<![CDATA[ - Shoe View]]>

<![CDATA[ - Shoe View]]>Sat, 15 Apr 2023 16:16:20 -0700Weebly<![CDATA[Review: Zelda: Skyward Sword soars to excellence and beyond. ]]>Sun, 25 Dec 2011 20:07:38 GMThttp://www.gameshoe.net/shoe-view/review-zelda-skyward-sword-soars-to-excellence-and-beyond(Posted by: Harrison Milfeld)

When Nintendo first unveiled the Wii six years ago, the idea of motion-based gameplay was both an ambitious and risky idea for a company looking to get back on top. Despite its potential (and resounding success), the Wii’s use of motion gaming has been hit or miss during its current life cycle. Small flashes of motion gaming brilliance such as Wii Sports, World of Goo, and Metroid Prime 3: Corruption offered what to expect, yet tacked-on experiences dominated the Wii’s landscape. The word gimmick was not that hard to apply for Nintendo’s so-called revolutionary console; however, all it takes is one game to make good on Nintendo’s promise in 2005. That game being The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword.

The latest iteration in the long-standing Zelda series, Skyward Sword, is the cultivation of five years of hard work and how motion gaming can be something other than gimmicky. Throughout my 30-plus hour experience, Nintendo was able to bring in the best aspects of Zelda, be it dungeon design, visuals, characters, gameplay, atmosphere, music, and even intriguing puzzles. This, along with the main development focus of Wii MotionPlus, separates Skyward Sword from its predecessors by making the entire adventure it a worthy challenger to the timeless Ocarina of Time.

Hit the jump to read the conclusion of the review.

As a prequel to Ocarina of Time, one would not expect story to be the main focus of Skyward Sword, considering Nintendo has opted not include voice acting once again (an omission that’s understandable to an extent). The story may seem familiar to any Zelda veteran: Link is thrown into conflict and must become the hero of destiny and save the damsel in distress before the world is thrown into ruin. While no sure surprises with that premise, Skyward Sword serves as a legit origin story to many important characters and things in the Zelda universe; the most obvious of these items being the legendary Master Sword.

The real selling point to this adventure though is the motion controls, which are nothing but pristine. With Wii MotionPlus, the one-to-one control gives one a feeling akin to waving a stick around as if it were a sword. That childhood comparison is enough to show how vivid and responsive each movement is on screen. The swordplay is different from any other Zelda title in recent memory. Each battle with a Lizalfo or Bokoblin becomes an exciting event that makes finding their specific weaknesses all the sweeter. For new players, waggling the Wiimote should not be the way to approach swordplay, as you will pay dearly for it.

Pinpoint precision is key with every puzzle and boss fight. Not only that, but with each new item acquired, it opens the window for new experiences with Wii MotionPlus. For example, the whip and beetle are two items that take advantage of the new control scheme and serve as highlights of the many dungeons and puzzles required to advance. Aside from some small issues with swimming and flying Link’s Crimson Loftwing (Skyward Sword’s own version of Epona), the swordplay mechanics are something one must experience to fully appreciate it.

The accuracy and precision are enough for me to declare that I would rather play a future Zelda title without the use of pressing a button. Wii MotionPlus evolves Zelda’s gameplay without making it feel outdated or stale. That alone gives the series a breath of fresh air, even if some tried-and-true mechanics rear their head from time-to-time. With that said, Skyward Sword’s one-to-one swordplay takes the Zelda series into new directions and with enough room to decipher for new ideas in future installments.

Now, like many 3D Zelda games, the game takes a bit of time for it to properly get moving forward. This is plagued by handholding moments that tend to thrive on a reiteration of text that’s sure to make one desire a sword and shield immediately. With that aside, once Skyward Sword’s adventure starts to roll, the action and puzzle solving start to shine.

Once you expect the same Zelda formula to unravel, the developers will throw a curve ball at the player. When a new challenge appears, the gears will begin to turn with each puzzle. Don’t expect the usual torch lighting or block-pushing puzzles of the past. Nintendo knew coming in that Zelda veterans would see the typical pattern in dungeon design, so they pulled the rug right underneath them.

Dungeons have also been slightly reworked to accommodate to the sky over world, which h. While the Skyward Sword employs only three major areas, each is layered with a new section and acts as a dungeon within a dungeon. So, basically you never know where a dungeon starts or begins. Off the top of my head, I counted seven dungeons, but with the new approach, you could say that there were around 14 to 18. As ridiculous as that seems, the layered dungeons set-up adds a new way of exploring without a break in the action. This is purely a new Zelda experience with its dungeons, puzzles and gameplay, despite it feeling slightly similar in design.

Visually, Skyward Sword won’t win any awards, considering how it’s running on old technology, but one would be willing to make an exception. Even with the Wii’s limitations, the game is still a sight to look at as you play. Skyward Sword offers a great balance of the cartoony, cel-shaded visuals from Wind Waker and the realistic tone from Twilight Princess. The mash-up between the two creates an impressionist style that allows for exaggerated enemy designs and whimsical area layouts. Now, there are a lot of blurry textures if you look close enough, but the visual style of Skyward Sword is like a painting come to life. As much as the series could benefit from an HD upgrade, Nintendo working the Wii’s aging processor at full blast is a reasonable decision.

Now, Skyward Sword isn’t perfect, and that’s not to say it’s a disappointment. For a game that will grab 35 to 40 hours of your time, the last ¼ is padded with unnecessary fetch quests that resemble something that’s meant to be in a Rare title like Banjo-Kazooie. In addition, the world of Skyloft isn’t as vast the Wind Waker’s ocean, which leaves little to no places to visit aside from the three main areas of the game. As much fun as it is to fly Link’s Crimson Loftwing, it begs for more places to explore instead of empty space. Overall, these negatives are not deal breakers in any sense, yet they leave one to wonder how much bigger of a game Skyward Sword could have been.

Skyward Sword delivers on every bit of promise from Nintendo with its spot-on motion controls, subtle storytelling, impressionist art style, and ingenious dungeon designs that continue to turn heads. The boss battles are as epic and surprising as ever; the music is grander with a backing orchestra (do yourself a favor and download the soundtrack); and overall experience is one to behold. Skyward Sword isn’t just one of 2011’s best, it’s one of this generations finest examples of video game development. The Zelda formula may have started to show its age, but Skyward Sword proves that a franchise that’s celebrating its 25th anniversary can still strive in a world dominated by first-person shooters and western-developed RPGs. Nintendo has once again proved skeptics wrong, and one wonders how they can outdo themselves again. Dust off your Wii and experience an adventure that shows why Zelda is still relevant and worth an extra rupee.

9.5/10

]]><![CDATA[Steve Jobs is dead, and you should be sad.]]>Thu, 06 Oct 2011 00:17:12 GMThttp://www.gameshoe.net/shoe-view/steve-jobs-is-dead-and-you-should-be-sad(Posted By: Alex Deckard)

Steve Jobs is dead.

Weigh that for a second. Steve Jobs, the face of Apple during its most prosperous years, is dead. Gone are the trademark semi-excited keynote speeches. Gone is the thick black turtleneck. Gone is the innovation and creativity that Mr. Jobs brought to the table wherever he went. Whether it was Apple or Pixar or any number of smaller projects he worked on, he was a boon to every industry he touched. His vision of a world where music was bought online and computers were designed with a user in mind was one that polarized people. But whether you’re a Mac fanboy or a PC purist, you can’t deny the effect the man has had on the industry at large.

When Steve Jobs stepped down earlier this year, it was reportedly to spend more time with his family. Now, that’s code for a lot of things, and in this case, dying was one of them. There is no doubt that Steve Jobs knew his time was short. He stepped down so he could spend his last months with some dignity. His loss will be felt, but the industry will move on. So let’s all take some time to mourn the passing of an industry luminary and a great man.

]]><![CDATA[Deus Ex: Human Revolution: A Beautiful Machine]]>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 07:08:34 GMThttp://www.gameshoe.net/shoe-view/deus-ex-human-revolution-a-beautiful-machine(Posted by: Alex Clippinger)

Hype for the third installment in the famous transhumanist series Deus Ex was pouring in months before the release date. After all, if asked to prove whether video games can have legitimate plots or artistic merit, a well-versed gamer would look no further than the Deus Ex franchise, and Human Revolution more than lives up to these expectations.

Let’s look at the latest installment with a ground-up review after the break.

Before anything else, the game is graphically beautiful. The character details are precise, their movements convincing. The game’s environments are well-detailed, though they occasionally can’t quite shake the brooding dusky atmosphere. Still, breaks from this are refreshing and frequent enough to keep the game environmentally appealing.

Controls/UI:

Deus Ex is traditionally a franchise firmly rooted in the world of PC gaming, and Human Revolution remains faithful to those origins. The controls are highly intuitive and PC-friendly, making it clear that the developers thought of PC gamers first and consoles second. The format—WASD with an ‘E’ action button—isn’t exactly groundbreaking, though it’s nice to see a smart button—Mouse 2—used for entering and leaving cover. Pro tip: learn to love that right-hand mouse button. You’ll be using it a lot.

The interface is also pretty straightforward. The HUD is very standard and anyone remotely familiar with a first-person shooter should be able to find their way around it without a moment’s pause. The inventory system is based on a ‘grid’ where items take up room based on their physical size. While its size can be expanded through Augmentations, it still requires the player to ‘trim the fat.’ You’ll quickly notice how weapons and ammunition can take up quite a bit of room, encouraging you to prioritize inventory space for more utility-oriented items, which are always smaller and easier to carry or pick up on the go. The quest log is very straightforward, giving bare-bones information on your current main and side quests.

As far as bad stuff goes, the map tends to be at best useless and at worst infuriating. It’s a yellow-on-black bit that will display every possible layer of terrain—but only one at a time. If you’re in, say, an office building, the map is somewhat usable. But in the sprawl of the city environments, it’s annoying and time-consuming to try to decipher. Similarly, quest waypoints can sometimes feel misleading when you’re standing two meters from an objective and there’s a brick wall in your way, or you can’t figure out if the waypoint is telling you to go to another loading-screen-inducing zone of the city or if it’s somewhere you can’t figure out how to reach. Both of these issues will be met frequently—and infuriatingly—in the game’s second city environment, which has a horrifically aggravating layout and renders the map hopelessly unhelpful.

Gameplay:

Despite the ease with which even a casual game player would understand Human Revolution’s controls or most of its UI functions, Human Revolutions is a real gamer’s game. Running and gunning is simply not an option. In fact, cover or no cover, even a firefight with more than a few opponents is not an option.

Human Revolution is a stealth-centered shooter. The cover system is made to be strongly instinctive because of how much you will be relying on it at every stage of the game. The ‘casual’ version of Human Revolution—which I admittedly sank to frequently for my first playthrough—might involve entering a room, getting a gist of how the guards are patrolling, and going. I’ll probably pick one or two off and make sure their bodies don’t get spotted by cameras or other guards, but I’ll make my way through the room fairly quickly. A true playthrough of that same room would involve sitting in place for five minutes, memorizing every nuance of the room—every patrol path, every turn of the head or idle glances the guards make—and spending another six or seven minutes working your way through the room and leaving it without moving so much as a pencil. The game recognizes the importance of stealth and makes a point of encouraging them and rewarding them handsomely for taking the time to ‘do it right.’

The enemy AI detecting you can be a little too forgiving at times. An enemy goes from passive to ‘Alarmed’ to ‘Hostile.’ A ‘Hostile’ enemy has seen you identified you, and has probably notified nearby enemies or sounded an alarm. While ‘Alarmed,’ though, they tend to stick relatively close to their usual patrol pattern, but are on higher alert and have weapons drawn. Still, there are a few times where you’ll feel as though the AI is letting you off easy when an enemy spots you from across the room and proceeds to diligently search his own little corner. For the most part, though, the AI is aggressive and will pursue you relentlessly for screwing up.

Still, combat happens. The cover system makes looking out from behind obstacles easy and gives you a lot of variety: peeking around the corners, over the top, and so on are all simple and allow you to take deadly little potshots and feel like a good little secret agent. Using cover in tandem with more advanced ideas—diving from cover to cover, using grenades to disorient enemies or Augmentations to sneak past them—are even more rewarding when done correctly.

The weapons are all well-balanced. A headshot will take out most enemies immediately, but enemies can and will use covering fire or obstacles to their advantage. At later stages, the enemies become more advanced, tougher, and better equipped, and big firefights just go right off the list of available options. In fact, the game does a good job of encouraging good stealth behavior early on, and gradually enforcing it as the action progresses.

The game’s hacking system is pretty easy to use and requires more a quick hand than much specific skill-savvy. You’ll be doing it quite a bit, though, and leveling it is important. Hacking offers small amounts of EXP and in most environments can be done to gain access to alternate routes or extra goodies.

Storyline/RPG Elements:

The story’s protagonist, Adam “I’m Not Keanu Reeves” Jensen is the head of security at Sarif, a corporation that develops advanced robotic human augmentations. When Jensen is horribly injured, his boss decides to use these augmentations to rebuild him (they have the technology). Jensen then doggedly pursues leads to uncover blah-blah-blah mass conspiracy blah-blah-blah repercussions. And so on. I’d hate to give away spoilers.

In brief, the main plot line is compelling and will consistently keep the action flowing right along. Though Jensen’s Dark Knight impersonation can be a bit flat on the delivery, it makes for some delightful dry humor in his interactions with supporting characters. In fact, most of the humor throughout Human Revolution is dry, subdued, and appropriate—but hey, it’s there, which is more than some of us might have been expecting. Jensen’s character is fairly understated, giving the player room to develop him as they see fit without having to make him Gordon Freeman. Still, it’s the little moments of roleplay that really make the game the subtle masterpiece that it is: in Jensen’s apartment, his bathroom mirror is smashed, a note attached to it reading “contact maintenance—replace bathroom mirror again.” Why can’t Jensen stand to look at himself? Is it guilt? Hatred of the machine he has become? We are left to interpret as we see fit.

The supporting characters are diverse and fun, mostly because appropriately exploring the plot will often leave you wondering about their motivations or whether they’re telling you everything. On many occasions you’re able to dig for information in conversations or push towards a certain outcome, and like the rewards for being stealthy the game knows how to compensate you for doing it well.

The side quests are so-so. On one hand, their plot and process are just as entertaining as the main storyline and you’ll almost certainly enjoy doing them. On the other, their diversity tends to fall a bit flat. Human Revolution boasted various aspects of gameplay and how you could different ones to solve quests or puzzles by different means. While this is almost always true of the main storyline, this is not necessarily the case with side quests. Rather, there tend to be a tiny handful of very specific ways you can solve them. For example, there’s an Augmentation that protects you from harm via poisonous fumes. At a couple points in the game, it’s great for circumventing an obstacle. But you literally only see it five or six times in the game, total, and almost never at a truly important point. So you can either spend multiple Praxis points (the games’ Augmentation upgrade currency), or just find another way around. While that’s not necessarily bad, a worse example is when I was on a side quest with strong plot relevance and I was confronted by a computer requiring level 5 Hacking. No alternative. I was just at the guy’s apartment, for goodness’ sake. He’s the one who told me where this computer was, and he didn’t give me the password? I couldn’t have sleuthed around the apartment for it? Most of these moments are in the side quests, but even on the main plot line at times I felt like my options were a bit throttled. I’d like to see some updating to offer more routes or options for players if they so choose and help diversify the game experience.

Speaking of diversity, the Augmentation system is fun. Really fun. There are oodles of Augs to pick from and they all offer a great deal of utility and functionality. At the same time, the system is incredibly well-balanced. The Augmentations tend to be pretty underpowered to start with, especially if you don’t diversify how you’re spending your Praxis points. Certain Augs, like bonuses to Hacking, are basically required to get absolutely anywhere in the game, but the frequency of these actions, or how often you can be rewarded for going out of your way to use them, make up for this mandatory investment.

At first I was concerned that spreading my points out so much meant that I wouldn’t get to specialize my character as much as I wanted. However, even on an average-EXP gain playthrough the middle of the game hands out Experience (and thus Praxis points) like free candy on Halloween, and you’ll get a pretty good boost to how well you can develop your character. If there’s one thing I regret, it’s the aforementioned problem of certain quests or areas requiring very specific Augs.

Overall, Human Revolution is a strong game that is a blast to play and even more fun to simply experience. Improvements can certainly be made—potential DLCs would give an already fleshed-out game even more, but mostly a polishing of its current campaign would nudge this game right up to the top for my current game of the year.

]]><![CDATA[Editorial: Stop looking for reasons to hate Gamestop]]>Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:25:52 GMThttp://www.gameshoe.net/shoe-view/editorial-stop-looking-for-reasons-to-hate-gamestop(Posted by: Eric Rees)

Full disclosure: I have worked at Gamestop before for quite a while working behind the counter and doing many other things.

Here's the long and short of the news story so I can get to the editorial piece about this: Square Enix paired up with OnLive, a digital distributor of games, to package a free copy of Deus Ex: Human Revolution into every copy of the game that was sold at Gamestop. Therefore, Gamestop employees have been told to open the new games and take the codes out, and sell them as is.

So here's the stitch. It's widely known around the industry that Gamestop has been planning a digital distribution model for a long time now, and this would give you a good idea why Gamestop isn't too happy about this. But everyone is up in arms at Gamestop for doing this, and when I mean up in arms, I mean very very agitated. But why does everyone get so angry so quickly whenever the nations largest brick and mortar game retailer does something they don't like?

There's lots of analogies I could use to bolster my argument here but let's compare apples to apples shall we? Steam is a digital distribution service, the biggest service of it's kind. EA decided to create their own and it's doing well for it's size, it's called Origin. The situation we're looking at today would be as if you went to Origin and bought a game to be downloaded right to your PC, and you got a free code to head over to Steam and download the same game. Steam and Origin are direct competitors so obvious Origin wouldn't even have to put up a fight in this case, why does the situation change when it comes off of the digital arena? The only, and I mean only, problem that I can see with this (and it's splitting hairs as it is) is that employees are being forced to open new games and then turn around and re-sell them as new, when they've been opened before.

I can say that I've felt this wrath before since I've worked at a Gamestop. For some reason the employees take the brunt of the hate towards the company because we are the ones that you have to interface with. The situation with OnLive is not the guys behind the counter trying to steal your promised codes and use them at home. It was an email, pictured above, that says to do this, and if you don't you might be subject to punishment because you aren't doing so. It seems to me that most people get a negative feeling towards Gamestop employees because they push pre-orders and their Powerup system so much. While I can come out and say that Gamestop employees do not get paid on commission, this is not unlike any other business where there are incentives for selling things; i.e. car wash attendants and even some restaurants.

When it comes down to it, this fiasco is a basic business practice; you do not promote a rival company with anything that you do. Granted that Gamestop might not feel any impact of this in their stores but left unattended, this could be a fatal blow to their yet un-released digital distribution center. Feel free to leave comments and debate the points below, the section is always open.

]]><![CDATA[An Argument On The First Amendment]]>Sun, 17 Jul 2011 20:36:22 GMThttp://www.gameshoe.net/shoe-view/an-argument-on-the-first-amendmentPosted By: Alex Deckard

This is an argument that occurred on Facebook between several parties, one of which was a contributing writer to Gameshoe.net. All the names have been changed to protect those involved. The names have been changed to characters from Mass Effect because I found it amusing. If you want to read it in the voices of the characters, you are welcome to. It makes it funnier. Please enjoy.

·       Ashley Williams Oh this is bullshit. Fucking supreme court.

27 June at 20:52 · Like

·

.

Jacob Taylor since Tillman hasn't got here yet, 'MERICA

27 June at 20:55 · Like ·  1 person

·

.

Garrus Vakarian yeah, Ashley. screw those guys. what the hell do they know about law?

27 June at 21:02 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams ‎....its not about laws or the first amendment or any of that shit. It's about morals. Underage children should NOT be playing violent video games. This case is a classic example of the most liberal state in the union being a complete and total JACKASS.

27 June at 21:05 · Like

·

.

Jacob Taylor Because it's totally up to the supreme court of the country to impose morals on everyone else. That's what parents are for.

27 June at 21:06 · Like ·  4 people

·

.

Ashley Williams But clearly certain parents are stacking in their duties. Yes, the parents SHOULD hold supremacy here, but most don't, and can't control their children. What's stopping them from buying the games off the internet, or away from their parents when they're out with friends? Kids today are fucked up enough- and the violent games, if they're that worth it? Are worth the wait until the minor is of legal age.

27 June at 21:12 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams ‎*slacking

27 June at 21:13 · Like

·

.

Jacob Taylor I think they decided it wasn't a felony, not that it was ok. Personally, I think that rape, arson, murder, etc. are way worse than selling video games.

27 June at 21:15 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams Truth. But who's to say that the games don't desensitize kids to rape, murder, arson, etc. 'Make it ok' as it were.

27 June at 21:16 · Like

·

.

Jacob Taylor Who's to say that watching the news specials on the topic and listening to people who need a scapegoat for their children's behavior won't desensitize you to taking freedoms away? Aren't you just as brainwashed as the children who think running over hookers with a tank is ok because they played grand theft auto?

27 June at 21:20 · Like ·  1 person

·

.

Ashley Williams Minor children HAVE no freedoms. They are at the will of their parents and the authority figures who govern them. You have to be a legal adult to enjoy the freedoms of being an American citizen.

27 June at 21:24 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams sure, I hate freedoms being take away as much as anyone. But when I have to worry about 11 year olds waving a gun at me because they saw it in a video game? When I have to worry about minor children thinking its ok to play with REAL guns because if games and tv? THEN I worry.

27 June at 21:26 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams ‎*taken

27 June at 21:26 · Like

·

Commander Shepard Wait, am I seeing someone who DOESN'T like this decision?

27 June at 21:38 · Like ·  1 person

·

.

Ashley Williams No I'm totally being sarcastic. >_>

27 June at 21:39 · Like

·

.

Urdnot Grunt why don't they make a law outlawing stupidity? that way only children who will take the proper lessons out of stuff will get to live

27 June at 21:48 · Like ·  1 person

·

Commander Shepard Wow. I swear when I posted my comment, it was the fourth one. I couldn't see the others.

27 June at 21:49 · Like ·  1 person

·

Commander Shepard

Okay, couple things.

First off, the "most liberal state" thing is true. California's government were acting like jackasses. They were trying to legislate sales based on content. It's a fine line, and it is not to be crossed. Whatever the consequences may be.

Fact of the matter is, there is no conclusive scientific evidence tying violent video games to violent behavior. All evidence is entirely circumstancial. The studies that DID find a link (and therefore get parroted by the misguided and the easily fooled), were found to have been tainted by ill methods and biased testers.

27 June at 21:54 · Like ·  1 person

·
Commander Shepard

Secondly, these games NEED to be given 1st Amendment protection, or it opens up an avenue for ALL SORTS of legislation. Today it's illegal to sell a violent game to a minor, tomorrow it's illegal to sell it to anyone. The ESRB does a perfectly good job of warning parents about content. NO LEGITIMATE RETAILER WILL SELL A MATURE RATED GAME WITHOUT CHECKING ID. That is a fact. If you do it, you're fired. Period. The parents have to do their jobs. If they're shitty parents, they're shitty parents. It's not the governments job to correct them.

27 June at 21:57 · Like ·  1 person

·

.

Ashley Williams Well I disagree and point out we're all entitled to our own opinions no matter how unpopular they may be. Frankly, I'm sick of underage kids playing video games that make ME queasy and wish there was a way to block their sales, especially to minors.

27 June at 22:28 · Like

·

Commander Shepard

That's what I'm saying. Retailers don't sell to minors. The law wasn't necessary. Furthermore, it would set a dangerous precedent regarding freedom of speech and the 1st Amendment. I don't want 8 year olds playing GTA either, but it's up to the parent to police that stuff. You make a law, the retailers get jumpy about stocking the product. They do that, the companies stop making the product. Before long, NO ONE gets to play it because it doesn't exist. Just because someone finds the content objectionable doesn't give anyone the right to restrict it through law. It's in the constitution.

27 June at 22:40 · Like

·

.

Garrus Vakarian if anyone, kids or otherwise, is ever under the impression that guns aren't dangerous, violent video games aren't what's at fault. he just has remarkably shitty parents. also, the sales blocking argument is MUCH more complicated than "it makes me uncomfortable, ban it!"

27 June at 22:44 · Like

·

Commander Shepard That's the problem. No it isn't. That's about as complex of an argument that you'll get out of these people. "It makes me feel bad. I want it to go away because it offends my delicate sensibilities." People need to stop imposing their morals on others and try imposing them on themselves for a change.

27 June at 22:46 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams Retailers don't sell to children? Please. They know where the money comes from

27 June at 23:09 · Like

·

.

Urdnot Grunt Who brings them to the stores?

27 June at 23:10 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams Crappy parents and/or crappy parents of friends. Or they walk. Or ride their bikes.

27 June at 23:13 · Like

·

Commander Shepard You're not hearing me. They don't sell to children. They sell to people who could reasonably be an authority figure for children, but if a kid tries to buy GTA, the teller asks him to come back with a parent. If they think you're buying for an underaged kid and you're NOT the parent, they won't sell to you.

27 June at 23:13 · Like

·

.

Urdnot Grunt So you are blaming the store because parents bring them to pick out the games they want

27 June at 23:13 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams I have watched Walmart retailers sell to 15 year olds.

27 June at 23:14 · Like

·

.

Urdnot Grunt They censor music highly doubt they would sell those types of games to kids

27 June at 23:16 · Like

·

Commander Shepard

And if their supervisors found out, they'd be fired. It's against store policy. If you make it illegal, it will still happen. I understand that the games make you uncomfortable, and if you want to believe that lobbying for some bullshit law in order to impose your own morality on everyone is okay, so be it. Some people need to help others so they can sleep easy at night. Other people prefer lying to themselves about how "good" their actions are. You're naive and you're wrong.

27 June at 23:17 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams Yes Ryan I am. Because they shouldn't be playing violent video games. If it were that important, or that worthy, it'd be worth waiting until you are of legal age to purchase them. In the meantime, why don't kids spend time playing outside, or doing enriching activities like reading, writing, attending the theater, etc etc? Instead of sitting on their asses day in and day out playing video games?

27 June at 23:19 · Like

·

Commander Shepard

And now we get to the root of things. The dismissal of an entire medium as "inferior" simply because it's newer. People wouldn't get so bent out of shape over violent games if they didn't already have a bias against games as legitimate art. Let me give this part an independent section so you don't miss it.

A video game can be just as much a work of art and therefore as enriching as any book, film or painting.

The stories are just as complex. The visuals just as majestic. The social points just as important. The difference is, it's new. So people blindly hate it.

27 June at 23:23 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams

Ok that was uncalled for. At any point did I say your opinion was wrong or resort to personal insults? No. I'm just saying, kids today are too desensitized to violence and should be prohibited from seeing or in this case playing certain forms of 'entertainment'. And when parents can't or won't step up and do their jobs, the children have to be protected. That's just the point here. The children have to be protected from themselves.

27 June at 23:25 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams And to clarify, I never said video games weren't art. I was implying that they do little to nothing for education, in the majority. They're mindless, pretty distractions.

27 June at 23:27 · Like

·

Commander Shepard

Firstly, you're wrong. You haven't exactly been hurling hurtful missives, but you've been talking as if children are stupid, cattle-like creatures that blindly repeat everything they see. I'll let you in on a hint. I was a kid once. I was a kid who played mature video games. At no point have I thought "Gee, I should go on a shooting spree." When you make blanket statements like that about the population, you insult people. You may not know it, nor need you intend it, but it happens.

Secondly, video games, by virtue of being an artistic medium, MUST have the same protection as other forms of art. Either you're saying they aren't art, or you're saying that certain artistic expression should be illegal. It's one or the other.

27 June at 23:30 · Like ·  1 person

·

.

Garrus Vakarian how do you define a "mindless, petty distraction", then? because if it's as broad as you just implied, something like 90% of all art falls under that category.

27 June at 23:30 · Unlike ·  1 person

·

.

Ashley Williams

Children's brains are still in development and are incapable of making informed, fully intelligent decisions until adulthood. Yes, the majority of children have the sense to differentiate, but some don't and deserve to be protected. Far too much emphasis is put on gaming. Because that's what it is when you boil it down- GAMES. With no benefit for the populace, educationally or otherwise, outside the realm of entertainment. And let's face it- kids are stupid. Sometimes they remain stupid well into adulthood. But if the emphasis put on GAMES was put on education instead, the world would be a better, much less threatening place. Trust me, I feel the same way about movies and wish there was a way to ban parents from taking their children to violent movies. And don't try to tell me it doesn't happen- I worked in a movie theater and I can't tell you how many traumatized children I saw being dragged out of violent movies on a DAILY basis. The problem is rooted in the entertainment industry and now that its out of control, I believe the government needs to step in. Those are my views. I am no less right than you are, Mr. Deckard. Again, if these violent games were so worth it, they'd be worth waiting for, like smoking or the ability to gamble or legally drink.

27 June at 23:41 · Like

·

Commander Shepard It is a moral wrong to punish a majority of society for the sins of a minority.

27 June at 23:44 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams The few always ruin things for the majority. That's life.

27 June at 23:47 · Like

·

Commander Shepard Only if it is allowed to be.

27 June at 23:47 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams Now I think you're the naive one. That's just the way life is, whether you like it or not.

27 June at 23:49 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams I fully realize mine is not the popular opinion, but that doesn't make me wrong.

27 June at 23:50 · Like

·

Commander Shepard

Your opinion is not wrong by virtue of being unpopular. Your opinion isn't even, at the core of it, wrong. I'm all for raising better children. But the route is through education. Let them see the options, then help them make the decision. Don't mystify the forbidden, then expect them to deal with it maturely when the time comes.

Also, I am, of course, quite concerned with the impact such legislation could have on free speech. It's not a road we want to walk down.

27 June at 23:52 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams

Free speech has its issues. Especially when it allows 8 year olds to view gory decapitations and other abominations over and over. The first amendment is used as a shield far too many times. It's flawed. Again, an unpopular opinion and yes its mildly hypocritical because my own statement is protected by that amendment but the point stands. Think about it. The Westboro Baptist Church are protected by the first amendment. Are they right as well by virtue of free speech?

27 June at 23:57 · Like

·

Commander Shepard

The absolute freedom of speech is important because if we don't have absolute freedom, we have limited freedom. And when we have limited freedom someone can restrict it how they see fit. And that is truly unacceptable.

Do I disagree with the Westboro Baptist Church? Of course. Are they disgusting and despicable? Yes. Should they be allowed to continue preaching hate? Definitely. Not because they're right, but because in stopping them, we would be saying "You have free speech, but we reserve the right to censor you based on your opinion."

You're opinions on free speech are unpopular, yes. They are also dangerous. If that's what you believe, go on saying it. But the rest of us don't have to sit here and silently watch. And, spoiler alert, we won't.

28 June at 00:03 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams And that's fair. As I've been saying the whole time, I'm open to others opinions and respect them. I'm just asking for the right to have the same kindness extended to me.

28 June at 00:06 · Like

·

Commander Shepard We're having the conversation, aren't we?

28 June at 00:07 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams Indeed we are. But I wasnt the one who began hurling out insults.

28 June at 00:09 · Like

·

.

Garrus Vakarian i just read back through most of the discussion... what insults are you referring to?

28 June at 00:10 · Like

·

Commander Shepard I'm not having this part of the conversation again, it already happened. I simply hurled mine more directly than yours. And with greater intent. Again, when you start making broad generalizations about people, you're bound to piss someone off.

And Gerry, I didn't aim them directly at her, but remarks were made to that effect and she took them the right way.

28 June at 00:11 · Like

·

Commander Shepard ‎"I understand that the games make you uncomfortable, and if you want to believe that lobbying for some bullshit law in order to impose your own morality on everyone is okay, so be it. Some people need to help others so they can sleep easy at night. Other people prefer lying to themselves about how "good" their actions are. You're naive and you're wrong."

That bit, I'm assuming.

28 June at 00:12 · Like

·

.

Garrus Vakarian that's not an insult, that's a heated argument. but i digress.

28 June at 00:12 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams ‎'You're naive and wrong'. I never claimed anyone I was discussing with/against/what have you was anymore right or wrong than I was.

28 June at 00:13 · Like

·

Commander Shepard

See, you're confusing the requirement that your argument be made with some sort of imaginary requirement that I not directly disagree with your basis. Your opinions, particularly on free speech, are WRONG, culturally speaking. Western society is built on an individuals right to think and speak freely. You are naive because the actions you advocate would in no way create the world you are envisioning. You place too much trust in the wrong people.

Therefore, you are naive and wrong.

28 June at 00:15 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams Well your opinion is clearly pointing towards too much trust in the American people as a whole, which says to me you're idealistic and equally naive and wrong as a result.

28 June at 00:21 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams Because the majority of people, as a whole, are IDIOTS.

28 June at 00:21 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams Do I trust politicians completely? Of course not. But I choose to believe that politics will come through where it counts.

28 June at 00:22 · Like

·

Commander Shepard

And politicians have shown, time and time again, that they will fail to do so.

Here's the thing. If speech is free, the worst that could happen is some people will say objectionable things and upset some other people. Free speech doesn't cause school shootings and carjackings, a poor upbringing, personal moral failings and psychological disorders cause those. But if we restrict free speech, we are giving away power. Power that is currently so diluted that it doesn't cause problems. However, once the government has the right to restrict speech, what makes you think they'll stop at this? Why not restrict religious speech? After all, plenty of religions have caused problems through their doctrine, lets just nip it in the bud. How about political speech? These radicals get all incensed and inspire people to commit acts of terrorism. Lets just ban all anti-government rhetoric.

Are you starting to see the picture? I sincerely hope so.

There will always be problems. But the solution can NEVER be to hand over our freedoms to a government. For when we do that, we never see them again.

28 June at 00:27 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams Of course that's crossed my mind. I'm no simpleton. However, it is my hope that the government can restrict ITSELF. Will they? Probably not.

28 June at 00:31 · Like

·

Commander Shepard Which is why this is a risk we cannot take.

28 June at 00:32 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams but certain things NEED to be restricted to protect the people from themselves.

28 June at 00:32 · Like

·

Commander Shepard

And that, it seems, is where we differ. That is the core belief on which we disagree. I believe that freedom trumps security, you believe security trumps freedom. That very basic core tenant is a point of contestation between us, and neither of us will waver in that belief, making this argument, and by extension the other, numerous arguments surrounding it, over. It has been a pleasure sparring with you, and I wish you well.

28 June at 00:35 · Like ·  1 person

·

.

Garrus Vakarian at what point does darwin come into this? why protect people stupid enough to not see the difference between fiction and reality?

28 June at 00:36 · Like

·

Commander Shepard And then, right on cue, Garrus returns from the bowels of Michigan to continue it. Good show, old boy!

28 June at 00:37 · Like

·

Commander Shepard For the record, Darwin enters in after the opening number, but he leaves shortly following the return from intermission. He's a bitch like that.

28 June at 00:39 · Like

·

.

Joker

‎Ashley Williams there is no actual evidence that video game violence desensitizes individuals, child or adult, any more than any other violently portrayed medium. If you want your child to grow up non-violent you can: A) Not buy them a game and B) Teach them a decent moral code. However, don't tread on the rights of an individual to convey their art form because you have a distaste for what some people claim it induces.

28 June at 13:12 · Like

·

.

Joker When we relinquish our freedom to the government in exchange for security, we end up with neither.

28 June at 13:13 · Like

·

.

Joker ‎Commander Shepard "I'm all for raising better children. But the route is through education. Let them see the options, then help them make the decision. Don't mystify the forbidden, then expect them to deal with it maturely when the time comes."
-Are we talking violent video games now, or abstinence only education?

28 June at 13:17 · Like

·

Commander Shepard The same principle applies to both. I'll admit, I'm a very hands off guy when it comes to this stuff. Probably because I was raised in a house where the options were never disguised and I was never treated like I was too immature to handle something. When we give our youth the proper instruction, I believe they can handle most anything.

28 June at 13:52 · Like ·  1 person

·

.

Ashley Williams

Again: you can't tell me that the games don't play a significant part in desensitizing our youth. I'm not so naive as to place the blame squarely on video games ALONE- but they play a significant part. And why do games have to be violent in the first place? That is something I've never understood. Nor the draw to buy and play them. Maybe I'm a pacifist, but I've never felt the need some have to buy games where you kill mercilessly for fun, outside of Soul Calibur, but that game had no extreme gore. I just don't get it and don't feel that our youth's easy access to such horribly violent material is right. I don't want my future children, or even the young children in my family now to have he ability to purchase these pieces of filth under the guise of 'oh its just a game'. As I keep saying repeatedly, I blame THE ENTIRE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY for how violent and abhorrent our kids are these days. And if the parents won't step up to stop it, I expected our government to, but they won't either.

28 June at 15:16 · Like

·

Commander Shepard

The idea that it's "just a game" is something we've been fighting for some time. Part of the reason it's been so easy for kids to get these games is that their parents have an outlook that it's "just a game". A game is a toy, and therefore all of it must be okay for children. If it was looked at as an artistic medium, like music or film, it would have the respect, and therefore the parental attention it deserves. Simply put, parents are to blame, not just for lack of judgement, but for a lack of understanding of the medium as a whole.

As for the necessity of violent games, disliking them is a personal preference. I happen to like a number of them a great deal. Not just because of the violence, although I have to admit that is the only reason I own Saints Row 2, but for the complex and mature plots and characters. Take Red Dead Redemption. This is a game with a plot that western directors would have killed for. With characters that number among the most compelling in the genre. It also features a bunch of killing. Does this make it bad? No. It just makes it violent, and therefore not your thing. Ergo, if you don't like it, don't play it.

In conclusion, the two biggest problems are the parents and their unwillingness to give games the same respect and attention they give film and music, and societies inability to separate meaningless violence from actual violence. Violent games give people the opportunity to act out roles that they would NEVER fill in real life. When I play GTA, I steal cars. I kill people. I light old ladies on fire and run them over with my van. It's entertainment. It doesn't mean I'm going to go out and do it. It's not as if these games are acting as a release for criminal urges kept in check only by our fear of the law. The actions taken in them are immoral, and people are drawn to it because it is a way to briefly step in to the shoes of a psychopath, while still remaining morally clean. Would 99.999% of GTA players commit the crimes depicted in the games? No. Would the part that does do it without the games existence? Definitely. It's a case of mislabeled blame.

28 June at 15:59 · Like ·  2 people

·

Commander Shepard TL;DR, games aren't toys, they're art like movies and deserve the same parental treatment, violent games are a healthy form of entertainment to the sound mind, and people that commit crimes and blame video games are either insane or liars.

28 June at 16:01 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams

To which I have to ask what's so damn entertaining about lighting elderly women on fire and murdering them? If you did that in real life, people would call you a psychopath. I see no difference in perpetrating the crime in the real world and the virtual world because you consciously made the decision to do it. Sure, in video games, you get points and largely don't get tried for your crimes. But if its ok in the virtual realm doesn't that, by extension, make it ok in reality? That's how a lot of people think and its just stupid. And video games started life as GAMES. TOYS. Why should they be treated any differently now? Just because they've suddenly become more complex than an Italian plumber beating his head on bricks on for coins? I don't think so. They're just. Games. If people put as much fervor into other pursuits as they're putting into arguing with people like me over GAMES than maybe gas prices wouldn't be so damn high, two people in love could get married and rape would be prosecuted in the way it should be. But no. We're arguing over moving pixels. This is stupid, and I'm done. Nothing any of you say is going to change my mind as much as anything I say is going to change yours. I bid you all a very fond farewell. Good day.

28 June at 16:15 · Like

·

.

Urdnot Grunt you both typed way to much... my scroll button doesn't like you

28 June at 16:21 · Like

·

Commander Shepard I'm about to post something much larger, and then I'm done with this.

28 June at 16:22 · Like

·

Commander Shepard

Just as well you leave now. You just pressed ALL my hot buttons.

And if you read this, I want you to know that you've maintained perfectly reasonable composure up until this point. Your argument is, in a word, infantile. It shows a lack of thought and a greater lack of any and all logic. By now you've probably stopped reading, but for my own sake, and the entertainment of anyone who cares to read, I'll go ahead and dismantle your arguments from that last post. Oh, and I'm done being Mr. Goddamn Nice Guy.

1. As for your questioning the fun of lighting elderly people on fire, it's a deviant behavior. Human beings are, by our very nature, drawn to and interested by deviant behavior. It's how we roll. And like you said, if I did that in real life, people would call me a psychopath. Absolutely. Because that would be shithouse crazy. The problem is exactly as you laid it out. You don't see the difference in the act virtually vs. the act in reality. You don't understand the inherent difference in the act. In the game, it's enjoyable. It's a test of skill and of creativity. No one is harmed, so a moral element never enters. When you murder people, the cops come after you. If the cops catch you, they either kill you or take your money. There is a consequence. It's the same as the thrill of a chase scene in a movie, only now it's you. Why do we watch movies about bank robbers? Why do we read books about outlaws? Because every once in a while, everyone wants to role play the bad guy.

2. You're right. People who equate actions that are acceptable in games to being acceptable in reality ARE stupid. Just like people who continue to insist that actions in games are just as immoral as their real life counterparts. This argument conflicts with your initial one.

3. Okay, so because games started as toys, they will remain toys forever? Yeah, THAT makes sense. You know what? Paintings began as nothing more than scribbles on a cave wall. Sorry Van Gogh, your paintings aren't actually high art, they're just graffiti. Oh, and music started out as cavemen banging rocks together, so I guess there's no need to look at it as anything more than that. My bad Beethoven, I guess you're just an idiot with some stones. And literature started out as scribbles describing how much grain some nomads had. I guess all literature is just really fancy bookkeeping. Better luck next time Hemingway.

Are you starting to see my point? If you are, good job. If you aren't, then you're either too stubborn or too stupid for your own good, and you seem too well spoken to be stupid, so I'll assume you're just being momentarily foolish.

4. This is my favorite. If we weren't arguing about this all the time, then we'd be brokering peace in the Middle East, banishing homophobia and ending rape? Wow. That is possibly the most ridiculous argument I've seen from a person older then 12. There are not words to adequately describe how utterly moronic that statement is.

So I guess I'll describe it inadequately.

Firstly, I'll assume that this was an argument made as a heated parting shot, which indicates that my rebuttals got to you and got you angry. That's a shame, I was under the impression you were better than that, but oh well. For the record, if that WAS a well thought out and tempered response, then I take back what I said before. You ARE an idiot.

Secondly, how are these problems related? It's not like the people bickering about video games are doing so instead of smoothing over international relations in the Middle East. We're not having this argument during our time off from educating hillbillies on tolerance. I don't have the police on hold waiting for a rape report while I type this. Your argument doesn't make sense. As ill-informed and juvenile as the other ones were, at least they fit the topic.

Thirdly, your argument seems to imply that it's not just the people who disagree with you who are now responsible for these terrors, but EVERYONE who bothers to have the argument. Including yourself. Wow. How do you live with yourself, knowing that you just personally caused gas prices to go up 20 cents? How will you sleep at night with the knowledge that you are responsible for gay people in Kansas having to live in fear? What will you tell the rape victims that you would have saved, had you been out and about as Rape Batman, instead of having this conversation? Honestly, have a little common sense. Have ANY common sense. Learn to SPELL common sense, find a dictionary, look up the phrase, then ask several people what they think it means, and finally take some sort of class so that you can properly understand what little sense you're making. When you've done that, talk to me. But until then, you should probably consider keeping your opinions to yourself. They make you look foolish.

28 June at 16:39 · Like

·

Commander Shepard Sorry for the length there. That took a while...

28 June at 16:39 · Like

·

.

Ashley Williams

I will admit to snickering at 'Rape Batman' and will also admit to having lost my temper. But as a human being, I can only take so many personal attacks (not from yourself but from others) before I lose my nerve and act, as you've pointed out, rather foolishly. However I maintain my stance that we're arguing over games, which is equally as foolish, with energy that could be better expended elsewhere. Otherwise, I bow to an opponent greater than myself. Were you in debate at any point? I must admit, you're more than a worthy adversary. And again I'm done. This is why I attempt to remain out of any and all political arenas. Again I bid you a good day, apologize for any insults I may have hurled, implied or otherwise, and wish you well.

28 June at 16:49 · Like

·

Commander Shepard

And I, in turn, apologize for any offense my remarks might have caused. Fact of the matter is, when I try to hurt, I go for the jugular. It is by no means a statement on you as a person. You seem, at the very least, to be a morally sound individual.

And yes, I debated through high school, and, due to the lack of a Mizzou debate team, internet argument has become the last refuge I have for this stuff.

And a good day to you too.

28 June at 16:52 · Like

]]><![CDATA[Hooray! The Supreme Court likes us!]]>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:46:48 GMThttp://www.gameshoe.net/shoe-view/hooray-the-supreme-court-likes-us(Posted By: Alex Deckard)

The Supreme Court has spoken, and we won. Video games have been provided with the same protection as books, movies, music and all other forms of art. One of the majority Justices, Antonin Scalia wrote:

Video games qualify for First Amendment protection. Like protected books, plays, and movies, they communicate ideas through familiar literary devices and features distinctive to the medium. And "the basic principles of freedom of speech . . . do not vary"

Wow. Looks like we’ve got friends in high places, or at least non-crazy people in high places.

The decision was 7-2, with Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan, Alito and Roberts making up the majority, and Justices Thomas and Breyer making up the dissenters.

This is a landmark case. This deals a killing blow to legislators and parents groups hoping to restrict the medium. A killing blow that can totally be represented by a video game with as much gore and violence as the designers want, then sold openly in the street.

"Who wants Postal 3?"

See, video games have been blamed for societies ills since their creation. Laziness, antisocial tendencies, obesity, oversexualizing and desensitization are all evils that have been laid at the feet of gaming. But only the big one, violence, was something that could be legislated on. Something that could be sued over. You can’t sue Square-Enix because you think Final Fantasy turned your kid into a fat, lazy friendless chronic masturbator who likes to look at pictures of crime scenes, even if you’re right. None of those things are illegal.

But they are very, very creepy.

But two Doom enthusiasts in Colorado shoot up a school, and it’s the game's fault? Forget the fact that those kids were dejected loners with crappy home lives, no supervision, easy access to firearms and no one to help them deal with their bullshit, not to mention the litany of psychological disorders they undoubtedly had. People wanted something to blame. They didn’t want to believe that “polite society” could have created such monsters. So instead they blamed a simplistic game in which you wander around Mars killing demons.

Pictured: Apparently a super-accurate murder simulator.

Video games have always had enemies, and those enemies aren’t gone. But when Leland Yee and the Governator decided they wanted to get the government involved, it turned out 7 out of 9 of the Supreme Court Justices weren’t enemies. As their reward, I’m assuming they get to be in a special release of “NBA Jam” or something. Justices Thomas and Breyer will have to be on the sidelines, so that Ginsburg can taunt them and call them “suckas” after she pops off a sick finger roll.

I'm just not that good at Photoshop.

Still, we need to look forward. Sure, it’s unconstitutional to legislate video game content, but there will always be people standing in the way of progress. There will always be small minded parents groups refusing to blame shitty parenting for poor behavior. There will always be scumbag lawyers like Jack “Jackie Boy” Thompson who want to exploit dead children and grieving families to make a quick buck, because it’s easy to blame video games and he’s an amoral vulture. There will always be people that just don’t get it. But there will also always be games. And gamers that love them. So today, sit down and curl up with your favorite game, and quietly celebrate your hobby’s new constitutional protection.

Seriously though, this guy can eat a dick.

]]><![CDATA[Hunted: The Demon's Forge Review]]>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:41:15 GMThttp://www.gameshoe.net/shoe-view/hunted-the-demons-forge-review(Posted By: Ryan Clark)

Hunted: The Demon’s Forge. Hrm. Don’t know what to truly say about this game, as I oscillate between thinking it’s a ton of fun, and wanting to drop kick Bethesda into a goddamn wood chipper. A forewarning, I will drop minor spoilers. It can’t be helped. That being said, let’s begin.

A preface for those who haven’t heard of the game before, you play as either Caddoc or E’lara, a human and elf team that are mercenaries. You get contracted by a spirit to search out and rescue her physical body. In addition, you get something called the Deathstone. It lets you talk to dead things. And that’s really about it. You travel across many, to be frank, linear maps, killing and looting along the way. The story is contrived, but the characters are fun, and despite my best efforts, had me enjoying their banter along the way. There is a small flavor of irony as the characters you play bitch about various game mechanics that you will wonder about yourself. However, both characters are well fleshed out, each with amusing quirks that make playing the game enjoyable. There are various items you can acquire by being adventurous and straying from the beaten path.

First and foremost, don’t play this game alone. Even if you have to get online to play with someone else, it’s definitely worth it. While the solo game isn’t terrible, the true feel for the game can’t be felt until you’re working with another person to defeat every enemy, and working on the puzzles. Of which there are two interesting varieties. You can light things on fire as E’lara, or you can push heavy objects as Caddoc. That’s really all the puzzles the game can throw at you. Some of them take more time than others, but the complexity is never so much that two individuals can’t figure it out. There is online functionality for map creation and such, but I have yet to access it so there is little I can say about it.

There is one thing that can be said in detraction of the game’s enjoyment, and that is anti-climatic boss fights, or the absence of them altogether. The game has an annoying habit of presenting epic monsters or opponents, then either not letting you fight them at all, or when you do engage said enemy it isn’t a confrontation worthy of the hype that was put into the fight.

SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!!

The first boss fight you encounter is against a massive spider that has been seen lurking around the cave system you’ve been fighting through. Yet when it comes to fight this behemoth of destruction, you run from it for a bit, then kill it with 2 shots from a ballista. And that’s it. There’s no ten minute fight against impossible odds, a brutal engagement that leaves you drained but exhilarated for overcoming such a monstrosity, or even a sense of accomplishment. Two ballista shots and the fucker’s dead. What should’ve been a satisfying and strenuous exercise in team work was instead a hollow victory, leaving you uncomfortable with yourself for not having done more.

There is another boss fight in the game that is the boss that never was. As you enter a city that is aflame from attacks by dragons, (another foe you never face) you see, lumbering across the horizon of smoulering buildings and flame an ogre. This is not the ogre of usual fantasy fare, but a hulking monstrosity 50 feet tall and capable of oblieterating entire buildings with a swing of its gargantuan hand. You see him again after you enter another cave system in search of the madman who is responsible for everything you have faced until this point. But you never face it. You see it multiple times, fear attacking it, and for nothing. However, I may have been discourteous to the game. You do face the dragons, but instead of waging war against so formidable an opponent, you instead use a little magic stone (the Deathstone from the beginning of the game) to make them retreat.

All in all, this is a game you shouldn’t think too much about. You’ll enjoy it while you play it, but after that do something that won’t let you ponder all the awesome things that could’ve been from what should’ve been a great game. Instead, due to these unfortunate issues, it is only a good game, entertaining, but with no real lasting appeal.

]]><![CDATA[Duke Nukem Forever: Not as good as you've hoped, not as bad as you've heard]]>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 00:37:11 GMThttp://www.gameshoe.net/shoe-view/duke-nukem-forever-not-as-good-as-youve-hoped-not-as-bad-as-youve-heardBy: Alex Deckard

Well. Here it is. The big one. The unreleasable game. Duke Nukem Forever. As a gamer and a journalist, I have spent a large amount of time waiting for this damn game. And I’d be lying if I said there wasn’t a part of me hoping for true greatness. But I’d also be lying if I said I was expecting it. And that is where I take issue with some reviews I’ve read. So, without further ado, here’s my review.

First off, let me start by saying I have a bone to pick with some reviewers. There were some that I was surprised at, from guys I thought would know better like Stephen Totilo from Kotaku and Ben Kuchera from Ars Technica, to Jeff Gerstmann, a personal hero of mine from over at Giant Bomb (whose review, despite making the one misstep that these folks all seemed to make, was actually quite reasonable).

There were, of course, haters that I saw coming a goddamn MILE away, like every third commenter on every gaming blog, Kevin VanOrd from Gamespot, who I’ve always kind of disagreed with, and Jim Sterling from Destructoid, who constantly wavers between destructively incompetent and profoundly inept, while still managing to douche it up no matter where on his sliding scale of unawareness he is.

For the record, if you don’t care about my problem with these reviews, just scroll down to the picture of the “Duke of Newcombe”. You’ll know which one.

Point is, these people all seemed to make the same mistake (except Kevin VanOrd, who described the game quite accurately, then gave it a much lower rating than his description warranted). They thought that Duke was supposed to be taken seriously. I don’t know WHY this was the thought, but it appeared to be. I guess it’s just been decided that unless a game actively mocks the stupid character, then the idea was for you to idolize and love that character. This is, in a word, asinine. Duke Nukem is obviously an asshole. The fact that he’s in a world where his ridiculous actions are not only accepted, but celebrated, simply serves to highlight this point. The game works much better as satire when you take it as satire. It doesn’t work when you think that satire has to claim that it is satire. The finest satire has masqueraded as legitimate, serious work. Machiavelli’s “The Prince”. “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” by Mark Twain. “A Modest Proposal” by Jonathan Swift. Is Duke Nukem on the same level as these? OF COURSE NOT. Being satire does not restrict it from also being extremely juvenile. But the numerous reviewers that have lambasted it for not “properly” mocking the character’s chauvinistic attitude and ultra violent behavior misidentify the nature of the work. We are not meant to agree with Duke Nukem, or even scoff at just him. We are meant to disregard his entire world as idiots. They must be. They look up to Duke Nukem.

See? I told you you'd know.

Now for the review of the game. I am attempting to counter my nostalgia by playing the soundtrack to “L.A. Noire”, which, incidentally, you should pick up because it’s great.

The first part is kind of neat. It’s an update of the end of Duke Nukem 3D, done with tech that was modern in 2007. It is here that we first encounter a problem. You are treated to an interactive urinal, or so it seems. You can hold R1 to pee (for a ludicrous amount of time, I might add), but that’s about it. What, I can’t aim? You could do that in Postal 2 for god’s sake. Whatever. I’ll just turn around and…wow. This game looks like recycled textures from Doom 3. Not good. I can see myself in a mirror though. I should try jumping or something.

Oh god. That looks bad.

First glaring flaw. When Duke jumps, he’s got his arms at his sides. Other than the movement of his legs, which is more of a tuck then a jump, he doesn’t move. At all. He jumps into the air without moving his upper body in any way, shape or form. Also, he looks like shit.

Oh well, forget all this. Forget the fact that throwing poop, while amusing, adds nothing but a knowledge that texture and paint effects are also garbage here. Forget all of that. I’ll just go get the Devastator and kill the Cycloid Emperor. Hell yeah. Okay, now it’s loading.

Oh dear god.

The load screens are RIDICULOUS. Like, average of 40-45 seconds per load screen. It’s just awful. This is going to get old FAST.

Now, I won’t journal the rest of the game, because it’s pretty long. Lets get down to business. Core mechanics. These are not great. They’re not bad, just not great. Two weapon limit, which flies in the face of Duke tradition. Limited sprint that doesn’t show a meter for when it’s going to run out and how long it recharges for. Jumping, as a mechanic, is bad. Like, “I’m constantly drunk and on ice” bad. Bosses can only be hurt by turrets and explosives, which sucks, especially since the RPG holds 5 rounds and it’s easy to miss, even with the auto-lock. And I’m not super huge on iron sights, they’re not that important to have in your game, but the zoom function sucks ass. It doesn’t make it that much easier to shoot, and the guns are inaccurate as all hell.

We already know the graphics are bad, but how bad are they? Just…bad. REAL bad. “Shouldn’t be in this generation” bad. Textures look fuzzy, the terrible depth of field effect is made worse by the fact that it’s prone to just not working. Character animation is atrocious. The gibs that enemies explode into look like rejects from Fallout 3, a game not widely praised for character graphics. Simply put, I don’t know what Gearbox was doing when they polished this game, but they didn’t do it right.

Voice acting is…fine, actually. Jon St. John returns as Duke Nukem, and he does a bang up job at it. Wish I could say the same about the writing. The references he makes are all at least a couple years old. Plus, they’re not references to underground cult movies, but things like “300” or the upcoming “Christian Bale Is A Huge Asshole”, based on Christian Bale being a huge asshole. Duke Nukem 3D rewarded you for being familiar with the unfamiliar. Duke Nukem Forever feels like it would give you a wedgie for it. And yes, I know there are some “obscure” references made, like Commando and that one GI Joe Youtube video, but seriously? Those are old and no one cares. Plus he says them ALL THE DAMN TIME AND THEY STOP BEING FUNNY AT ALL. If Duke is going to run his mouth the whole game, write more then 10 things for him to say.

Level design is a strong meh. Uninspired and bland for the most part, there is one part that was clearly a Half Life 2 reference, but other than that, the whole thing was just pedestrian. It wasn’t impressive.

Was it fun? Yes. I enjoyed myself, and that’s where this game picks up some points. For all my complaints about it, I still had fun. The game usually threw just enough enemies to keep me on my toes, but not so many that I got overrun. USUALLY. There were some times when I got swamped by Octabrains, and one time in particular where I got SWARMED by them in three waves with no cover. That sucked. The Octaking boss fight sucked because he kept blowing away your cover and you couldn’t consciously avoid his attacks, only apparently getting lucky once in a while. Also, in keeping with video game tradition, EVERYTHING underwater sucked. It wasn’t fun, the combat was shitty and imprecise, you never have enough health, bullets or air, and it was boring as shit. But the game had enough simple shooting that, as a whole, I’d give the core shooting and killing aspect about a 6.5.

But how is the whole package? All together, it was astoundingly okay. It was about what I expected. A game that feels dated, looks dated and acts dated. It is, for all intents and purposes, an old game. Hell, the game was technically finished in 2009. And it stopped making tech advances in 2006. Frankly, it’s a miracle it even exists. Would I suggest it? If you played Duke Nukem 3D, yes. It’s worth it just to close the long, horrible chapter of life it represents. Otherwise, rent it. It’s still worth a playthrough, despite all the flaws. I got the special edition and I don’t regret it one bit. I’m just looking forward to seeing where Gearbox takes it.

6/10

]]><![CDATA[My Top 5 FPS Campaigns]]>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:19:22 GMThttp://www.gameshoe.net/shoe-view/my-top-5-fps-campaignsBy: Alex Clippinger

5. Halo: Reach

What list would be complete without a nod to a franchise that has firmly established itself in gaming history? Surprisingly enough, I decided to prefer Halo: Reach over the original Halo game. The reasons for this are somewhat contextual: in my opinion, the potential of Halo: Combat Evolved wasn't fully realized in Halo 2 & 3. Though the sequels' multiplayer is considered top-tier, I felt like their campaigns started to become too straightforward and at times gimmicky for my tastes.

Reach's slogan about how we already know the outcome is part of its appeal. There's something appealingly Norse about soldiering on (no pun intended) knowing that the core characters are ultimately doomed. There's an interesting dramatic irony between the character holding the gun and the player holding the controller, and it's something I think Reach balances rather well in its storytelling.

To top it off, Reach boasts breathtaking graphics, with attention to detail from everything from the sweeping landscapes to the attention paid to the combat environments. The biggest thing Reach can boast over Halo 2 and 3 is the part where I give a damn. For God's sake, Reach has normal people. Civilians, even! It's not just a Spartan running around Futuristic Environment Number Four shooting Alien Group Number Four Hundred and Fifty-Seven.

4. Crysis:

Oh, this computer-roasting little gem. I picked it up recently after realizing two very important things: first, that I now had a computer capable of rendering the brilliant graphics and intricate environments; and second, it was on sale.

I picked it up expecting nothing more than another Master Chief experience. You know what I mean: up against insurmountable odds, being shot from all angles with every kind of weaponry imaginable and charging through it to punch the enemy in the dick with a rocket launcher on the sole merit of being Master Goddamn Chief.

I was absolutely delighted when Crysis made a point of reminding me of a very important fact, a fact that Halo had mostly spoiled me from: bullets hurt. I could leap clear up to the roof of a hut, dash through the jungle at breakneck speeds, and even go invisible, but if I stood around and got shot for more than two seconds I would be loading at my last checkpoint before I could say "Maximum F***!!!"

The firefights in Crysis require a great deal of planning, positioning, and creative approach. At one point it took me double-digit tries to clear out an enemy base--combat takes constant reevaluation and snap-decision making if you're going to succeed.

The story makes for a great variety of environments that keeps gameplay refreshing throughout the campaign. The environments are pushing free-roaming and are in no way forgiving: slip up and you'll fall, hurting yourself, alerting enemies, and looking like a colossal moron in the process. There's also no convenient radar feature on your nano-suit, meaning you could be sitting on a Korean soldier like a lawn chair and you wouldn't know it until he starting complaining or you bothered to look down.

The game keeps up a good progression of difficulty, starting with basic Korean troops and quickly moving you into player-versus-vehicle combat. In one of my favorite moments of the game, you're suddenly asked to night-fight against Koreans with nano-suits. Imagine a less flawless Master Chief being asked to fight against five or six of himself without warning.

When you finally get to the alien bits it's yet another refreshing scene change and introduces a new level of difficulty. The boasted zero-gravity environment is less about combat and more about atmosphere--the area is erratic and undeniably creepy, and once you make contact with the aliens you'll be floating around paranoid for the next thirty minutes.

The protagonist is your archetypal silent figure, and if the game falls short it's in the fact that it takes very little time to explore any of the supporting characters. Still, I felt the incredibly balanced gameplay and near-perfection of the game's overall design picks up the slack of its time for character development. Overall, Crysis is a game that knows what it's doing throughout.

3. Modern Warfare: 2

Yes, even I'm a bit surprised. The reason I've placed MW2's campaign above the previous two games is mostly because it either capitalizes on the things I liked the most about the previous games, or it solved for failings that I felt these games had.

The best part about MW2 is that the protagonists are constantly acting or being interacted with. The sections starring Task Force 141 have a commanding sense of brotherhood. The characters are incredibly well-voiced and feel as much a part of the action as the player does at times. Something I appreciated was how helpless you were at times, being dragged along by your teammates when it all became too much. I always feel like moments of frailty--however brief or unimportant the game might make them seem at the time--are the key to really immersing someone in the story.

The other sections of the campaign revolve around James Ramirez, who is fighting on the home front as Russia invades the United States (spoilers!). Though the voice acting is still superb (and recognizable), there are fewer named characters in this section and the direct character comradarie doesn't compare to the 141 sections. However, these parts of the campaign make up for it with their setting.

It's not just about fighting in the Capitol Building or around the other landmarks of Washington. The most emotional moments involved fighting in suburbia, shooting out of a parodied Burger King, sprinting, gun in hand, across parking lots. Modern Warfare 2 takes war and shoves it in your face, dragging you through not only the most exotic environments the world has to offer, but the most personal.

2. Descent III

I have to admit, this one holds its place mainly for nostalgia purposes. Created by Interplay in the early 90's, Descent revolutionized the FPS scene with a hovering ship capable of moving in any conceivable direction. The game was standard DOS-level graphics, comparable to Doom and other games in the franchise. Its sequel, Descent II, was more of the same.

Then in 1999, Interplay released the third installment of the Descent series, upping the ante with well-rendered 3-D environments, outdoor regions, and more intelligent AI.

As a game where you find yourself facing virtually exclusively nonhuman, robot enemies, Descent has never been a franchise interested in character development--or honestly, even character involvement. Though it would certainly be considered a failing trait in comparison to the First-Person-Shooters of today, Descent III existed in an era of FPS that used a thin blanket of storytelling over a ridiculously nifty waterbed of action-adventure. In that regard, Descent was a success.

The game represents a near-essay of transition in the gaming world. Though it still tended to follow a straightforward design of linear environments and occasional boss battles, Descent III made strong moves away from the truly rigid, A-to-B-to-C, Blue-Key-Red-Key system that many similar FPS games, including its own predecessors.

Descent III went wild in its attempt to create a broad array of weapons and enemies, and was a success in that regard. Enemies range from varieties of trooplike soldier robots, to bizarre gunslingers, to the disturbingly silent Old Scratch bots. Weapons from the short-range mortar, to clusters of homing missiles, and the vortex-opening Black Shark missile make gameplay interesting and entertaining in a way that only old-school First Person Shooters can deliver.

1. Half-Life 2

It comes as a shock to no-one that Half-Life 2 would top my list as the best FPS campaign I have ever played. Of all of the moments in First-Person Shooters that delighted or surprised me, I doubt if anything will ever beat those first moments of being plucked out of limbo and dropped into the heart of City 17--weaponless, helpless, friendless, and in total ignorance of how or why the world has fallen to the faceless and mysterious Combine.

You have nothing, not even the crude weapon of the crowbar that defined the encounters of the original Half Life. The only knowledge you can possibly glean is based off of what you can gather from your fellow new arrivals to City 17, and what you can see with your own eyes. The picture is a despondent one; this city, supposedly a surviving metropolis, is nevertheless dead. The streets and buildings are all but empty, and it seems clear that the Combine are shuttling people into the area in a measure that is less about promoting a vibrant metropolis and more about maintaining control over the hollow shell of a human population.

It's one of the best levels I've ever played. If you own a copy of Half-Life 2 and find yourself a good time away from your last playthrough, play that level alone. Remind yourself of how flawless every little tidbit and scripted event was: the chaos of running through the apartments with a police raid on your tail, running into the stairwell just as Combine come pounding up from the floor below and see you, the panic as you think you're completely trapped. It's one of my favorite levels of the game, and one of the best I've played in a First-Person Shooter.

The thing that best explains the appeal of Half-Life 2 is by looking at almost every other First-Person Shooter with appeal and realizing that Half-Life 2 either did it first, or did it best. Gordon Freeman is the most mute of silent protagonists, a trick used to make the player feel as though they 'are' the character. At the same time, however, Half-Life 2 contains such a rich cast of supporting characters (most important being Alyx Vance), that Gordon's character is powerfully defined over the course of the game--miraculously without the need for interrupting cutscenes, protagonist dialogue, or other common gimmicks used by other FPS games to force characterization. Even in the incredibly rare instances where you are not fully in control of your character (which is the closest to a cutscene the game dares tread), the events and minute control that you still have keep you from feeling as though your experience is somehow being 'interrupted.'

The second greatest appealing factor of Half-Life 2 is its atmosphere. Valve created a game with a number of different environments across multiple levels, always knowing how or when to pace events just right. From that first incredible level in City-17, the player experiences Gordon Freeman as a fugitive through the belly of the city's sewers and waterways. Ravenholm will forever be remembered by anyone who has played the game as a staple of chilling FPS environments.

Nova Prospekt is an incredible turning point in the game. Up until this point Gordon has spent most of his time running scared--he was helpless when he first arrived in City 17 and had to flee for his life to Black Mesa. He barely arrives before the Combine attack, and he is next forced to scrape by in the streets and mines of Ravenholm. He escapes the area to continue running, having to avoid Antlions and the like. Nova Prospekt is the point at which Gordon Freeman stops running and turns the tables in the Combine, assaulting their infamous prison alone in one of my favorite sections of the game--the steady beach assault, fighting ground forces while staying out of sight of the bunkers' searching turrets. Taking Nova Prospekt is the point at which Gordon becomes the 'one Free Man.' It is a powerful metaphor to destroy the prison of a fascist, militaristic government, and in my opinion it is this powerful act of defiance that sparks the revolution in City 17.

The game turns seamlessly from survival to warfare, creating memorable moments such as the great Strider battles. I mostly appreciate how the game still includes a great deal of atmosphere: as I fought it out with Combine forces, I at least felt a lurch as I realized that many of these torn-up battlegrounds were places I had been only days beforehand in Gordon's timeline of events. The swap from decaying city to damaged battleground is done beautifully and without fuss.

That perhaps is the key to enjoying Half-Life. At no point does Valve shove its little tricks in our faces and demand we worship how clever they are. It is clear that Half-Life 2 was crafted lovingly by a group of individuals who love games, and who included every layer, from the obvious to the subtle, in order to allow the player to discover for themselves all that the game has to offer. And when it comes to Half-Life 2, it's offering a lot.

]]><![CDATA[Some Opinions on Sony]]>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:08:13 GMThttp://www.gameshoe.net/shoe-view/some-opinions-on-sonyBy: Alex Deckard

For those of you unwilling to read the following article, here’s the short version: Uncharted and Resistance got us all excited, then a bunch of things we didn’t care about got announced, then Sly Cooper, then an incredibly intriguing EVE tie-in. Then they started talking hardware. Firstly, there was a neat 3D display that can make split screen not suck by dividing the signal and feeding it through the 3D glasses. Just look it up, it’s awesome. Finally, there was the Playstation “I hope this is better than the PSP” Vita. Big HD touch screen, dual sticks, front and rear facing cameras, a touch pad on the back and NO MORE GODDAMN UMDs. If all you wanted was a brief highlight reel, stop here. If you want more, follow along after the break.

Still here? Awesome. You and I are friends now.

Uncharted 3: Looks awesome, allegedly plays awesome. Naughty Dog knows what they’re doing. But that’s no surprise, they’re Naughty Dog. The multiplayer looks tight, the graphics look crisp, and the acting is top notch. Looks like another GOTY contender.

Resistance 3: It’s even more gritty alien fun. Everything is nice and gray, and the guns appear to work nicely. Hopefully it will be a more rewarding experience then Resistance 2. There was some nice gameplay shown, the game seems solid. That being said, a lot of people felt burned after the second game, and it seemed pretty solid at E3 too. Just wait for this one to drop.

We’re also getting the HD remake of Ico and Colossus in September, which will be very nice. God of War was covered, as was some really unimpressive move stuff. The aforementioned 3D display was pretty cool, but there’s only one thing here that really mattered.

Playstation Vita.

It’s kind of a stupid name, but at a conference that contained something called “WiiU”, it’s pretty much okay. The hardware looks awesome. The potential of this new handheld is extremely high. However, so was the potential of the PSP, and it flopped like a coma patient on a rollercoaster. The Vita may be better though. The tech they showed was really nice. But ultimately it’s going to come down to third party development. Can Sony convince developers to come to the Vita? Probably. Will they make good games? I sure hope so.

Overall, I’d give Sony about a B. It was a good press conference, but not great. I’m excited, but not impressed. I’m still too cautious to give them a better score. But I’m optimistic for the future, as ill advised as that may be.

]]>