I want to take a moment to bring up Tom Clancy's EndWar once more. If you recall from my last post regarding the subject, EndWar is a nifty new RTS coming to PC and consoles that combines voice commands with quick, small scale combat to make for a fine strategy experience. Checking my usual sites this morning, I saw that 1up.com had posted their review of the game, the day before it's scheduled to hit retail shelves. So I read it, as is my ritual, and was shocked (Shocked!) by the apparent contempt for the fledgling IP contained within. A "C"? I've played EndWar in both beta and demo forms and I'm of the opinion that , even if one were to concentrate solely on the faults of the game, it's a "B-" at worst. The game MIGHT have taken a slide in quality since the beta but, given the state of the demo, that's unlikely.
Now, normally, I'm not one to dispute review scores. I read reviews largely for entertainment value and I'm seldom swayed by their expressed opinions, especially when they conflict directly with my own. Furthermore, I pay the review scores even less mind than the review itself, since the numbers are largely arbitrary and useless without the content of the article to provide context. If this were simply a case of differing opinions, I would have payed it no mind and this post would be about something entirely different. Maybe politics and their effect on games.
But this seemed to be more than just a case of "to each, his own". Certain phrases in the review tipped me to the notion that Mr. Haywald's review was less than impartial from the start. He starts with some niggling complaints about the single player campaign. I can't speak to this because I haven't been able to sample the full game, but it does set the tone for the rest of the review. The first really suspect phrase is "[...]beyond a few minor differences in upgradeable abilities, each faction feels exactly the same." I was under the impression (and I've seen firsthand) that the developers went out of their way to give each faction a unique feel. The American's fight with precision, the Euros are fast, and the Russians are lumbering powerhouses. They all play the same, in the sense that the controls are no different and the unit types are the same, but the units receive different upgrades the more you play, upgrades that further differentiate the different playstyles. I was honestly confused when I read this part of the review.
In the next paragraph, the review starts to break down into senseless nitpicking. "EndWar's rock-paper-scissors battle system -- helicopter beats tank, tank beats transport, etc. -- doesn't add much variety, either. [...] [T]he context-sensitive commands they learn aren't intuitive to use and simply add an annoying layer of micromanagement. What's the point in having tanks that can fire SAMs if you have to tell them to do so every time?" (Bold print added for emphasis.) First off, the "rock-paper-scissors" gameplay adds a layer of strategy to an otherwise small-scale game. This isn't Starcraft. The point is to maximize the effectiveness of the units your given, not to march over the enemy with an overwhelming force. This gives the game a feel more similar to what (I'd assume) real combat is like. Which brings me to the part in bold. Really? You're going to complain that you have to TELL your units to do things? Yes, what's the point, Mr. Haywald? Why bother playing Super Mario Bros. when you have to TELL Mario to jump? Why play Halo when you have to TELL Master Chief to shoot aliens in the head? Why, indeed? Maybe we'd feel more at home reviewing a non-interactive medium, like books or movies, hm? OF COURSE you have to tell them to use their abilities. There's a reason I mentioned Starcraft earlier. That game has a similar system, where units are given special abilities, in addition to their default attack, that have to be activated manually by the player. The difference between that game and EndWar is that Starcraft allowed you to command many units of the same type to activate their abilities in unison, whereas EndWar does not. Starcraft also expects you to micromanage dozens of units simultaneously while EndWar tasks you with managing... well, one dozen. Seems to balance out, at least in my eyes. It also takes the bite out of Justin Haywald's petty criticisms.
"Moving your forces from point A to point B is simple enough, provided that you carefully monitor the route they take -- without your input, your army's single-minded march easily derails. If a tank gets in front of your infantry on the way to an outpost, they'll just try to walk by without opening fire, taking cover, or doing anything intelligent whatsoever." Once again, I'm baffled by Mr. Haywald's observations. Did he review a copy of the game from Bizzaro world? Even in the private beta, units were intelligent enough to fire upon nearby enemy units while following your movement orders without deviating from their path to your designated destination. In my personal observations, this aspect of the game had even more polish on it when it went to public demo. I was surprised by how effectively my units would react to unexpected confrontations before I could give them new orders. The only exception to this are infantry units, who need to be directed to garrison a building or find cover, as they are weak when fighting from an unfortified position. The infantry AI will automatically seek cover if they are attacked while idle but this sometimes is ineffective, as Mr. Haywald points out. Of course, this all ties back into that "annoying layer of micromanagement" that Justin is ever so fond of.
Just when I think I couldn't be any more baffled, Justin hits us with the next statement. "Playing against real people is, as always, more fun than just challenging the computer. Human opponents are more unpredictable and thus make things more exciting. But this mode's as vanilla as the main game, with no additional options -- and the same micromanagement problems that plague single player are just as persistent." At this point, I was certain that Justin had played a different game than I had. Ignoring for a second that he neglects to even mention the game's persistent online campaign, his logic still seems faulty. EndWar comes with three skirmish gametypes (Assault, Conquest, Siege). The game doesn't really need any more than that. The whole point of the game is providing a simple ruleset to build strategy on. The complexity of the game comes from the nuance of meeting the demands of each battle. Of course, since Mr. Haywald doesn't seem to enjoy the game at it's core, why would the multiplayer change his mind? Omitting the existence of the online campaign, though, is inexcusable. It's more than half of the game. In the beta, the online campaign is what kept me coming back. The gameplay reminded me of Chromehounds and gave me hope that EndWar might fix some of the minor flaws evident in that game's multiplayer. Also, the rank and upgrade systems gave the game a sort of RPG levelling appeal that kept me coming back, even when I knew my progress would all be lost when the beta ended. Justin Haywald doesn't mention ANY of this in his review. I... wow. Words fail me. The inconsistencies in this review leave me speechless.
Finally, and this a big "Finally", Mr. Haywald wraps up his review: "It just isn't enough by itself to raise the game beyond "mediocre RTS." It's definitely worth checking out to see voice command done right, but overall, it lacks the depth and substance to bring anyone over from superior PC alternatives." This last phrase is highly suspect and, frankly, is what inspired me to type out 1000 words on the topic. "It lacks the depth and substance to bring anyone over from superior PC alternatives." Let's just forget for a second that I, personally, think the game has more depth and substance than Mr. Haywald gives it credit for. If we take his words at face value, he's saying that PC RTS are better because they're MORE COMPLICATED. This, combined with his allusions to Command & Conquer at the beginning of the review, seems to tell us that Mr. Haywald would rather be steamrolling newbs with a squad of 4 dozen Mammoth Tanks than learning the ins and outs of a new game, regardless of its quality. Maybe you feel the same. I certainly don't. The point is, this is a glaring example of a reviewer's taste and bias interfering with his assessment of the innate quality of a game as a product. Is the game good? Bad? Who cares? Justin Haywald doesn't care for it. Why should you?
Go ahead and tell me I'm reading too far into this. Tell me I'm splitting hairs. Hell, feel free to point out that MY bias is what inspired me to write this rebuttal to begin with. You'd be right on all accounts. That doesn't make my point any less valid, though. I just want to know: How can an otherwise intelligent person who considers themselves a gamer look at a lovingly crafted game with the same level of spit shine as EndWar and think "Meh."? Judging by Gamerankings.com, I'm not alone.
Showing posts with label PC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PC. Show all posts
05 November 2008
21 October 2008
Tom Clancy's EndWar Coming to Handhelds
I just read here that Tom Clancy's EndWar, in development by Ubisoft Shanghai, is getting a PSP and DS release in addition to it's console and PC releases. To those who don't know, EndWar is Ubisoft's new real-time strategy game, set to revolutionize how we think about RTS on consoles with its voice controls and simplified, fast-paced gameplay. I didn't know what to think of this game when I first heard of it, but I had a chance to play the beta when it was released earlier this year and I've been hopelessly addicted to the demo since it hit Xbox Live marketplace. I've been anxiously awaiting this game's release ever since.
So, of course, I was happy to hear that a handheld edition was in the works as well. RTS games are severely underrepresented on handhelds, particularly the DS. I know part of this lies in technical limitations, but an unorthodox RTS like EndWar would be just the thing to change our expectations of what a portable RTS can do. I mean, hell, Final Fantasy XII: Revenant Wings was fun enough. Unfortunately, I read on to learn that both of the portable EndWars are turn-based strategy games. Not only that, but that they're completely eschewing EndWar's "simplicity is perfection" philosophy with 20 unit types per faction, incorporating ground, sea and air tactics. What? Even the screen captures make the games look less like EndWar and more like a fancy Advance Wars knockoff. Don't get me wrong; I'm sure both of the games will be excellent in their own right, especially if they maintain the standard of quality set by their console counterparts (if nothing else). I just thought that a portable EndWar had potential for so much more. The simplified rock-paper-scissors RTS formula of EndWar would make for a seamless transition to handhelds, with the expected graphical downgrade (though, on PSP, maybe not so much). Hell, the DS is uniquely equipped to handle voice commands!
At any rate, keep an eye out for EndWar this November, regardless of the platform you play it on. If you're an RTS fan at all, it's at least worth a look.
So, of course, I was happy to hear that a handheld edition was in the works as well. RTS games are severely underrepresented on handhelds, particularly the DS. I know part of this lies in technical limitations, but an unorthodox RTS like EndWar would be just the thing to change our expectations of what a portable RTS can do. I mean, hell, Final Fantasy XII: Revenant Wings was fun enough. Unfortunately, I read on to learn that both of the portable EndWars are turn-based strategy games. Not only that, but that they're completely eschewing EndWar's "simplicity is perfection" philosophy with 20 unit types per faction, incorporating ground, sea and air tactics. What? Even the screen captures make the games look less like EndWar and more like a fancy Advance Wars knockoff. Don't get me wrong; I'm sure both of the games will be excellent in their own right, especially if they maintain the standard of quality set by their console counterparts (if nothing else). I just thought that a portable EndWar had potential for so much more. The simplified rock-paper-scissors RTS formula of EndWar would make for a seamless transition to handhelds, with the expected graphical downgrade (though, on PSP, maybe not so much). Hell, the DS is uniquely equipped to handle voice commands!
At any rate, keep an eye out for EndWar this November, regardless of the platform you play it on. If you're an RTS fan at all, it's at least worth a look.
01 October 2008
Spore DRM: It's A Bitch, Ain't It?
Digital Rights Management (DRM. Copy Protection, by any other name.) is most definitely the hot topic in the PC gaming scene right now, specifically in Spore. Console gamers... well, they'll just play in the sand, blissfully ignorant, won't they? Somebody who's never had to coax the game out of their disc via installations, driver updates, driver downgrades, and various other ancient voodoo rituals couldn't comprehend the implications of yet another barrier on the road to JUST PLAYING THE DAMN GAME. And that's a shame since, even sheltered as they are playing on their Xbox 360s and PS3s, they're not totally unaffected. A distressingly large portion of the console gaming population can attest to the abomination of copy protection embedded in PSN and Xbox Live downloads. Microsoft, in recent months, has introduced an online tool to allow people to transfer DRM for their 360 downloads between consoles, but even this isn't foolproof (I have my own experience with this, but that's a horror story for another day.). But I digress.
The fact is game publishers have resorted to punishing paying customers for piracy, something they, as paying customers, have nothing to do with. At all. Apparently, the next best thing to shooting yourself in the foot is aiming for the vital cash flow. Furthermore, DRM doesn't obstruct pirates. It barely registers as a hurdle. Most modern DRM is code written by companies who do nothing but DRM work (Securom, Starforce, etc.). If 5 different games all have Securom security on their discs, the groundwork for that code is probably similar, if not identical. Pirates are elite hackers on steroids and most copy protection measures are just another line of code for them to glance over on their way to converting a game from a disc to a digital copy to be distributed online.
So, copy protection doesn't bother hackers. That leaves customers. (Just to clarify real quick, those are the people trying to give these companies money.) Unless you've been living under a rock (or a console), you've probably heard about the DRM controversy surrounding Spore. Spore uses the Securom protection and requires online activation to access all of the game's features. In addition to all of this, EA decided to limit the number of online activations to three(3). This number was later increased, after much bitching from the peanut gallery, to five(5). In addition EA dismissed the whole issue from the start, saying that only 10% of their user base has tried to install more than thrice. This could likened to Toyota releasing a 2009 model car that, when crossing the Ukrainian border, explodes. Then saying "Less than 10% of our customers drive our product in Eastern Europe." It's THAT level of willful ignorance.
Of course, this is only an obstacle if you bought the game. If you acquired the title through a less legitimate source, say, a torrent site, then these little nuisances are conveniently weeded out in the piracy process. So, again we're back to punishing consumers while exalting pirates. Yes, EXALTING. In a world where companies exhibit such flagrant disregard for their "valued customers", pirates take on the role of modern-day Robin Hoods (Maybe, "|20|}1|\| |-|00[)$"), taking it all back for the little guy. Well, thieves are thieves. From a PR perspective, companies like EA couldn't be dealing with this issue any more ham-handed. It ought to be a rainmaker: people are stealing from them. For them to take that and turn THEMSELVES into the villains takes a special kind of incompetence. The kind that usually makes you eligible for government assistance.
Electronic Arts and every other publisher out there needs to make a few vital changes in their position. Firstly, just accept the fact that some people are going to steal your product. If it bothers you that much, get on Congress' collective ass to pass harsher penalties for distributing protected IP illegally. Or, better yet, take a nod from Stardock and assume a much less authoritarian position. i.e. start making it worth more to buy your product than to pirate it. Spore should be a natural in this regard. One of the games biggest selling points is the ability to seamlessly integrate other people's creations into your games, as well as share your creations with everyone else. This is something you need to register with a legitimate copy to do. You shouldn't NEED to saddle your software with viral copy protection (Securom DOES affect system performance. Don't let anyone tell you different.) and draconian install limits. This is paranoia on your part. Nothing more.
Which brings me to my second point: start treating people like potential sales instead of potential criminals. The glass really is half full, EA. A quick glance at gaming forums will tell you that a good portion of people who pirate your game are honest folks who bought the game and are determined to actually PLAY it, despite your best efforts to the contrary. Your attitude towards your customers has done more to drive them to piracy than the price tag ever could have. You've taken the stance of a metaphorical old man, shaking his cane and yelling from his stoop at the kids skateboarding in the street. Stop it. It's not going to change anything and it just makes you look cold and out of touch.
That being said, I'd like to address the individual for a moment here. If you pirate games just to avoid paying for them, or anything else that couldn't be defended as a "legitimate" reason (acquiring out-of-print games, a backup copy for a legally owned game, nonsense like this Spore business), than you are a criminal. A SWAT team's not gonna come bust down your door any time soon, but, morally, you know you are wrong. If you have the money and want a game, go buy the damn thing. Somebody worked hard to make that game and they'll never receive due credit for their work unless somebody buys it. If you just gotta get you some free games, there are other options. Do your part to end this pirate-publisher hostility.
That ended up a lot longer than I planned. Shoudn't be surprised, though. It's a complex issue. The bottom line is publishers need to take responsibility for their role in the issue and generally loosen up, while the pirates themselves need to find something better to do with their talents. Like hacking the e-mail accounts of corrupt political figures.
The fact is game publishers have resorted to punishing paying customers for piracy, something they, as paying customers, have nothing to do with. At all. Apparently, the next best thing to shooting yourself in the foot is aiming for the vital cash flow. Furthermore, DRM doesn't obstruct pirates. It barely registers as a hurdle. Most modern DRM is code written by companies who do nothing but DRM work (Securom, Starforce, etc.). If 5 different games all have Securom security on their discs, the groundwork for that code is probably similar, if not identical. Pirates are elite hackers on steroids and most copy protection measures are just another line of code for them to glance over on their way to converting a game from a disc to a digital copy to be distributed online.
So, copy protection doesn't bother hackers. That leaves customers. (Just to clarify real quick, those are the people trying to give these companies money.) Unless you've been living under a rock (or a console), you've probably heard about the DRM controversy surrounding Spore. Spore uses the Securom protection and requires online activation to access all of the game's features. In addition to all of this, EA decided to limit the number of online activations to three(3). This number was later increased, after much bitching from the peanut gallery, to five(5). In addition EA dismissed the whole issue from the start, saying that only 10% of their user base has tried to install more than thrice. This could likened to Toyota releasing a 2009 model car that, when crossing the Ukrainian border, explodes. Then saying "Less than 10% of our customers drive our product in Eastern Europe." It's THAT level of willful ignorance.
Of course, this is only an obstacle if you bought the game. If you acquired the title through a less legitimate source, say, a torrent site, then these little nuisances are conveniently weeded out in the piracy process. So, again we're back to punishing consumers while exalting pirates. Yes, EXALTING. In a world where companies exhibit such flagrant disregard for their "valued customers", pirates take on the role of modern-day Robin Hoods (Maybe, "|20|}1|\| |-|00[)$"), taking it all back for the little guy. Well, thieves are thieves. From a PR perspective, companies like EA couldn't be dealing with this issue any more ham-handed. It ought to be a rainmaker: people are stealing from them. For them to take that and turn THEMSELVES into the villains takes a special kind of incompetence. The kind that usually makes you eligible for government assistance.
Electronic Arts and every other publisher out there needs to make a few vital changes in their position. Firstly, just accept the fact that some people are going to steal your product. If it bothers you that much, get on Congress' collective ass to pass harsher penalties for distributing protected IP illegally. Or, better yet, take a nod from Stardock and assume a much less authoritarian position. i.e. start making it worth more to buy your product than to pirate it. Spore should be a natural in this regard. One of the games biggest selling points is the ability to seamlessly integrate other people's creations into your games, as well as share your creations with everyone else. This is something you need to register with a legitimate copy to do. You shouldn't NEED to saddle your software with viral copy protection (Securom DOES affect system performance. Don't let anyone tell you different.) and draconian install limits. This is paranoia on your part. Nothing more.
Which brings me to my second point: start treating people like potential sales instead of potential criminals. The glass really is half full, EA. A quick glance at gaming forums will tell you that a good portion of people who pirate your game are honest folks who bought the game and are determined to actually PLAY it, despite your best efforts to the contrary. Your attitude towards your customers has done more to drive them to piracy than the price tag ever could have. You've taken the stance of a metaphorical old man, shaking his cane and yelling from his stoop at the kids skateboarding in the street. Stop it. It's not going to change anything and it just makes you look cold and out of touch.
That being said, I'd like to address the individual for a moment here. If you pirate games just to avoid paying for them, or anything else that couldn't be defended as a "legitimate" reason (acquiring out-of-print games, a backup copy for a legally owned game, nonsense like this Spore business), than you are a criminal. A SWAT team's not gonna come bust down your door any time soon, but, morally, you know you are wrong. If you have the money and want a game, go buy the damn thing. Somebody worked hard to make that game and they'll never receive due credit for their work unless somebody buys it. If you just gotta get you some free games, there are other options. Do your part to end this pirate-publisher hostility.
That ended up a lot longer than I planned. Shoudn't be surprised, though. It's a complex issue. The bottom line is publishers need to take responsibility for their role in the issue and generally loosen up, while the pirates themselves need to find something better to do with their talents. Like hacking the e-mail accounts of corrupt political figures.
07 June 2008
Review: Grand Theft Auto 4
System: Xbox 360 (Also on PS3, PC)
Release Date: April 29, 2008
ESRB Rating: Mature
Publisher: Rockstar Games
Developer: Rockstar Games
Occasionally, controversy has struck the game industry. Actually, "occasionally" may be an understatement. As early as the 70s, Death Race scared uptight parents with the notion of vehicular zombie manslaughter, Chiller shocked 80s arcade-goers with its "violence for violence' sake" gameplay, and Mortal Kombat rocked the collective sensibilities of the 90s with it's digitized actors and gory fatalities. All pale in comparison to the media outrage surrounding Rockstar Games and a little title called Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. However, amidst all the PR hullabaloo is a proven series of games that served to pioneer the urban sandbox genre. Grand Theft Auto 4 is the latest game in that series. Fanboy hopes run high and prerelease hype runs rampant, but now that the title has seen retail release, does the game do it's legacy justice?
The answer is an emphatic "Gouranga!". GTA4 maintains the nonlinear storytelling and freeform carnage of the previous titles, but introduces interesting new elements befitting the first next-gen Grand Theft Auto game. The established formula of dropping players in a city and giving them a royal buttload of guns to do with what they will remains intact, but with a twist. Liberty City (the setting for the game, as well as for GTA3) now feels like a living, breathing metropolis. Pedestrians, no longer props in the urban backdrop, seem to take on lives of their own. On any given street corner, a woman may answer a cell phone call as she walks by, a man may be mugged by a local hood, only to receive assistance from a passing patrol car, or you may even encounter a homeless bum in the midst of a crackpot rant, stopping only to beg for change as you walk by. Liberty City lives.
But I digress. The biggest change from the previous games is the emphasis on modern consumer technology. Early in the game, you receive a cell phone from your cousin and, shortly after, you are introduced to the internet. As soon as you get your first safehouse, you have the option to veg out in front of your TV and, of course, the radio stations make a welcome return. The cell phone serves as your main form of contact with the various mission-giving miscreants of Liberty City, but the rest serve up more of the trademark social satire that has become synonymous with Grand Theft Auto.
Of course, the core of the game has always been shooting and driving, sometimes simultaneously, and if you've played any of the previous GTAs (save for 1 or 2), you should know what to expect here. The lock-on targeting system of old returns, but with some welcome improvements. Clicking the left trigger while holding a weapon will lock on to a target, but applying less pressure to the button allows free aiming, similar to the look and feel of Resident Evil 4. Even when locked on to a target, you can use the right analog stick to adjust your aim to strike specific points on your target. In addition, GTA4 introduces a cover system to the game. Pressing the right bumper will instruct Niko to press himself against the closest object large enough to use as cover, allowing him to shoot around corners, This system will feel familiar to anyone who's played Rainbow Six Vegas.
Which brings us to Niko Bellic, the Slavic hero of our story. If you've watched any of the prerelease trailers, chances are you already know that Niko is an eastern European vagabond with a sordid past who comes to America hoping to create a new life for himself. What you probably don't know is that Niko happens to be the most memorable and well written hero you'll ever encounter in a Grand Theft Auto game, maybe any game. Keeping with the cinematic production values of the GTA franchise, the entire game is full of top notch writing and masterfully acted personalities which you are given plenty of opportunities to familiarize yourself with thanks to the new relationship mechanic. In addition to receiving missions from these people, many of them can be invited out for a time on the town, drinking, bowling, playing pool, or just to grab a bite to eat at the local Cluckin' Bell. You can even catch a stand-up comedy act or watch a little dinner theater. Each of these diversions comes with their own respective minigames, but what I found most engaging about this feature is the chance to spend more time interacting with the in-game personalities. I can't stress enough how good the writing and acting in this game really is. You'll come for the non-linear combat driven gameplay, but stay for the engrossing story and likeable characters.
Along with exceptional single player experience, Rockstar ups the ante with online multiplayer, a series first. You'd never guess this is GTA's first online outing, though, with how smooth finding and playing an online match is. The run-gun-drive-and-gun-some-more gameplay translates beautifully to online deathmatch play, but fragfests are just the tip of the iceberg. The multiplayer really shines when offering more objective based gameplay. Cops n' Crooks pits a player team of police against another team of criminals in effort to kill the designated "boss" before he reaches the scripted waypoint. Also of interest is the Turf War mode, where teams of players compete to control various sections of the city. All of these concepts have been explored elsewhere, mostly in first person shooters, but GTA4 brings it into a living urban landscape with a serviceable, if not downright pleasant, control scheme. Add to this a Free Mode where players can do as they please through out the city and you've got one off the most complete gaming experiences you'll find on a single disc. The multi-player alone will keep people coming back for months, even years, to come.
Grand Theft Auto IV is a magnum opus for Rockstar. Combining elements of all the previous games, while adding new concepts exclusive to this one, GTA4 will be a tough act to follow. Even so, with new episodic downloadable content* already in the works, Rockstar Games doesn't seem daunted by the task. A life of crime never looked so lucrative.
Score 10/10
* As of this writing, downloadable episodes are an Xbox 360 exclusive.
Release Date: April 29, 2008
ESRB Rating: Mature
Publisher: Rockstar Games
Developer: Rockstar Games
Occasionally, controversy has struck the game industry. Actually, "occasionally" may be an understatement. As early as the 70s, Death Race scared uptight parents with the notion of vehicular zombie manslaughter, Chiller shocked 80s arcade-goers with its "violence for violence' sake" gameplay, and Mortal Kombat rocked the collective sensibilities of the 90s with it's digitized actors and gory fatalities. All pale in comparison to the media outrage surrounding Rockstar Games and a little title called Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. However, amidst all the PR hullabaloo is a proven series of games that served to pioneer the urban sandbox genre. Grand Theft Auto 4 is the latest game in that series. Fanboy hopes run high and prerelease hype runs rampant, but now that the title has seen retail release, does the game do it's legacy justice?
The answer is an emphatic "Gouranga!". GTA4 maintains the nonlinear storytelling and freeform carnage of the previous titles, but introduces interesting new elements befitting the first next-gen Grand Theft Auto game. The established formula of dropping players in a city and giving them a royal buttload of guns to do with what they will remains intact, but with a twist. Liberty City (the setting for the game, as well as for GTA3) now feels like a living, breathing metropolis. Pedestrians, no longer props in the urban backdrop, seem to take on lives of their own. On any given street corner, a woman may answer a cell phone call as she walks by, a man may be mugged by a local hood, only to receive assistance from a passing patrol car, or you may even encounter a homeless bum in the midst of a crackpot rant, stopping only to beg for change as you walk by. Liberty City lives.
But I digress. The biggest change from the previous games is the emphasis on modern consumer technology. Early in the game, you receive a cell phone from your cousin and, shortly after, you are introduced to the internet. As soon as you get your first safehouse, you have the option to veg out in front of your TV and, of course, the radio stations make a welcome return. The cell phone serves as your main form of contact with the various mission-giving miscreants of Liberty City, but the rest serve up more of the trademark social satire that has become synonymous with Grand Theft Auto.
Of course, the core of the game has always been shooting and driving, sometimes simultaneously, and if you've played any of the previous GTAs (save for 1 or 2), you should know what to expect here. The lock-on targeting system of old returns, but with some welcome improvements. Clicking the left trigger while holding a weapon will lock on to a target, but applying less pressure to the button allows free aiming, similar to the look and feel of Resident Evil 4. Even when locked on to a target, you can use the right analog stick to adjust your aim to strike specific points on your target. In addition, GTA4 introduces a cover system to the game. Pressing the right bumper will instruct Niko to press himself against the closest object large enough to use as cover, allowing him to shoot around corners, This system will feel familiar to anyone who's played Rainbow Six Vegas.
Which brings us to Niko Bellic, the Slavic hero of our story. If you've watched any of the prerelease trailers, chances are you already know that Niko is an eastern European vagabond with a sordid past who comes to America hoping to create a new life for himself. What you probably don't know is that Niko happens to be the most memorable and well written hero you'll ever encounter in a Grand Theft Auto game, maybe any game. Keeping with the cinematic production values of the GTA franchise, the entire game is full of top notch writing and masterfully acted personalities which you are given plenty of opportunities to familiarize yourself with thanks to the new relationship mechanic. In addition to receiving missions from these people, many of them can be invited out for a time on the town, drinking, bowling, playing pool, or just to grab a bite to eat at the local Cluckin' Bell. You can even catch a stand-up comedy act or watch a little dinner theater. Each of these diversions comes with their own respective minigames, but what I found most engaging about this feature is the chance to spend more time interacting with the in-game personalities. I can't stress enough how good the writing and acting in this game really is. You'll come for the non-linear combat driven gameplay, but stay for the engrossing story and likeable characters.
Along with exceptional single player experience, Rockstar ups the ante with online multiplayer, a series first. You'd never guess this is GTA's first online outing, though, with how smooth finding and playing an online match is. The run-gun-drive-and-gun-some-more gameplay translates beautifully to online deathmatch play, but fragfests are just the tip of the iceberg. The multiplayer really shines when offering more objective based gameplay. Cops n' Crooks pits a player team of police against another team of criminals in effort to kill the designated "boss" before he reaches the scripted waypoint. Also of interest is the Turf War mode, where teams of players compete to control various sections of the city. All of these concepts have been explored elsewhere, mostly in first person shooters, but GTA4 brings it into a living urban landscape with a serviceable, if not downright pleasant, control scheme. Add to this a Free Mode where players can do as they please through out the city and you've got one off the most complete gaming experiences you'll find on a single disc. The multi-player alone will keep people coming back for months, even years, to come.
Grand Theft Auto IV is a magnum opus for Rockstar. Combining elements of all the previous games, while adding new concepts exclusive to this one, GTA4 will be a tough act to follow. Even so, with new episodic downloadable content* already in the works, Rockstar Games doesn't seem daunted by the task. A life of crime never looked so lucrative.
Score 10/10
* As of this writing, downloadable episodes are an Xbox 360 exclusive.
12 April 2008
All Reviews Must Go!!!
Welcome to Discount Game Reviews. The purpose of this blog is to provide intelligent, unbiased reviews of games for all platforms. Unfortunately, since I'm currently the only staff reviewer and my console selection is limited to what I can afford, expect only to see reviews for Nintendo Wii, Xbox 360, Nintendo DS and PC, at least for the time being. Depending on how much support this blog sees, I may decide to take on other reviewers in the future and it's only a matter of time before I get around to getting a PSP and PS3. Let's not get ahead of the game, though.
I currently have no plans to keep an update schedule, as my ability to review games is ultimately limited to what I can acquire and play. Comments are welcome and e-mail feedback can be sent to discountgamereviews@gmail.com. At any rate, thanks for stopping in. (Page views are the official currency of the internet.)
I currently have no plans to keep an update schedule, as my ability to review games is ultimately limited to what I can acquire and play. Comments are welcome and e-mail feedback can be sent to discountgamereviews@gmail.com. At any rate, thanks for stopping in. (Page views are the official currency of the internet.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)