create an avatar that looks like anything they want.  The possibilities are limitless, thanks to the ability to create your own items for use in-world.  A visual and audio 3D representation of one of my selves that I can fully manage is the closest we’ve come to true virtual representation.  I use Second Life for recreation, but I take my avatar very seriously.  I am recognized by my name, but my appearance is fairly static despite the ability to change at any second into anything I please.  Because of the level of attachment a player puts into their Second Life avatar, they are prone to take incredible care of it, which in turn, is taking incredible care of themselves.  It’s a feedback loop that previous virtual worlds had but not to this level.  If the avatar looks good, and is talking to fun people or doing fun things, then I the user feel good as well.  This two edged sword means if the avatar feels bad, then so do I.  As we approach the event horizon of avatar creation (where the singularity is an avatar indistinguishable from a real person) we come dangerously close to a world Turkle foresaw: a world where we really are investing emotion, time, energy and life force into a virtual self, and where that energy can be destroyed as easily as invested.  It’s already hard on people when their virtual girlfriends leave them, or when in-world drama spills into this world, I can only imagine what it will be like in 10 years when the world of the avatar approaches perfection.

The avatar is usually reserved for worlds where we create the character, but after being raised a gamer I see that any game where I affect the world puts me in control of an avatar of some kind. Throughout my investigations I’ve discovered all forms of avatars, how much we invest in them, and how much we honestly care about them.  The avatar is a part of nearly every American’s life now, from a username in an IRC chat, to a fully realized Second Life creation, to Gordon Freeman. The options are endless, and the future is full of promise and danger but the avatar is undeniably putting the paintbrush of the virtual world in the hands of the user, and letting them play.



Turkle, Sherry “Who Am We?” http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.01/turkle_pr.html

Sunday, September 7, 2008

Game Culture Assignment #1

Quote of the Assigned Reading: "When you read, you are always reading something in some way." -James Gee, page 1


I find Gee's decision to play a more "Adult" game called "The New Adventures of the Time Machine" hilarious. Considering I've never heard of the game, and that Deus Ex was out at the same time.

My impressions of the reading were tainted, at first, from a comment made by a girl in class that the book was "terrible...awful" etc, etc, ad infinitum. That's a powerful statement. Things like that tend to sit unfavorably on me because it
means no matter how hard I try I will already have just the thinest of opinions impressed on me as I enter the book. Well I'm happy to report she was right.

The book was written by James Gee. James Gee, although not openly admitting it at the beginning of the book, was not and probably still is not a gamer. I can walk onto a race track, pick out a car and drive it, and write a book about driving a racecar but I am not a racer. I am a person writing about being a racer, with language I have gleened is language racers use. These are foreign words like apex and drop shifting, drafting and cylinder heads. Sure I know the definitions of them all, why not. I know what they mean and how they apply. But I'm not a racer. I don't have one very, VERY crucial facet to my being that represents true understanding: instinct.

Gamers have gamer instinct. Here above is a screen capture of the game "The New Adventures of The Time Machine" that Gee played back in 2000 (Gamespot gave the game a 3.1, the press average was 5.3, and the developer no longer exists). After reading this, and talking to my roommate who also read this book, we both agreed that despite Gee not having gamer instincts, MOST critical writers lack the instinct of their subject. I digress. Gee didn't impress me, and hasn't so far. I guess we will see what is going on in his mind the more I read this book.

------------------------

The game I have chosen to play for my study is Tales of Vesperia. Now why did I choose this game? Good question. Here's a detailed list of reasons.

  1. I do not really like the Tales series of games. I was never really good at them and I got stuck in Tales of Symphonia and became embittered to the series. I think this game is a chance to open my eyes a tad and feel that freshness wash through. I am pretty excited to be playing it.
  2. It's new. I like old games, but in being critical thinkers I feel it just as important to look forward at what's being played now as to look back. Tales is new, came out last week. It's Xbox 360, it's pretty, it's co-op...it's a forward thinking game. I want to be at the front of something.
  3. I want to test myself. I don't want to write a plot point-by-point. A lot of game journals are just that. My journal will not be. I will try weekly to come up with some way to tie an experience of playing the game into gaming theory itself, in order to generate some interesting articles and not diary entries.
So...here I go journeying deep into the world of Tales of Vesperia. We'll see what happens when I come out the other side. The game is critically acclaimed. My friends can play it with me, and so far (Of the two hours I've played), the game itself is pretty much a blast. Gotta keep on keepin' on.









-----------------------------------------------------

Fallout 3 kicks its drug habit

So, Fallout 3 has been making waves. Personal waves thanks to it being Fallout 3 (I just reinstalled Fallout 1 and 2 in honor), and global waves thanks to its mentions of drug use. The game has been falling apart in the hands of international censors thanks to the inculsion of ingame drug use, and its portrayal. Australia specifically was going to ban the game all-together from its shores, but before they could Bethesda Softworks cleaned the game up. There are no more references to real world drugs in any build of Fallout 3.

Good idea? Probably. A case of unfair censorship? Nope. Countries can do what they like. Citizens will still get the content they seek. If Australia doesn't want players shooting up with real world drugs that makes perfect sense to me. It's rough to admit that media has to still fall victim to censorships but this is specifically INTERACTIVE media. Someone playing the game, someone profoundly stupid, may very well indeed assume that a drug in the game that cures what ails you is perfectly reasonable to use IRL, so to speak. They will likely die, and Bethesda Softworks will likely be sued. So I can perfectly understand the reasoning behind it, Bethesda. But I applaud you for trying. Too many tight hands on the creative process of games stifle world elements like that. I am not condoning drug use, but we didn't need it for the updated (and terrible) NARC, and we didn't need the graphical blurs of Manhunt 2.

Then again, turning on the news...I guess we do.



Sunday, August 10, 2008

Review: Castle Shikagami III


I play a type of game known as the "shmup" fairly often. Shmup is a shortened term for "Shoot'em Up", and it's an intense genre to enjoy. The staples are usually short game lengths (5 levels is typical), tons of bullets on screen with varying patterns (that a lot of die hards study and perfect dodging patterns for), and some sort of unique mechanic (for instance, changing colors in the game Ikaruga).

Early games that this genre must have gotten their inspiration from include the Gradius series, and the R-Type series. 1942 is also an excellent example of arcade "bullet hell" as it's known. There are dozens of varieties of shmups, but I particularly like the "bullet hell" genre.

At the center of that are a few games. The aforementioned Ikaruga, Perfect Cherry Blossom, Omega 5...I could go on. One of my original loves was the terribly voice acted Castle Shikagami II for the PS2. Now, there's Castle Shikagami III, out for the Wii. I couldn't resist.

Game play: Hate to say it, but it's super standard by most terms for the genre. You pick a character, a shot type, and get right at it. Where the home version stands out is in its options. There's many different difficulties to choose from, a roster of ten characters off the bat, two music tracks to pick from and so on. There's even a mode called "Dramatic Change" where you play with two characters at the same time, switching on the fly between the two. The story even changes based on what combination you use, resulting in branching storylines (Not to say the storylines are deep at all, but it's fun to mix and match). 4/5

Graphics: It's a shmup. Not a lot to expect here. The characters/enemies/environments are all 3D, but the game operates on a 2D plane, resulting in moments where you're unsure if an enemy is on level with you yet. They're nothing to get really excited about, in terms of spectacle. The beauty of the game comes from the bullet pattern variety, especially in boss battles. There are several different kinds of bullets, some destructable some not, and discerning them can be a bit of a chore when you're trying to dodge them all. Then again, this game was not designed to be easy. 2/5


Sound: The voice acting in this game, once again, is pretty abysmal. But that being said, it's a step forwards. The voices aren't all that terrible, and the in-game music is standard fair synthy-dance music, a staple in this style of game. The sound doesn't really float my boat. 1/5

Lasting Appeal: The game has several play modes, a few for two players even that up the amount of onscreen chaos to epic proportions. It's got unlockable options, rewards for dedicated playing. It's not a marathon game. You pick it up for about ten minutes, give it a round or two then switch to a nice long haul. 2/5

Final Word: I love shmups, I'll play them forever. This game was made for people with that love them as well. If you don't like your games weird, EXTREMELY japanese or frustratingly difficult, avoid the game and series alltogether. If you enjoy a challenge, anime, or a quick and fun experience, give it a shot and see what you think. My score is based on it's over all appeal. I've included my personal score as well.

Score: 9/20

MY biased score: 17/20, as far as good shmups go, this one is pretty damn great.

Here is a great site to downlaod some free to play shmups. Check them out!