If a developer who's previous best game had "Justice League Heroes" somewhere in it's title could make the best Contra game ever, then why can't every developer make a good Contra game? The answer is that Wayforward Technologies hadn't been given a fair chance before Contra 4. But let's give some other random dev a chance and publish the game on wiiware. Developers who happened to like NeoContra. A Ps2 Contra other than Shattered Soldier. Sniffle Sniffle.
But the developers didn't do as bad a job as I thought they would. Sure, the voice acting's worse than it was in Hard Corps (that took quite an effort), some songs on the soundtrack are painful to listen to, and the graphics feel primitive, but the level design was passable. Unlike Hard Corps, Rebirth understood that Contra isn't about being hard, it's about being fun by challenging yourself. I rarely felt like a death was cheap or because of bad design, and when I did, I eventually realized that it was wrong of me to think so. The game is the good kind of difficulty all the way through.
Although I feel a bit dishonest about calling it "difficult". I don't really think the infinite continues is the issue; that's a change I welcome. The real issue is that the game on nightmare with seven lives is about as hard as Contra 3 on easy with, say, five lives? Not exactly difficult enough to be called Contra, eh?Sure, this makes it better to play with with you Contra-inept friends, but, considering how little difference in difficulty it feels like there is between the four different settings, I think this co-op friendly design could've been implemented better.
However, some of the gameplay aspects annoyed me. I liked how Contra 4 had two different levels of power-ups and made your starter weapon next to useless; that's what made the game so intense (you lose your power-up when you die). Rebirth scaled your arsenal of power-ups down to three, all of which have one level. None of them have the rate of fire of your standard machine gun. And what are the three lucky power-ups? Obviously, spread shot's in them. Homing found its way into the game, much to my delight. And, last but not least... LASER!!!! A power-up hated as much as spread shot is loved. All it does is damage, but spread shot at point blank does more, and laser is slower than any other weapon, making it less than useless. So two power-ups. No big deal.
I'm happy to have another Contra game that doesn't feel like a travesty, but I also feel like it could have easily been better. Maybe this will truly mark a Rebirth of the Contra series, or maybe it'll be a repeat of what happened on the PS2.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Colossal Failure
I am a big fan of well made shooters, and I'm also a big hater of poorly made shooters. You'd think that would be a lot of people's mentality, but the fact that Frantic 2 got zetta better ratings than Pixelvader proves you wrong. So today I'm going to review yet another bad shooter: Cube Colossus!
The idea of the game is that you run around shooting cubes. So no, it's not fun because it's different. You can upgrade your ship's attack, energy (more or less translates to firing speed), and shields, as well as buying new weapons and ships. Uninteresting upgrade system. With all this, the game has to be well-made, like Pixelvader, to be fun. Or it could have a good storyline, but I only played the first five lives levels, so the potentially interesting storyline was lost on me, although the writing did have it's merits, I will admit that.
But the game seems to think that having a ridiculously small roster of enemies is okay. Which it most certainly isn't. To add to this, enemies fill the screen, taking up all the space you would use to, you know, dodge? But who needs to dodge attacks when you've got a ridiculously easy game with an upgrade system that has the potential to take all the challenge out of everything? LOLSAUCE! Dodging attacks!
But the real shortcoming of this game is the controls. Rather than moving with WASD and aiming with the mouse, you move with the mouse and aim with WASD. Now, obviously, aiming with WASD is a zetta terrible idea that could never, ever, ever, ever, EVER work, so the developers added in an auto targeting system. Which would have worked if your enemies weren't constantly moving or your bullets were fast enough to compensate for this, but that simply isn't the case, so you have to aim with WASD, which feels clunky and unusable since your aim changes directions constantly to compensate for the movement of the enemy you're targeting. This can easily be remedied by purchasing a spreadshot-like weapon that doesn't do as much damage (but the game' so easy that you won't care), but then all you're doing is dodging. And, since this game managed to make dodging BORING...
All in all, Cube Colossus isn't fun. Maybe someone who played through the whole game could tell me that the story makes it worth it, but I simply don't care. I'm going to go replay Pixelvader because that's more fun than this.
The idea of the game is that you run around shooting cubes. So no, it's not fun because it's different. You can upgrade your ship's attack, energy (more or less translates to firing speed), and shields, as well as buying new weapons and ships. Uninteresting upgrade system. With all this, the game has to be well-made, like Pixelvader, to be fun. Or it could have a good storyline, but I only played the first five lives levels, so the potentially interesting storyline was lost on me, although the writing did have it's merits, I will admit that.
But the game seems to think that having a ridiculously small roster of enemies is okay. Which it most certainly isn't. To add to this, enemies fill the screen, taking up all the space you would use to, you know, dodge? But who needs to dodge attacks when you've got a ridiculously easy game with an upgrade system that has the potential to take all the challenge out of everything? LOLSAUCE! Dodging attacks!
But the real shortcoming of this game is the controls. Rather than moving with WASD and aiming with the mouse, you move with the mouse and aim with WASD. Now, obviously, aiming with WASD is a zetta terrible idea that could never, ever, ever, ever, EVER work, so the developers added in an auto targeting system. Which would have worked if your enemies weren't constantly moving or your bullets were fast enough to compensate for this, but that simply isn't the case, so you have to aim with WASD, which feels clunky and unusable since your aim changes directions constantly to compensate for the movement of the enemy you're targeting. This can easily be remedied by purchasing a spreadshot-like weapon that doesn't do as much damage (but the game' so easy that you won't care), but then all you're doing is dodging. And, since this game managed to make dodging BORING...
All in all, Cube Colossus isn't fun. Maybe someone who played through the whole game could tell me that the story makes it worth it, but I simply don't care. I'm going to go replay Pixelvader because that's more fun than this.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Wasn't your Mann Gegan Mann music video enough?
So, I just saw the album cover art for Rammstein's newest album, which the name of could not be discerned through the sea of asterisks iTunes kindly provided, and uh...
I'm not downloading that album. Ever.
I'm not downloading that album. Ever.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
I'd put a cheesy pun in the title, but the developers already did for me
Lots of video game franchises have histories of developer shifts, switching publishers, bad games in the series, etc. etc., but none of them really seem to also be a lesson in game design the way the history of the Contra series does. Contras one and two were, even for their time, brutally difficult, but still managed to attract a fan base. Why? Because they were zetta awesome. Contra three is an undisputed classic because it was even more zetta amazing, but after that, the series started to decline when the developers left to form Treasure and program Seven Force. With the exception of Shattered Soldier, none of the games were much fun, relying on innovative gameplay like 3rd person elements and health bars rather than good design.
Just recently, I played the Contra game that marked the start of the series' decline, Contra: Hard Corps. Just from reading the title I know something was wrong because all Contra games are hardcore. You don't need to advertise it in the factoring title! But after starting to play, I realized the developers weren't complete idiots. Sure, they took away the difficulty select and the option to give yourself more than three lives, but they gave you different characters that had different upgrades, a gameplay change I'd actually call progress rather than a marketing gimmick.
Now then, Hard Corps saw that Contra three had taken advantage of the new technology brought along by the SNES to make more bosses, some of which were zetta epic. The logical step now that you've transferred to the Genesis would be to go all the way and make the game 80% bosses, right? That may have been a good idea, but what wasn't a good idea was not doing a good job making these bosses. Contra three had the kind of bosses that shoot lasers, whereas too many of the bosses in Hard Corps were the kind of bosses that you needed to have faced before to have a chance to beat, which isn't good when you only have three lives, plus maybe two bonus lives, and lose your power-up whenever you die. For example, one of the bosses spawns on the ground on the right side of the screen, but waits until you've had enough time to walk over to the right side of the screen before spawning. It's a timer, so if you've faced the boss before and lost a life because you were so arrogant as to walk towards the end of the level (you factoring hectopascal!), you'll know what to do. But on your first playthrough, you suffer a cheap death.
Other bosses are an exercise in standing still and pressing the shoot button, while some are just plain easy. Don't believe me? Go onto youtube and watch anyone's playthrough of the first level. In that level, there's a boss that cannot attack the spot right under his hitzone until after you've had enough time to kill him with the starter weapon. It really just wastes my time when I want to be having fun.
On the other hand, this game was quite graphically impressive for its time. The opening was amazing, and a lot of the bosses have zetta cool animations. The soundtrack was also amazing, especially for the genesis. Anyone who's into synthetic video game music should check it out. I will, however not lie; the synthetic "voice acting" really did annoy me. It worked for Brownie since, you know, he's a robot, but was otherwise a fail.
The storyline and writing, on the other hand, I must attack with extreme prejudice. The villain's hiding under a garbage dump! What the factor? Iz are evil cause I talk like a villain! I trying to overthrow government that could be stabbing puppies to entertain selves! I evil! Now, not many video games had good storylines at this time, but considering how they actually have periods where the game stops for dialogue, it annoys me that they can't at least try to make it interesting.
What I guess really went wrong with Hard Corps is that they were trying to be hard for the sake of hard. The first three Contras and Contra 4 were hard for the sake of being fun. Making games hard isn't a good idea if you're just doing it because you can. You need to pair it design that isn't factored, or your game is going to suck.
Just recently, I played the Contra game that marked the start of the series' decline, Contra: Hard Corps. Just from reading the title I know something was wrong because all Contra games are hardcore. You don't need to advertise it in the factoring title! But after starting to play, I realized the developers weren't complete idiots. Sure, they took away the difficulty select and the option to give yourself more than three lives, but they gave you different characters that had different upgrades, a gameplay change I'd actually call progress rather than a marketing gimmick.
Now then, Hard Corps saw that Contra three had taken advantage of the new technology brought along by the SNES to make more bosses, some of which were zetta epic. The logical step now that you've transferred to the Genesis would be to go all the way and make the game 80% bosses, right? That may have been a good idea, but what wasn't a good idea was not doing a good job making these bosses. Contra three had the kind of bosses that shoot lasers, whereas too many of the bosses in Hard Corps were the kind of bosses that you needed to have faced before to have a chance to beat, which isn't good when you only have three lives, plus maybe two bonus lives, and lose your power-up whenever you die. For example, one of the bosses spawns on the ground on the right side of the screen, but waits until you've had enough time to walk over to the right side of the screen before spawning. It's a timer, so if you've faced the boss before and lost a life because you were so arrogant as to walk towards the end of the level (you factoring hectopascal!), you'll know what to do. But on your first playthrough, you suffer a cheap death.
Other bosses are an exercise in standing still and pressing the shoot button, while some are just plain easy. Don't believe me? Go onto youtube and watch anyone's playthrough of the first level. In that level, there's a boss that cannot attack the spot right under his hitzone until after you've had enough time to kill him with the starter weapon. It really just wastes my time when I want to be having fun.
On the other hand, this game was quite graphically impressive for its time. The opening was amazing, and a lot of the bosses have zetta cool animations. The soundtrack was also amazing, especially for the genesis. Anyone who's into synthetic video game music should check it out. I will, however not lie; the synthetic "voice acting" really did annoy me. It worked for Brownie since, you know, he's a robot, but was otherwise a fail.
The storyline and writing, on the other hand, I must attack with extreme prejudice. The villain's hiding under a garbage dump! What the factor? Iz are evil cause I talk like a villain! I trying to overthrow government that could be stabbing puppies to entertain selves! I evil! Now, not many video games had good storylines at this time, but considering how they actually have periods where the game stops for dialogue, it annoys me that they can't at least try to make it interesting.
What I guess really went wrong with Hard Corps is that they were trying to be hard for the sake of hard. The first three Contras and Contra 4 were hard for the sake of being fun. Making games hard isn't a good idea if you're just doing it because you can. You need to pair it design that isn't factored, or your game is going to suck.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
A franticly written review
So recently I looked at the comments for my beloved pixelvader after successfully beating it without health regeneration (not as hard as I thought. Missiles are overpowered, too), and some noobs thought Frantic was better the same way some noobs think Rock Band is better than Guitar Hero. /point. Now anyways, I had played Frantic before and wondered how any factoring hectopascal could be stupid enough to think that Frantic is fun, let alone more zetta fun than Pixelvader.
Nonetheless, I gave them the benefit of the doubt and decided to play Frantic 2, failsauce edition. I started by clicking the easy button, then immediately came to regret that. I then started over, clicked the hard button, and couldn't tell the difference. See, Pixelvader actually had a degree of difficulty to it. Didn't quite reach Touhou or Contra standards for difficulty, but who gives a digit!
I was also befuddled by the title, since bullets seem to move at a rate of about two pixels a second. Two factoring pixels. Seriously, my grammy could outrun these bullets. Sure, there are a lot of them, but that's only because they stay on the screen for an hour apiece. Bullets also have the zetta annoying tendency to not move until a few years after they've spawned, perhaps to give the player the impression that this game is indeed zetta challenging and they only beat it because they're psychic and can see the bullets coming before they move.
The game was also a bigger Touhou rip-off than Pixelvader, directly copying its drifting system. This drifting system was also zetta easy to abuse, since, you know, the bullets move ridiculously slow. Furthermore, your sprite just has to get near the bullets, not on the bullets, making drifting the most ridiculously easy thing you'll ever do. Kind of like beating this game.
And, unlike in Pixelvader, the bosses are nothing to write home about. They're all simplistic, which isn't surprising since they're all the same. They all start stationary with some turrets at their side, then start moving once the turrets are gone while shooting bullets that start stationary, only visible to the psychic and the not psychic, before moving in their bland and uninspired patterns, all while your tiny hit zone maneuvers itself through them with no challenge since this game is easy, slow paced, and, overall, not challenging. If you want a fun bullet hell game, then please... just play Touhou.
Nonetheless, I gave them the benefit of the doubt and decided to play Frantic 2, failsauce edition. I started by clicking the easy button, then immediately came to regret that. I then started over, clicked the hard button, and couldn't tell the difference. See, Pixelvader actually had a degree of difficulty to it. Didn't quite reach Touhou or Contra standards for difficulty, but who gives a digit!
I was also befuddled by the title, since bullets seem to move at a rate of about two pixels a second. Two factoring pixels. Seriously, my grammy could outrun these bullets. Sure, there are a lot of them, but that's only because they stay on the screen for an hour apiece. Bullets also have the zetta annoying tendency to not move until a few years after they've spawned, perhaps to give the player the impression that this game is indeed zetta challenging and they only beat it because they're psychic and can see the bullets coming before they move.
The game was also a bigger Touhou rip-off than Pixelvader, directly copying its drifting system. This drifting system was also zetta easy to abuse, since, you know, the bullets move ridiculously slow. Furthermore, your sprite just has to get near the bullets, not on the bullets, making drifting the most ridiculously easy thing you'll ever do. Kind of like beating this game.
And, unlike in Pixelvader, the bosses are nothing to write home about. They're all simplistic, which isn't surprising since they're all the same. They all start stationary with some turrets at their side, then start moving once the turrets are gone while shooting bullets that start stationary, only visible to the psychic and the not psychic, before moving in their bland and uninspired patterns, all while your tiny hit zone maneuvers itself through them with no challenge since this game is easy, slow paced, and, overall, not challenging. If you want a fun bullet hell game, then please... just play Touhou.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
guitar hero vs. rock band round 2
well its been an exciting three years for rythem games. before 2007 we had games like DDR, beat mania, and other stuff that im sure didnt suck. but i remember playing the best in the new (and what used to be called innovative) guitar hero series. the first guitar hero one was massivly overlooked. what do i mean? can anyone, without the help of the internet, remember 7 songs from it?.............. no? didnt think so.
then guitar hero 2 came and blew everyone....... 's freakin socks off.
it was more thrashy, more hardcore, and more humouris ("trogdor", "thunderhorse", "elephant bones") and felt like an actual guitar game with music for almost anyone.
then 2007 reared its oversold head and dear sweet harmonix left its forbidden lover, red octane, to go off a write L. ron hubberd fan fiction.
not really, they went to make rock band.
so the first music game we saw that fatefull year was red octanes (and its new boy toy neversoft) guitar hero 3, a game that apperently ran full fledged out the door and was all the way in san antonio before it relised it foregot to put on pants.
metaphores rule.
what do i mean?
even though it had by far the best soundtrack of the series, it had lost its thrashyness and traded in the series staple of classic rock for a more new age audiance.
it was more about hitting the right notes than seeing how fast you could brake your controller. and i felt kinda disapointed.
it did have some great bands,
slipknot
RATM
deftones
dead kennedys
level 70 elite tauren chieften
foo fighters
and queens of the stone age
as well as some real crap,
priesstess
tenacious d
heart
but the problem i have is with the good bands they have, guitar hero (as well as mtv) has a way of commiting musical suicide that not even beethoven could of belived.
what do i mean again?
guitar hero takes an unpopular band, over plays one of its songs and suddenly you have little kids saying they've listened to "before i forget" before it was popular and cant name another slipknot song to save there worthless lives.
and that pisses me off.
so any way rock band kicked guitar heros ass like crack kicked dj a.m's ass. (wow that is way to soon)
rock band was inovative and fun with tons of dlc in the first few weeks of release.
but guitar hero would rise again in 2008. guitar hero picked up (totaly f**king ripped of) on the whole band idea with lousy drums, an upgraded guitar and a universal mic. wow.
but that aside it had an awsome tracklist that spanned a wide array of music fans.
it even had something for the 4% of us in the country that still like TOOL. and something for the rest who hate it.it was still a joy to play even with faulty equipment. and even with the help of ROCK JAM(tm) instruments kept catching on fire or something stupid.
rock band 2 did not fair well that year. the instrument trouble was finaly fixed and the game looked alot better, the only problem was he tracklist. it kinda sucked.
so 2008 goes to guitar hero
(wait, guitar hero had that insufferable song by paramore)....
ITS A TIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
now 2009 has come and for some reason the human race is still going strong.
and thus again we have an on going war between the thrashers and people with friends.
guitar hero again started of the year with guitar hero mettalica, in which i have a two word review,
metallica, yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay (sarcasm)
and a few months later we get sma(sh-its) ha ha. but seriuosly who cares.
and now we got Hugh Heffner advertising guitar hero 5 (showing that now guitar hero is officialy for dumb blonds and old guys)
what do i have to say about gh5.
it is =>garbage.
yes the juke box mode is nice and the track list does have some good titles ("smells like teen spirit", about f**king time) but if you will look closer you will see black magic at work.
first of all, Curt Cobain makes a cameo. wierd, I could of sworn he was dead.
BLACK MAGIC !!!!!!!!!!!!!&&&%%%%%%%%%%$$$$$$$$$$$$
also in songs like du hast, judeth and blue orchid, what the hell instrument are you playing?
in du hast its mostly key board and how can you include blue orchid in the bass chareer when the white stripes dont even have a bassist.
this is not a guitar game, its an animal farm key board simulater that makes different instruent noises, minus the cow and the pig.
im afraid the year belongs to rock band yet again for giving us a half-way decent portable game and a game for all the well deserving beatles fans (im not one but my roomates are)
and even if your not a beatles fan, the songs are fun to play, even more fun to sing and have a trippy backround eouforea. its fun. okay. its bright and wavey and its a lot cheaper than a pound of weed (yet almost as damaging to your brain).
so looks like rock band narrowly makes it just by having a guitar game featuring real guitars.
so the score is 1.5 to 1.5 and i cant wait to see next years................
what..................
i just found this odd game that comes free with guitar hero 5. holy crap in a peta! the songs.. are....
GOOD!
what witch craft is this.. gasp its.......
cools.
though it may be a giveaway gift, in many ways its better than the game its trying to promote.
why? well its f**king free! also it has a lot of great songs and just like the beatles rock band, you dont have to like van halen for the songs to be fun.
also, ITS FREE!
well ttff for now my wayward kittens (metalacolypse rules, whens that going to be a guitar hero game?)
heres van halens track list:
Ain't Talkin' 'Bout Love"
Van Halen
"And the Cradle Will Rock..."
Van Halen
"Atomic Punk"
Van Halen
"Beautiful Girls"
Van Halen
"Best of You"
Foo Fighters
"Cathedral" (solo)
Van Halen
"Come to Life"
Alter Bridge
"Dance the Night Away"
Van Halen
"Dope Nose"
Weezer
"Double Vision"
Foreigner
"End of Heartache" "The End of Heartache"
Killswitch Engage
"Eruption" (solo)
Van Halen
"Everybody Wants Some!!"
Van Halen
"Feel Your Love Tonight"
Van Halen
"First Date"
Blink-182
"Hang ‘Em High"
Van Halen
"Hear About It Later"
Van Halen
"Hot for Teacher"
Van Halen
"Ice Cream Man"
Van Halen
"I'm the One"
Van Halen
"I Want It All"
Queen
"Jamie's Cryin'"
Van Halen
"Jump"
Van Halen
"Little Guitars"
Van Halen
"Loss of Control"
Van Halen
"Master Exploder"
Tenacious D
"Mean Street"
Van Halen
"(Oh) Pretty Woman"
Van Halen
"Pain"
Jimmy Eat World
"Painkiller"
Judas Priest
"Panama"
Van Halen
"Pretty Fly (for a White Guy)"
Offspring The Offspring
"Rock and Roll Is Dead"
Lenny Kravitz
"Romeo Delight"
Van Halen
"Runnin' with the Devil"
Van Halen
"Safe European Home"
Clash The Clash
"Semi-Charmed Life"
Third Eye Blind
"Sick, Sick, Sick"
Queens of the Stone Age
"So This Is Love?"
Van Halen
"Somebody Get Me a Doctor"
Van Halen
"Space Truckin'"
Deep Purple
"Spanish Fly" (solo)
Van Halen
"Stacy's Mom"
Fountains of Wayne
"Takedown" "The Takedown"
Yellowcard
"Unchained"
Van Halen
"White Wedding"
Billy Idol
"You Really Got Me"
Van Halen
(wikipedia.org)
For Great Justice
So yes, some republicans decided that Barack Obama's speech on education had brainwashing in it and that they shouldn't let their kids watch it. I heard this before hearing the speech, so I was zetta befuddled by this controversy. See, if Obama walked up to that podium, said, "Try hard in school," and stepped down, the meaning of his speech would have been communicated, it just wouldn't have been as convincing.
I am reminded of John McCain's add where he compared Obama to Paris Hilton. Is that why we should've voted for Obama? Because he didn't try hard in school, just like Paris Hilton? Or I know, you just want to teach your kids that all liberals are hellspawns that should not even be given the decency of listening to a simple speech that preaches morals anyone with a responsibility function in their brain would agree with. Do your homework, kids! Satan's word. Being successful isn't easy! Did he just try to convince me that genetic talent isn't a free ride through life? Don't drop out of school! But when will my kids do what I want them to do if they don't drop out of school? Honestly, you'd think evolution would have killed off these people before fire was discovered. Or maybe not believing in evolution frees you from it being real. At least, that's what they'd argue. Idiots.
I am reminded of John McCain's add where he compared Obama to Paris Hilton. Is that why we should've voted for Obama? Because he didn't try hard in school, just like Paris Hilton? Or I know, you just want to teach your kids that all liberals are hellspawns that should not even be given the decency of listening to a simple speech that preaches morals anyone with a responsibility function in their brain would agree with. Do your homework, kids! Satan's word. Being successful isn't easy! Did he just try to convince me that genetic talent isn't a free ride through life? Don't drop out of school! But when will my kids do what I want them to do if they don't drop out of school? Honestly, you'd think evolution would have killed off these people before fire was discovered. Or maybe not believing in evolution frees you from it being real. At least, that's what they'd argue. Idiots.
Monday, September 7, 2009
MOAR FAIL!
So yes, I've been pre-ordering my share of albums, getting early single downloads, and then being zetta aggravated because, you see, it turns out that half the bands I decided to pre-order the albums of are idiots. Factoring idiots. As in, they're all like, "this song a f***ing amazing!!!!! It overshadows everything good you have heard before this song!"
And Three Days Grace was lying. Or, if the fan reception tells me anything, they were selling out. Mainstreamingizing their factoring song as much as they can so everyone will be hyped up about their album when, in reality, they failed to produce a better single than Paramore.
And, to Paramore's credit, I was actually concerned about them releasing a crappy single. Considering all the hype was being shoved onto Misery Business, CrushCrushCrush, despite being a zetta terrible song, got quite a bit of popularity. Monetarily, the best thing to do to react to that would be to release another CrushCrushCrush as the single for their next album. But they didn't. Now, Three Days Grace, you factoring hectopascals, what can we learn from this? Not to pay $60 for special editions of your album the way I did, that's for sure. Now I don't know what I'll do with that t-shirt I'll get with it because wearing it would be a mark of shame. Thanks for being nice to your fans, you assholes! Fucking assholes!
Now, I'm not the kind of person who says my favorite band is selling out because one of their singles got on Guitar Hero or because you can buy their songs off of iTunes, I judge selling out by the sound of a band. Three Days Grace went for a more mainstream sound, blending with all those other metal bands, while Paramore diverged from their wuss-friendly pop-punk to anarchist-friendly punk. Is it unfair to judge these bands by their singles? Maybe in the case of Three Days Grace since their two guitarists differ greatly in style and sound. But honestly, if Paramore's got a better single than you, then all my respect is gone. So goodbye, Three Days Grace! You're going down from #3 to #4! See, it says on your website...
And Three Days Grace was lying. Or, if the fan reception tells me anything, they were selling out. Mainstreamingizing their factoring song as much as they can so everyone will be hyped up about their album when, in reality, they failed to produce a better single than Paramore.
And, to Paramore's credit, I was actually concerned about them releasing a crappy single. Considering all the hype was being shoved onto Misery Business, CrushCrushCrush, despite being a zetta terrible song, got quite a bit of popularity. Monetarily, the best thing to do to react to that would be to release another CrushCrushCrush as the single for their next album. But they didn't. Now, Three Days Grace, you factoring hectopascals, what can we learn from this? Not to pay $60 for special editions of your album the way I did, that's for sure. Now I don't know what I'll do with that t-shirt I'll get with it because wearing it would be a mark of shame. Thanks for being nice to your fans, you assholes! Fucking assholes!
Now, I'm not the kind of person who says my favorite band is selling out because one of their singles got on Guitar Hero or because you can buy their songs off of iTunes, I judge selling out by the sound of a band. Three Days Grace went for a more mainstream sound, blending with all those other metal bands, while Paramore diverged from their wuss-friendly pop-punk to anarchist-friendly punk. Is it unfair to judge these bands by their singles? Maybe in the case of Three Days Grace since their two guitarists differ greatly in style and sound. But honestly, if Paramore's got a better single than you, then all my respect is gone. So goodbye, Three Days Grace! You're going down from #3 to #4! See, it says on your website...
"the only ones we could really relate to were the true fans. They know what's going on inside your head because they are the ones that are hearing it in your music"
...And you just threw that away. Congratulations! You get the idiot of the year award! I hopre you're happy now!
Friday, September 4, 2009
Interactive storytelling
So yeah, Unskippable did their conclusion to Metal Gear August, and that made me start wondering: Why the factor was MGS 4 ever so popular? I've never played it, but I've heard enough to know that it can hardly be called a game. Unskippable jokingly said that it was a movie where the player occasionally got control.
Paradoxically, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare was also quite popular. Another game I've never played but have heard enough about to know that I do want to. Supposedly, one of the joys of COD 4 is that you're in control even when you're playing as a character who's on the brink of death. After seeing that scene in MGS 4 via Unskippable where everyone's being inflicted mass pain because of some uber weapon, I thought to myself, "You know, that would be zetta cool if you were in control." Imagine just playing normally, when, all of the sudden, snake starts keeling over in pain and you move much slower. You're still in control and led to believe that the mission's not over.You limp around, trying to fight, yet unsuccessfully. A feeling of dread comes over you as you are led to believe that you're a second a way from the game over screen...
The definition of a game includes the word interactive. Cutscenes are not interactive, and thus should be avoided. Even if the events are scripted, the player should still be able to control the character when possible. Take Bioshock. Would watching Atlus get attacked be as suspenseful if your hands were away from the keyboard, convinced that you can't do anything? But even though you can't, restricting the players actions with a wall rather than disconnecting the controls makes you feel like the reason you can't help Atlus is because you're not trying hard enough. A fabrication? Yes. A zetta convincing fabrication? Double yes.
So come now, Hideo Kojima. It would have been easier to make a movie rather than fully-rendered cutscenes. Perhaps MGS 4 had a good storyline, but I buy video games to play. Whether I'm playing a part in a story or having fun shooting aliens, I don't give a digit, but really. Let me play.
Paradoxically, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare was also quite popular. Another game I've never played but have heard enough about to know that I do want to. Supposedly, one of the joys of COD 4 is that you're in control even when you're playing as a character who's on the brink of death. After seeing that scene in MGS 4 via Unskippable where everyone's being inflicted mass pain because of some uber weapon, I thought to myself, "You know, that would be zetta cool if you were in control." Imagine just playing normally, when, all of the sudden, snake starts keeling over in pain and you move much slower. You're still in control and led to believe that the mission's not over.You limp around, trying to fight, yet unsuccessfully. A feeling of dread comes over you as you are led to believe that you're a second a way from the game over screen...
The definition of a game includes the word interactive. Cutscenes are not interactive, and thus should be avoided. Even if the events are scripted, the player should still be able to control the character when possible. Take Bioshock. Would watching Atlus get attacked be as suspenseful if your hands were away from the keyboard, convinced that you can't do anything? But even though you can't, restricting the players actions with a wall rather than disconnecting the controls makes you feel like the reason you can't help Atlus is because you're not trying hard enough. A fabrication? Yes. A zetta convincing fabrication? Double yes.
So come now, Hideo Kojima. It would have been easier to make a movie rather than fully-rendered cutscenes. Perhaps MGS 4 had a good storyline, but I buy video games to play. Whether I'm playing a part in a story or having fun shooting aliens, I don't give a digit, but really. Let me play.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
