Game Sponge

Rocksmith, week 8 check in

2012-01-12T21:29:00.005-05:00

I'm calling this week eight, cause it's only 8 weeks play time... and I'm weak, and haven't been practicing during the holidays and all that. And to be honest, I got even more into Dark Souls after we completed it. Strangely enough, so I've been playing that.

Regardless. I feel I maxed out on Nirvana In Bloom as much as I could at my current skill level. So I moved on to other songs in hopes to get my collective skill higher to one day go back and master the solo section. I've been able to get almost 100% on the song "Angela" but yet again, I'm having issues with the solo (a.k.a. "man-determiner" section) :/

I then decided to take a song I like a lot, Franz Ferdinanz "Take Me Out" and see how I could do. This song doesn't have much of a solo in the middle like all the other songs, it's more of a solo throughout the entire song. Or at least if feels that way :/ But I like it, so I'm giving it a go to use it to help me get better overall at fast strumming, and finger placement around different frets and strings. So, here's 2 vids of me getting DESTROYED by it. Trust me, you think these two videos are long, you should hear what it's like to listen to me play the whole song :/ My poor wife.

then it gets worse...

Rocksmith, week 7 check in

2011-12-16T19:32:00.000-05:00

Haven't practiced a whole lot, been working a ton and hanging out with family during the holidays. However, I was able to increase the difficulty on the solo to 85% up from 80%. Which is definitely more difficult, yet accomplishable, so I'm feeling good there. Check the vid for the fast finger action. Hopefully I'll master it soon, so I can complete the whole song at 100%

Merry Christmas!

I might be skippin next week due to the holidays ;)

Rocksmith, week 6 check in

2011-12-09T23:41:00.006-05:00

So, I'm starting to think that the way I'm going about this whole "tracking my progress" thing is all wrong. It's tricky, because in order to progress in the game you need to keep playing more and different songs. [the bad part here is you only have to play them "good enough"]. However, this isn't really a great way for (me) to get better at guitar. Usually every time I get better at a song, it's because I have 'used' the riff repeater (bared with it, rather) or practiced with the game off just running through the notes I've been able to memorize thus far. (still the coolest part of this whole 'game' experience). So, I can play for about 5 hours in a week, and not even play the song I'm tracking, because the 'gamer' in me wants to get further in the game, cause it thinks THAT will result in being a better guitarist. I need to remember that they didn't make the game this way!

Regardless, this makes it feel like I haven't gotten any better, because I haven't played, so duh, I'm not better. I'm also torn, because I can cruise through the majority of the songs that are presented in the (loose) story mode the game has.... ugg, anyway.

So, in short. I'm forgoing the games 'recommendations', and just learning songs that I think are cool. One at a time. As I run out of songs that I think are cool enough to learn, I'll jump back on the progression train the game wants me to, and hopefully stumble onto some more songs that I thought WOULD be lame, but are now cooler... or new downloadable content.

Here's my progress on Nirvana's In Bloom... (I only played it 3 more times since the last vid, so no major leaps forward here I'm afraid) :o/

I also realize that watching pretty much the exact same video every week is pretty boring, and you're more likely to try and figure out what that thing is to my right up against the radiator... It's a baby chair. Now for more of the same ;)

Rocksmith, week 5 check in

2011-12-02T23:39:00.000-05:00

Yo everyone! So I'm putting week 5 in because I really didn't get time to play much last week since it was Thanksgiving and I was in Ohio with my fam. Regardless, the coolest thing about the game is that I was able to take my wife's baby acoustic guitar with us and play around a little bit from what I remembered from the game. you know... so I wouldn't lose my sweet calluses...

Anyway, I've been playing through a bunch of songs just trying to "level-up" through the game, but the ironic thing is, this isn't really a good way to get better at playing the guitar. Sure it's more playing in general, but it's not really like it's as focused as it should be to actually commit a song to muscle memory. Either way, so i spent a little more time with Nirvana's In Bloom, practicing the solo. I'm only at 80% difficulty on the solo, and 100% on the rest of the song. For some reason, i just can't pull it off just yet. oh well. Check the vid for my latest status on the solo.

Also even with all my complaining about this game, I was able to still get my friend to play it. It was of course after he played it with this family over the break and had a good time with it that he eventually plunked down the cash, but hey, I'll take a little credit ;)

Rocksmith, week 4 check in

2011-11-18T21:00:00.001-05:00

K, not a whole lot of progress this week on my "tracker" song, In Bloom. Mainly because I was playing through more of the game where you continue with new songs, and qualify for events. Each of the events are now about 5 songs so playing them twice, then the event makes the hour go by quick. With this approach I don't really feel like I'm learning a whole lot, given I'm not really able to prefect any of them based on what the game is asking me to do, but I guess playing is playing. I did go back to Next Girl and tried to play it again without looking at my hands at all, and I could only hit about 80% of the notes. Which is not bad, but not as good as I had wished it would have been. So, here are some vids of In Bloom for tracking purposes.

that was probably the weakest solo in the history of Nirvana... i had to hit the first note a bunch of time to get it to keep registering.... yeah... it's suppose to be strummed ONCE ;)

I feel like over all, I played the song pretty bad, hence my reaction at the end. Any way, thanks for reading! ;)

Rocksmith, week 3 check in

2011-11-11T23:11:00.002-05:00

K, week 3 complete, and about 20 hours total time.

I was able to master Blur: Song 2 shortly after The Black Keys: Next Girl, so that was pretty sweet. Granted they both hover around the first two strings, (aka my rocksmithing confort zone) but whatever. The biggest deal to me was finally qualifying for a song called "Well Ok Honey" by some lame girl rock group. OK, the song is cool, but since I sucked at it for so long i grew to hate it... maybe after I master it (read: ever play it again) I'll start to like it since the pain of holding up all my career progress in the game is no longer hanging in the balance. So, in short, I can move on and play more songs and gigs and continue to rack up rocksmith points.

The next song I'd like to track/master is Nirvana: In Bloom. Currently I have most of the sections at the 100% mastery level, minus the solo.... a big minus (check the second vid for ultimate finger stumblage :/ ) Also, apparently I am deathly afraid the strings are going to snap and either cut my face and/or hands off... Maybe I feel this way because I tightened the strap some, and now I can practically play with my nose...

I feel like I'm bending the strings SOOO much that they break, yet, I'm still not registering the notes enough to have the game consider my playing a success. Something to work on I guess.

The first vid is just a status check on me playing what the majority of the song is:

Here's my crap-tastic attempt at my first solo (in any song actually) extra points for strange faces when trying to pull of a bend?

Here's one more vid of me totally botching the ending...

Rocksmith, week 2 check in

2011-11-04T23:29:00.001-04:00

K, here's my progress with 2 full weeks of playing. 14 hours. The coolest thing so far was "mastering" The Black Keys. "Next Girl" Which allows you to play it without any notes or fretboard freeway on screen. Essentially, playing the real song with the rest of the song being supplied by the game. Here are three incredibly borring vids. The first, unlocking the "master mode" then me goofing around seeing how much I had memorized... heh... enjoy my SMITHAGE. (scroll down to see the comparison from the first time I played the song.... ever)

Amazing how much more you concentrate when there's notes on screen ;)

Make no mistake, my stage presence and guitar skills are equalizing ;)

Come ON! That high kick is at least worth the the price of admission... which is currently $0 ;)

So, im gonna probably move on and track another song... I'll hopefully continue this trend until it's clear I no longer need to track progress. [read] Fire will shoot from my guitar.

Rocksmith, week 1 check in

2011-10-28T23:03:00.003-04:00

K, here's my progress for one week, and about 7 hours with the game. About an hour a day.

The majority of my progress has been moving on to other strings besides to top two, and the occasional chord. Check out the vids for some "slight" progress... First time through this song.

I also apparently have a pretty ridiculous concentration face :/

Here's the same song as the first time I played, "Next Girl"

Rocksmith, midweek 0 thoughts 2

2011-10-26T20:21:00.003-04:00

... still strumming away to the best of my ability. Currently the thing I feel I want to do most is control the difficulty and speed of a song. So far the "on the fly" difficulty is cooler in concept than in practice. I at least think they should have had easy/medium/hard/expert AND dynamic difficulty. The main reason is that there isn't really a sense of flow, nor consistency.

One of the toughest things in teaching is the concept of "flow", which when done correctly, makes us enjoy learning. Be it a game, or school. This is were we find the perfect amount of challenge to give the student without being too hard that it discourages them nor too easy that they become bored. With the dynamic difficulty, you would think that this would work out perfectly, but it actually ends up seeming like the system is fighting the player, rather than presenting a clear challenge that a player can work at, and eventually conquer, and feeling the accomplishment of completing a mini goal. What I mean by this is that as the game gets harder and easier, you find yourself settling in the same spot, doing well, then doing poorly, well, then poor, and we never can give the player gratification accurately. This gets the player stuck in a loop where they aren't able to master a section at a steady difficulty that they were once bad at, then move on to a harder one once they have trained themselves enough to beat it. You then need to repeat this structure throughout the game... thus the easy, medium, hard approach in games like guitar hero. Bottom line, as a teaching tool, and a game, each song seems to be missing a clear and consistant achievable goal.

My TWO quick suggestions to Ubisoft are to patch the game and add the following features:

1, Preset difficulties along with the dynamic one, as options, and chart the completion of each difficulty. The presets are already built into the game, it's just about getting an option to lock it down to a specific one! Where the first song is the easiest of the easy, and the last song is the most difficult of the easy, leaving way for the next logical step to the easiest of the medium difficulty, and so on.

2, A practice mode where you can set the speed % to your specificity, and allow you to practice a technique, section or whole song as many times in a row as you would like. (Currently you only get to practice so many times, and then you have to reset it up through the menues again. It's like the game is telling you you have practiced enough, and you have to keep saying, no I haven't)

K, enough reviewing, time to keep practicing!

Rocksmith, midweek 0 thoughts

2011-10-23T23:09:00.004-04:00

Currently, Rocking through Rocksmith, is rocking the crap out of my fingers... geeze. I'm a total wuss! So the "technique challenges" seem to be helpful, although I feel like I'm learning skillz that I might not exactly be ready for, or qualified to play. I sorta feel like a 6th grader at a 9th grade dance... or some other metaphor that makes sense and is funny. Anyway, I mastered the shifting challenge, but it only dealt with moving back and forth on the top string... so, i can move around on that string pretty well, but still need to really memorize the position of the other strings, AND the frets. On "I can't get no satisfaction" I'm attempting to maintain "good technique" and press down the strings with the "correct" finger, so my ring and pinky finger are getting put to the test, and boy, are they failing me BIG TIME.

Anyway, I'd really like to get all my basics down, even before trying a song... mainly because I find myself constantly looking at my left hand, then my right hand, then the screen, and it's causing me to miss notes, and fall behind, and in more difficult sections of a song, i just completely blow it... lessing my overall smith-ness. Which is decidedly un-rock of me. Either way. Still rocking it out when I can, and I find going through the sections of the song by myself has actually helped get some muscle memory. While the game loads and whatnot.

Ideally, there would have been a scales technique, or the "ducks game" but with tips on how to move around... ehh, either way, I'm definitely better than I was 3 days ago ;)

Dark Souls!!!

2011-10-23T18:05:00.005-04:00

Been playing Dark Souls for about a week now. Having played through it's predecessor (Demon's Souls) I knew what pain to expect going into it. It's definitely more of the same, but more of the same excellence is always welcome! It continues to create amazing situations and feelings while I'm cautiously exploring it's open world landscapes. That's probably the main difference thus far from a quick glance between the two titles, plus some graphical improvements. Along with what seems to be more bad guys and surprises.

The game continues on it's quest to make you pay for every decision that is presented to you. And yet, the most upsetting part is realizing, it's all my fault. Not the games'. I WISH it was the games, and they'd give my those souls back! But I lost them fairly. This is the real reason why this game, and any other game is successful. Sticking to the main game design goal of "allowing the player to feel as if they were judged fairly". When this happens, we only have ourselves to blame, and to look to for improvement. No scapegoats here, just the gamer, shaking his head at my -er- himself after not checking if there was an enemy at the top of the stairs just waiting to push a boulder at him... twice... Every time you learn something new about an event that happens in the game, you'll always find the answer in "yup... that would have really happened". And that makes it ok.

One aspect that continues to blow my mind as my wife and I continue to play through the game, is the amount of possibilities. This makes for a unique experience across all the people who play it. There seem to be so many iterations of events based all on how/what and when you do things. I mean, you can kill a merchant (trust me, don't!) and then he's just ... dead. And you can't buy anything from him, cause... you can't buy stuff from dead people... cause that's what would happen in real life... So, now that player is forced to find another way to survive and make it through to the next area, without whatever merchandise the seller might have had to make your journey a little easier. This is just one simple example. There are differences in whether or not to summon a helper, who you help or kill, which path you go down and when, and they all make for a slightly different, yet personalized experience. This really makes you feel as if you have a serious impact on the game and world you are in.

Both Demon's Souls and Dark Souls seem to have no connection through their narrative, but I recommend that if you haven't played Demon's Souls, play that NOW, then wait a while, then wait some more... until you feel as if you can take another round of punishment from "From Software" (strange name, right?) and then get Dark Souls... if you're up for the challenge, you will NOT be sorry you did.

Rocksmith, initial skill, week 0

2011-10-21T22:40:00.001-04:00

K, here's my skillz as of day one, first attempt... Any tips feel free to comment below. ;) But for now, feast your eyes on my SMITHNESS!!!

first time on this play through...

ROCK SMITH!!!

2011-10-21T21:28:00.002-04:00

Well it's been a REALLY long time since I've updated this blog. This is still game related, but not as review based as other post have been. This next string of posts is designed to track the progress of UbiSofts "Rocksmith".

I currently have ZERO "actual" guitar skills, but have always wanted to learn. I've been able to play other "guitar games" on either hard or expert difficulty, but that's as much guitar skill (if you can call it that) that I'm bringing to the table. I don't expect to become a "true rocksmith" however, i hope to at least create some muscle memory, chord and general guitar knowledge.

I plan on tracking my progress by posting a new video of me playing the game every WEEK, and hopefully I'll suck less and less as the weeks go on. I'm going to try to stick to a plan of at least an hour of playing/practice per day. I'll post the amount of hours spent that week, incase it varies, and then let me track the expected progress a bit more accurately.

Game Play Thoughts: 1st person shooters

2009-09-09T14:30:00.001-04:00

UPDATE: Check out RED FACTION: GUERILLA - some cool distruction multiplayer action... destructive environments. However, in this game, everything can explode (which is awesome) but it should be designed a bit more so that the elements you can distroy can still lead to balanced, gameplay

(below from 08/06/09)

(ideally, multiplayer/deathmatch/CTF stuff, but could work for campaigns as well.)

Basically the idea came from thinking about how to balance a character with a flame thrower, who was pretty weak compared to some of the other characters in the game. range issues, speed etc. The main idea is that, what if the guy could light parts of the level on fire? Let something burn to the point where it can either remain burning for the entire session (damaging players who walk through) - or even to the point where it could destroy pathways. For instance, if there was a bridge that most players use to get to a specific area, weapon, or sniping point. The "pyro" guy goes and lights it up, and eventually, it would burn down. This would totally change the way the map is played from this point forward.
So, the theory is about exploring how we as players interact with more aspects of the game itself, thus allowing more possibilities. In most cases our involvement is with the players and the predetermined (and meticulously designed) maps. The element that keeps us coming back for more is, how will these players find and exploit strategies based on where people usually go to on the map (especially in CTF scenarios). But if we can give this area of the design more depth, the games would benefit from it greatly. Imagine the situation where a demo guy could dig a whole through a wall, to connect two rooms, or other underground passage way - mechanics who could rebuild or repair - pyros affecting only wooden objects, etc. Thinking about the character creation more balanced between weapon and skill, as opposed to weapon and weaker weapon that games tend to gravitate toward.
It would really start to evolve the way we'd look at these types of game play scenarios, and hopefully give a somewhat tired genre some new life. Granted it seems like a huge task... dynamic environments, but hey, here's hopin'.

Game Play Thoughts: Side Quests

2009-08-18T22:10:00.004-04:00

Side quests in games used to feel more connected to the "main" quest, where something else to do would have something to do with either the town you were trying to save, or how the story was affecting other people whom needed your help. In recent games, side quests seem to be filler - a padding that allows the game to have a longer stay in your console disc drive. Personally, I like side quests, but in the wrong hands, they can be dangerous. The last two titles I've had time with that had side quests are inFAMOUS and Prototype. Both have examples of good and bad side quests.
In Prototype, there were a few different kinds you can choose from while traversing the city. They ranged from racing around the city through check points, killing a certain amount of enemies, finding specific people on the streets that played a part in the story, and collecting orbs at random places around the game world. Of these 4 I can remember off the top of my head, 1 of them actually has something to do with the game itself. The quests where you track down people who know something about the story works the best because you actually get to see other sides of the story. I actually thought this was a really cool way to tell a story. I wished they would have pushed this further, and had more useful info in the videos you watched as you absorbed their thoughts. Maybe even leading you to clues as to what to do next, and who you could help etc. But challenging yourself to jump up a building and back down as fast as you can, or killing a multitude of enemies while restricted to a specific weapon type, really doesn't have much to do with the story, but can at least improve your skills in how good you are at moving your character around, which obviously makes you better at playing the game. The worst type, is the random collection of some sort of item. Thankfully, games rarely punish you for not collecting all of these, but then why really put them in? They usually help you out in some fashion (usually exp of some sort) making us want to collect them all to improve the character, but what does collecting items really have to do with improving a character in this way? These types of decisions that stray away from actual story/character relevance, turn the game into something that seems to have less purpose... Is it to get you to move around the city? Your story should compel the gamer to go from place to place. To increase the time it takes to complete the game? Odds are it will most-likely serve as a distraction to the main story line, and can totally affect the pacing on your game as a whole. And overall left me asking, what is this story about anyway?
In inFamous, the side missions have good/evil/neutral tasks, and also a collection based one. The side missions in this seemed to be somewhat related to what is happening in the story. At least they have to do with people living in the city that are affected by the global problem, which is cool. One thing bad about them, is some are pretty repetitive in what you need to do, leaving you with an " oh another one of these" type of feeling when you realize what your next task is. The completion of these quests also "clears" a section of the map, effectively leaving that area in turmoil or peace, which helps give you a sense of accomplishment in your reign, be it good or evil. The collection quest where you get electrified pieces from the explosion that occurred at the start of the game, is at least semi linked to the game, but it treads close to being too much of a time sink when you find yourself just collecting these pieces when you really should feel the urgency of finding your friend and figuring out what's happened to you.
In general, I think we should keep side missions alive, of course, but if they are filler, get them out of there. There are creative ways to add other elements to your game that can keep it full of content, and going to the simple "collect this, I'll give you experience points" should be left off the table. It takes us away from what you really want us thinking about when we play the game.

one suggestions: Why not have more choices between side quests, and main quests, and add an element of suspence or urgency? Where if you spend too much time on side quests, more bad things would happen. Currently in games, I could do side quests all day long, and nothing really that bad happens to the characters in the story, it would tie you into the game way more, and give you a senes of accountability for your actions, and the added affect that what we do matters.

Game Play Thoughts: Good vs. Evil

2009-08-13T15:38:00.004-04:00

so... good vs. evil games. and you - well, me actually... anyway.

I want to take a second and think through this gameplay type. Currently, people consider it a big draw to be able to make choices as they are playing a game, to see their character become evil, or good. Choosing to either give someone the food, or kill him and steal his money. Each giving the character some sort of experience type points in the direction his life is headed. At the surface, this seems pretty cool, more choices usually equals, more fun [ it can be if done right!]. But I think at times it ends up doing the opposite, instead of letting the player actually roam free doing whatever he wants, he feels limited because if he wants to be on a specific path, he better stay on target. Sure persistence is key to getting anywhere in life, but that's just it, LIFE, these are games, and games that want to tell really good stories should probably stick to one 'unique' path. Usually i find these types of games leave you with a middle ground story that doesn't really push either good nor evil far enough.... Unless the two sides were REALLY different, but I'm sure there are tons of reasons not to spend that much extra time and money on a portion of the game people might not even get to enjoy. The point being, make the game different enough. Not only on the surface to where it seems like they replaced the words "good" for "evil", and the color of his hair, and called it a day.

The same goes for upgrading weapons/powers etc. Most games these days seem to throw a hundred different weapons at you throughout the game, and you never really have time to hang on to one, or improve on it. Or an upgrade screen full of choices that pretty much overwhelms you, leaving you wondering if you are going to pick the right power, or if your character is going to suck. The point here is to have the right amount, not too many to where it's no longer unique. One thing that sucks about all this customizing, is that it means that the gameplay can't be as tailored to the specific actions your character can actually preform at a given time in the story. Finding yourself at times, either too over powered, or too weak, which leads you to a game that gets boring quick, or frustrating to the point you feel like turning it off. Rarely does a player ever pick the combination that will keep him in check with the games current difficulty settings. Which leads us to making all the powers relatively similar in strength, just different in visual, and yet again, taking the uniqueness out of the game/power. Then we sit there, hands full of exp points, ready to buy, I usually find myself pining over which power to develop instead of enjoying the gameplay experience. Of course i could farm for exp to get all my stats to their max, but than it seems too forced, and the fun has gone and where was I in the story?

Developers usually try and sell you this idea as reasons to extend the life of a game. Play through the first time, being good, see what the game is like, and than do all the bad stuff you wanted to do, and see how the game pans out. This in theory also seems cool, but I haven't really found any game unique enough to actually make me want to play through it twice, choosing different sides each time. I usually end up starting out being good, than getting bored of not getting the cooler weapons or skills, and switch mid game to a life of crime, and thereby leaving my character at a middle ground.

The main idea behind adding this element to the game play is choices. Choices make us feel like we are creating a character that is ours. I think however, the choices the character MAKES in his decisions in the story, are far more important than the stats he posesses. I think that if more attention was paid to the game changing based on what you actually have done, [and i mean really changing] it would round out the character and create a tighter connection between player and hero. Games do currently do this to a degree, but I feel like it could be taken further. I know this would talk a massive amount of programing to create all the different scenarios, but even a small amount, done well would be great!

Game Play Thoughts: Whip weapons

2009-08-12T09:49:00.004-04:00

Just a quick thought for weapon based fighting and hit detection. Back in the day (while playing the FPS, Soldier of Fortune) I was amazed by the hit detection system and it's influence on the enemy. Basically you could hit the body in about 28 different spots, and the character would react to it accordingly. Usually resulting in shooting their arm off or leg. Pretty rewarding. Basically, I'd like to see more of this ;)
Let's look at the awesomeness that could come from a character with a whip. You'd have regular attacks that would do damage, but maybe a secondary attack could hit specific body parts. For instance, as you would perform this action, the whip could wrap around the enemies arm, (you pull on the whip) and that arm comes flying off, and now the guy's left to fight armless. Heck, maybe he'd run away? Maybe it would scare others off? Maybe a throw could be initiated by something like this as well. What if you caught him around the neck? or around his waste? around his weapon? more awesomeness. I think it should be random as well,[at least at the start] because the pacing and complication of aiming can take the fun out of specific types of game genres. In Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem for the Game Cube, you could aim your attacks, and it was pretty successful, yet a little too cumbersome when lots of enemies attach you, as you struggle with selecting the right body part rather than reacting to the instincts of wanting to slay the beast!!! - plus i think that it would add a layer of randomness to the outcome of the fight. If the game design allows... maybe your character would progress and your overall aim would be better and that would result in more devastating wounds?

My Brute!

2009-08-05T14:54:00.004-04:00

this site is pretty bad ass. Select a character, pick an opponent, and then fight! Win or lose you get experience points and level up as you use your 3 allotted fights per day. Your brute will randomly use/throw his weapon, allow the pet to attack, dodge, etc... all through the stat system they have set up. It's pretty great fun, actually, and a great break in the middle of your work day.
Basically, when your character is created all their stats are random. (pray you get a pet early on) Then it's fightin' time!!! Actually, it's pretty much "watch a fight" time, but a fight to the DEATH nonetheless! actually, til one of you kneels down... but in absolute PAIN!!! hmm, maybe just out of breath... but you can tell he's sad, on the inside at least...

Oh, one more awesome thing, you are all my pupils now... obey!!!
http://speedsimmons.mybrute.com

inFamous:: First Impression

2009-08-03T23:00:00.001-04:00

My first impression of inFamous is that it's pretty addictive and the lightning combat pays off. So far the story seems to be off to a slow start, the cut scene animation is pretty mediocre and moving through the city is a bit sluggish and nowhere near as fluid as Prototype. But the biggest mystery is still, what's in my backpack, and why does it sounds like broken glass every time I take a step....

Final Fantasy VII

2009-07-31T16:59:00.009-04:00

Playing through this gem again, and it’s pretty great honestly, I still love leveling these characters and remembering the good ‘ole days when graphics like these were awesome. Maybe now, since there’s a landslide of games that all look identical [hyper-real over exaggerated normal maps, I’m looking in your direction] more developers will quit thinking that over detailed graphics look good, and work on something innovative with the gameplay structure before they release another title, and focus on colors, depth of field rather than realistic something...
test

Silent Hill: Homecoming

2009-07-29T16:36:00.003-04:00

Playing this game off and on [it's amazing how playing at night really affects the mood] Mood is the most successful element to this game actually - crying babies, swings that creek in the night, and creatures whom seem to have watched “The Ring” one too many times. Other than that and a few decent visuals, this game falls pretty flat and stands to end the series. The combat systems seems as though I'm fighting against the air, as there is hardly any feeling of impact in the character. One major thing though, is that I am actually surprised at how poorly this game plays. Not just the spotty game play, but even the fact that the game is actually buggy to the point where the models don’t load in, leaving your character standing in the ‘matrix’ where you are forced to run around hoping the stage will load as you get nailed by a needler.
SH:H seems to be more of the same from the previous games in the series thus far…. Run around, check doors. I got it… they’re locked. Maybe I should be looking for the person who had time to lock all the damn doors before the entire town was filled with ash…. Again.

Prototype

2009-07-27T20:39:00.001-04:00

...even though this game gets a lot of flack for not being as good as inFamous [I've heard the story in infamous seems to be more solid than in prototype]. Now, I think the story is the lifeblood of anything worth making, but some times you get in the mood for a certain by of gamePLAY. So, in comparing the two, they actually seem like two different games, but only in how play. Prototype plays more like an action RPG where you are right in the middle of the action, jumping in and out of tanks and helicoptors. Although it would have been nice if you didn't get pwned by bullets as you wait for the cut scene animation to play as you make your way into a tank! So, think of it more like GTA in a different skin, and a one dimensional story. Where InFamous actually plays more like Gears of War [minus the duck 'n cover aspects] as they both act as 3rd person shooters for the most part, with even less close combat since there doesn't seem to be a chainsaw gun in the game. So, if you are having a tough time deciding between games, let that guide you, because usually people don’t spend time comparing ‘hack-n-slashers’ to 3rd person shooters … but I digress….

At its core, it’s actually a really fun open city action hack and slash, where you can kill both good guys and bad in ways most horror films would like to replicate. There is something also to be said about the effortless mobility your character has as he moves throughout the city. It's pretty awesome to watch him stiff arm and push his way through a crowd, somersault over an oncoming car, or bust through trees and light posts. Essentially taking out the computer AI glitchy feel most games have. Refining subtle details like this in games definitely helps the character come to life and keeps the game feeling organic. It keeps you immersed in the game when you don't have to deal with the frustration of getting stuck on a pedestrian as you spin and walk in place trying to break free so you can get to your destination... but enough about what the game isn't!.... You can also run up buildings!!! Who doesn't want to do that?!?!?

ComicCon '09

2009-07-26T15:50:00.001-04:00

Not at it, but it seems cool. Besides the regular stuff, nothing’s better than this cosplay image [courtesy of www.gamespot.com ]

"Proud Parent Award 2009"

Punch Out!

2009-07-25T14:27:00.016-04:00

A pretty fun game that you’ll end up playing for about a week or so as you casually work your way through the career mode. Then after your arms recover (I’m weak), you’ll probably get your bang for your buck when you use this game as a break from your others.

It’s pretty clear this game is meant to take advantage of the original game for the NES, and its fan base. Add some flare allowing players new ways to control this ‘classic’ title. Add a few new additions, and you have a ‘brand new’ game; much to the same ilk as the re-engineered film series’ of late. All to create both a nostalgic and fun game allowing for a wide market base of buyers, not to mention offer the closest experience most of us will ever have actually knocking out someone twice our size.
Over all, Punch Out! Doesn’t really push any boundaries, but that’s not really what it seemed to try and do from its design. Its’ attention to the accurate representation of the original titles game play is near perfect, the audio has both impact and depth while being both historically accurate and updated. All making for an entertaining all ages party friendly game anyone can pick up and play.

Graphics
Even though the characters and environment are built using 3D technology of today, it maintains the same style as Super Punch Out had, both in color and design. Over all, the returning characters resemble themselves and the [few] new ones seem as if they could have been in the series from the start. The animation of the characters has made its’ leap through the ages as well. It is very fluid and as fun as the original in its’ zany over exaggeration knockdowns. Character introductions [that take place out side the ring] are a new addition to the series, however, they didn’t seem to have the same quality, and even style as the rest of the game. They fit in, but something seemed amiss when seeing them in direct comparison.

Gameplay
I can’t remember the last time I had 3 vastly different options when choosing how to control the character in a game I was playing. You can use the balance board, and wiiMote with nun chuck attachment, just the wiiMote and nun chuck attachment, or use the wiiMote by itself. The balance board option, while I appreciate the effort in support, seems poorly implemented and not too responsive as you attempt to make the precision moves to dodge and counter you foes. The controller and nun chuck style seems to be the best mix of wii style controller flailing and accuracy. While going back to the ‘old school’ NES controller using just the wiiMote on it’s side actually yielded the best results in actually taking down Mr. Sandman, it doesn’t bring the player into the match as much as when using the nun chuck attachment. Over all, a big plus goes to the recreation of the original feeling when trying to take down the super hero-esk opponents with the new motion controller craze. The two player element of the game seems to be a bit of an after thought however. It left me wanting more, as I had expected it to be where most of the games lasting appeal would come from. While the game does allow you to continue fighting the same cast of characters with their original weakness’ no longer exploitable, the real extension of most games life spans comes from its’ gratifying multi-player element. The 2 player fighting felt delayed and different than the regular boxing Mac usually displays in the rest of the game. Changing into the larger Giga-Mac is fun, but doesn’t give much to the player, as you’ll most likely find yourself just dishing out as many super moves as opponent tries to feverishly dodge your onslaught of attacks. I think this modes lack of strategy that the rest of the game so finely possesses made me put it down after only a few matches. Another Mode available that acts as a bit of an achievement system asks you to perform specific actions [even losing!] to complete challenges. You can easily spend hours trying to complete some of these tasks as they can be both incredibly frustrating in their difficulty. However, after completing the challenges, many of the same techniques you needed to deploy can help aid you in some serious KO’s in other portions of the game.

Presentation
The over all presentation of this game seems relatively polished, while it seems no extraordinary feet was really sought after to break ground here, it also wasn’t very necessary either. In the load screens I found myself wanting to see some reactions to my continual jabs my wiiMote cursor made on the characters. Fortunately during the 2 player load screen you can actually get out some of these aggressions. The menu traveling from exhibition to career could have been a bit more streamlined as most times, after getting dealt a massive beat down, you best get yourself to the exhibition [training] ring. But once you’ve gained back your confidence, there could have been a better way to instantly jump back into the career mode, saving about 4-5 menu screens to sift through. There was one element that seemed to stand out from the extraordinary sound effects and track. During the loading screens a bout circuit logo would be displayed, and while the center portion rotated, a strange clicking sound was played. I know you’re wondering why I would mention something as small as this, but it stood out as an annoyance compared to the spot on audio that the rest of the game has in store for you.

Overview.
The only elements of this game I would have tried to improve before it’s release are the 2 player offerings, amp up the already exaggerated animation knockdowns and impact moments[the games ‘aw man that was awesome’ factor], better menu screen navigation and more boxers, new and otherwise. Over all, Punch Out! for the Wii is just about almost everything most people would expect from it, and is what it could have been based on it’s concepts potential would allow, and for that it should be considered a success.

Buy this game if:
This game is for you, if you are looking to have an updated version of the original NES and SNES classic underdog boxer series. Or if you want a moderately fun party game that will most likely give you a few hours of fun to first time players. If you need a break from some of the more focused hardcore games you’ve got for your Xbox 360 or PS3. Or if you’re looking to justify not going to the gym cause your shoulders hurt after playing 8 hours straight of a new game you just got. And no, my shoulders aren’t sore any more Carl, so if you’re ready for a rematch, bring it…

Rating: (while I recommend using percentages based on the numbers below, I feel it’s only fair to judge this game in stars)
3.25 STARS (our of 4)
Overall potential - 50% (potential of games over all idea, a handicap)
Graphics - 90%
Presentation – 50%
Sound – 90%
Gameplay – 90%
What’s missing – 10%