It's been too long since my last post. Rather than my usual philosophy, how about a simple rundown on some games I've played over the past month?
Currently, I'm creeping through a borrowed copy of Rainbow Six: Vegas 2. I've only played the single-player campaign mode so far. It's a good tactical shooter, with more emphasis on action than strategy on the medium difficulty setting. I haven't played a Rainbow Six since the first game, which required thorough planning before starting a mission. V
egas 2 lets me jump right into the action. The level design is mostly linear, but there's a lot of freedom in weapon selection/customization and directing the AI companions (I often send them out as decoys, like the heartless commander that I am). When limited health means I have to replay a checkpoint several times, enemy actions are generally predictable, so I'm encouraged to try different strategies.
I downloaded Deathspank weeks ago, but didn't get far into it. I plan on playing more, but never feel in the mood. The heart of the game is its humor. The dialog is by turns hilarious and stupid, and sometimes both. But it's the item descriptions that I love most. The hack-and-slash gameplay is simple but well done. There's a good amount of choice in outfitting my character and use of weapons. One reason I decided to buy it is that it seems like the sort of game one of my non-gamer relatives could enjoy.
I traded in Dragon Age: Origins after at least 20 hours of play. I came down a little harsh on Mass Effect years ago because I had expectations going in (expectations created by Bioware's marketing, mainly concerning exploration) that were not met. Since then, I've played through Mass Effect 1 and 2 more than a few times. They're good games. But I went into Dragon Age after having ignored it for many months and remembering little other than that it's more focused on story than on action.
Well, that last part's an understatement. The two words that best describe my experiences with Dragon Age (as a male dwarf warrior untouchable and a female elf mage) are bland and tedious. The dialog drones on with a slew of uninteresting choices without even foreshadowing of lasting effect. Aside from the race backgrounds, the story strikes me as run-of-the-mill fantasy. The graphics are ugly and dated. As fervently and widely as the game has been praised, I have no doubt that the story improves further in and that I am simply not the sort of gamer Dragon Age was designed for. Even so, I'm extremely skeptical of the extraordinarily high marks it has been given. I'm looking forward to Mass Effect 3, but not Dragon Age 2.
Then there's Crackdown 2. It's difficult for me to come to a definite conclusion on that one, but I'll venture to say it's slightly better than the first Crackdown. It's better in some ways and worse in others. I really miss the gang variety. That alone makes gameplay a bit redundant after a while. But additions like agility orbs and gliding are great, as is plowing through mutants with a vehicle at night. I haven't tried much co-op yet.
What really makes the sequel stand out is multiplayer. Crackdown 2 has fragfests like you simply can't experience anywhere else. Once, I glided completely across a map to land on and crush an unsuspecting player, then shot the player who had been running toward him for a kill. It's blissful chaos. Half the time, a player is chasing another while being chased himself, then yet another player enters the fray from the side or above.
I recently traded in five games to pick up four others, so I'll make another post like this soon. Honestly, I have more games right now that I can fully explore -- always a good thing!
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
healing grenades
As you might expect, I'm reading and watching a lot on E3 news. I might offer some impressions later. For now, I've got two words for you:
healing grenades!
Dynamics are the name of the game, so why not make healing a bit more interesting? Imagine a grenade or vial of healing potion that you must smash against the ground. Throw it down at your feet and it heals you. Throw it by some allies and all in the area of effect are healed. But throw it too close to an enemy... and your enemy is healed.
This creates opportunities for many memorable moments. If your fellow player or AI companion is toe-to-toe with an enemy and hurting, you can try to aim your throw behind your ally so it heals him and not the enemy as well. If the fighters turn at just the wrong moment, you might heal the wrong person, or both of them, or neither. There might even be a possibility that the grenade can be batted while in the air... flying across the battlefield to land who knows where.
Even more, healing grenades might react differently to different objects. They might burn particular enemies. They might explode when they touch a particular metal, hurting friends or foes alike. If two healing grenades hit one spot simultaneously, the healing effect might be exponentially increased.
The basic idea is that, like the sticky grenade in Halo, there are countless possibilities that make each counter feel fresh and potentially surprising. Healing grenades might not fit a particular game, but all games should include at least one dynamic like this.
healing grenades!
Dynamics are the name of the game, so why not make healing a bit more interesting? Imagine a grenade or vial of healing potion that you must smash against the ground. Throw it down at your feet and it heals you. Throw it by some allies and all in the area of effect are healed. But throw it too close to an enemy... and your enemy is healed.
This creates opportunities for many memorable moments. If your fellow player or AI companion is toe-to-toe with an enemy and hurting, you can try to aim your throw behind your ally so it heals him and not the enemy as well. If the fighters turn at just the wrong moment, you might heal the wrong person, or both of them, or neither. There might even be a possibility that the grenade can be batted while in the air... flying across the battlefield to land who knows where.
Even more, healing grenades might react differently to different objects. They might burn particular enemies. They might explode when they touch a particular metal, hurting friends or foes alike. If two healing grenades hit one spot simultaneously, the healing effect might be exponentially increased.
The basic idea is that, like the sticky grenade in Halo, there are countless possibilities that make each counter feel fresh and potentially surprising. Healing grenades might not fit a particular game, but all games should include at least one dynamic like this.
Labels:
combat,
dynamics,
health,
replayability
Saturday, June 12, 2010
digital dictionary
How many word games exist today? Hundreds. Why do they all use different dictionaries?
Is it really too much to ask that all developers use a common word bank?
Is it really too much to ask that all developers use a common word bank?
Labels:
word games
Thursday, June 10, 2010
cheap trust
One reason I'm looking forward to another Deus Ex sequel is the possibility of trust gameplay that's actually meaningful.
Too often, players are put in situations where the protagonist is asked to trust a character while being all but certain that character is indeed trustworthy. There's no real question that the character is trustworthy. There's not even a possibility that circumstances might remove power from the character to keep his/her promises. The character just says "trust me" and player automatically answers "sure".
It's nice to be surprised by betrayal sometimes. Players have to feel like they're really taking a chance in order for those decisions to trust to seem important.
Too often, players are put in situations where the protagonist is asked to trust a character while being all but certain that character is indeed trustworthy. There's no real question that the character is trustworthy. There's not even a possibility that circumstances might remove power from the character to keep his/her promises. The character just says "trust me" and player automatically answers "sure".
It's nice to be surprised by betrayal sometimes. Players have to feel like they're really taking a chance in order for those decisions to trust to seem important.
Labels:
dynamics,
NPCs and story
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
leave it open
I just finished Mass Effect 2. Excellent. Bioware fixed problems, introduced some cool new dynamics, and cranked everything up a notch. A very memorable game, and one I'm anxious to play again with different choices.
But (an observation, rather than a complaint) I again ran into situations in which the "right answer" I hoped to choose was not among the dialog options. And, this time around, that situation came right at the end... at the most important decision my character makes in the game.
It wasn't the choice of action that disappointed me, but the reason behind it. Sometimes it's good to leave characters' motivations unstated so that the audience can inject his or her own. This is a game, afterall, so the player should have as much control as possible over the protagonist's implied thoughts.
If you're curious how I was disappointed at the end of Mass Effect 2, the explanation is below.
**SPOILER INCOMING**
Shepard has the options of destroying the Collector space-station or keeping it for research. Research could provide valuable insights into Reaper technology and play a pivotal role in defeating them. But that research could also be used by the Illusive Man, apparently devoted to protecting and advancing the human species, to gain power for Cerberus alone and either act as dictator over everyone or aid only humans so that other species becomes subordinates.
I chose to destroy the station. And all my crew, whose loyalties I had earned, agreed with me. They all recited the above reasoning back to me... that the Illusive Man lacked the wisdom to wield such power generously or that other species would suffer, and so on.
But that's not why I chose to destroy the station. Whatever the dangers of giving the Illusive Man that much power, I agreed that researching Reaper tech could prove vital. I thought saving the station was worth the risk; better to ensure survival and fight for justice later. But I chose to destroy it because I thought the danger of the Reapers still holding sway with their indoctrination ability, despite the Illusive Man's proposed radiation sweep, was too much to risk.
In other words, I would have given Cerberus the power if I was certain its researchers would be beyond the Reapers' mind control. Unfortunately (but understandably), I wasn't given the option of that motivation for Shepard.
Oh well. I actually think the dialog options, on a whole, were much improved in the sequel.
I'd say Mass Effect 2 is one of the best games on the 360 now.
It will be interesting to see next time through if I can earn my crew's loyalties and complete every mission using the neutral dialog choices, as opposed to paragon or renegade choices. I'm a pretty even-keeled person, but it is fun to shoot a criminal in the foot now and then. :)
It will also be interesting fighting without the soldier's ability to slow time. That plus the Viper sniper rifle plus cryo ammo was a lot of fun.
But (an observation, rather than a complaint) I again ran into situations in which the "right answer" I hoped to choose was not among the dialog options. And, this time around, that situation came right at the end... at the most important decision my character makes in the game.
It wasn't the choice of action that disappointed me, but the reason behind it. Sometimes it's good to leave characters' motivations unstated so that the audience can inject his or her own. This is a game, afterall, so the player should have as much control as possible over the protagonist's implied thoughts.
If you're curious how I was disappointed at the end of Mass Effect 2, the explanation is below.
**SPOILER INCOMING**
Shepard has the options of destroying the Collector space-station or keeping it for research. Research could provide valuable insights into Reaper technology and play a pivotal role in defeating them. But that research could also be used by the Illusive Man, apparently devoted to protecting and advancing the human species, to gain power for Cerberus alone and either act as dictator over everyone or aid only humans so that other species becomes subordinates.
I chose to destroy the station. And all my crew, whose loyalties I had earned, agreed with me. They all recited the above reasoning back to me... that the Illusive Man lacked the wisdom to wield such power generously or that other species would suffer, and so on.
But that's not why I chose to destroy the station. Whatever the dangers of giving the Illusive Man that much power, I agreed that researching Reaper tech could prove vital. I thought saving the station was worth the risk; better to ensure survival and fight for justice later. But I chose to destroy it because I thought the danger of the Reapers still holding sway with their indoctrination ability, despite the Illusive Man's proposed radiation sweep, was too much to risk.
In other words, I would have given Cerberus the power if I was certain its researchers would be beyond the Reapers' mind control. Unfortunately (but understandably), I wasn't given the option of that motivation for Shepard.
Oh well. I actually think the dialog options, on a whole, were much improved in the sequel.
I'd say Mass Effect 2 is one of the best games on the 360 now.
It will be interesting to see next time through if I can earn my crew's loyalties and complete every mission using the neutral dialog choices, as opposed to paragon or renegade choices. I'm a pretty even-keeled person, but it is fun to shoot a criminal in the foot now and then. :)
It will also be interesting fighting without the soldier's ability to slow time. That plus the Viper sniper rifle plus cryo ammo was a lot of fun.
Labels:
customization,
NPCs and story
Thursday, June 03, 2010
unlimited achievements
I'm not far into Mass Effect 2, but I'm very impressed so far. One thing Bioware did right was adding an in-game achievement system in addition to Xbox Live Achievements.
Console game developers shouldn't limit themselves to XBL Achievements, Avatar Awards and PSN Trophies. Design as many as you can, because gamers love them.
Console game developers shouldn't limit themselves to XBL Achievements, Avatar Awards and PSN Trophies. Design as many as you can, because gamers love them.
Labels:
achievements,
rewards
Monday, May 24, 2010
Red Dead surprise
As I was playing Red Dead Redemption today, I happened across a woman crying beside a dead man. By his limp hand was a revolver. The game only gives players a short amount of time to respond to strangers in need. It seemed I had missed my opportunity to help this man fight off bandits. He had failed to defend himself and died.
I stood for a few seconds watching the woman cry, and I turned away. Then I heard a gunshot. I spun back around, thinking it was a trick (like previous ploys NPCs had used on me) -- the woman must have killed the man and then pretended to be grieving so I would let down my guard. But no, the woman was dead. She had indeed been grieving, and now she had committed suicide with her fallen husband's revolver.
Kudos to Rockstar for creating a very memorable game-story experience.
I stood for a few seconds watching the woman cry, and I turned away. Then I heard a gunshot. I spun back around, thinking it was a trick (like previous ploys NPCs had used on me) -- the woman must have killed the man and then pretended to be grieving so I would let down my guard. But no, the woman was dead. She had indeed been grieving, and now she had committed suicide with her fallen husband's revolver.
Kudos to Rockstar for creating a very memorable game-story experience.
Labels:
dynamics,
NPCs and story
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
