So per yesterday's post, #5 on my Top Five Games of 2011 is Serious Sam 3. I should probably note that I had hoped to have played Batman: Arkham City but have not; it is the one game left from 2011 that had a high probability of making my top five. The game that lands in my #4 spot is no stranger to the people around Talking about Games being #2 in the community voting for Game of the Year: Gears of War 3.
Special prize if you can tell me where (Game, Act, Chapter) this screenshot was taken.
Gears 3 was originally slated to be released early in 2011 but got pushed back to late in the year. The game undoubtedly benefited from this move. Gears 3 is the most polished game of the series and this polish is seen in all modes of it's gameplay. The game sports a great campaign, that can also be played in an arcade style mode where players are scored for each chapter. A huge plus to the game is that both of these modes can be played in cooperative mode with up to four players.
The other multiplayer modes from Gears 2 return, including the TaG favorite Horde mode. Horde mode has been refined in Gears 3, most notably with the ability to build fortifications between waves and huge boss fights at each decade level. I'm not a huge competitive multiplayer gamer but from my limited experience the competitive multiplayer for Gears 3 appears to be more balanced than it was in Gears 2. Having time for a beta of the multiplayer was valuable to achieving this balance. (The new mode and why it's my #4 after the jump)
Sure, you look at that picture and think surely the title should be everyone wants to be Nintendo or maybe everyone wants to be Apple. But no, I mean everyone wants to Microsoft.
Back in post 100 (Soon As I Find Myself a Crystal Ball) I had a theoretical discussion with John Carmack about the possibility of a one console future. If this years E3 made anything clear to me it was that the big three companies are going to do everything in their power to prevent that from ever happening.
See everyone wants to be Microsoft; no not as Microsoft exists in the gaming space but as Microsoft has existed for so long in the PC operating system (and in the Office Suite) space. Microsoft with the Kinect, Sony with the Move but even more so with the Vita, and Nintendo with the Wii U controller are attempting to drive distinctions between their hardware and how you play games on their hardware. (more after the jump)
AT&T gave me 1000 free rollover minutes. They didn’t do it because they love me. They didn’t do it because I paid my bill on time for two years straight. They didn’t do it because they think I’m a good person and they want to make my life better.
AT&T did it because Verizon announced that they also offer the iPhone, and they are scared I will leave. Competition in business is good for the consumer. It drives progress and innovation. It keeps prices low and quality high.
Video games are a business. Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony are major players in that business. Their goal is to get us to part with our hard earned cash in exchange products and services they offer. They don’t love us, they don’t care if we are good people, and they aren’t trying to make our lives better out of the goodness of their hearts. They want our MONEY. The fact that they compete for our money works in our interests.
For Example,
Within the last year, there was an uproar about Microsoft raising the price of an annual Gold membership to $59.99. None of us were happy about it. But the only reason why Xbox live isn’t $70, $80 or more per year is the fact that Sony offers online play for free. Sony offering an alternative has held Microsoft back from jacking up the price even more and putting more of a burden on us. They would do it if they could. Competition is keeping them in check.
Playstation offers Netflix, Hulu, Playstation Home, and Playstation Plus as services available for use on their network. Rest assured that if Xbox live wasn’t there, we wouldn’t have any of it. PSN would be a bare bones online service just like it was long ago if competition hadn’t pushed them to add features.
Microsoft is no longer focusing on exclusives for the hardcore. They are a business. They already successfully put Xboxes in the home of most of the hardcore gamers. They know that their development and advertising dollars will generate more of a return on investment if the capture the casual market. We hardcore gamers don’t need to worry. Sony is also a business. They see the gap that Microsoft is creating and they are more than willing to step in with quality exclusives to capture more of the hardcore market. Whether we own Xboxes or not, we should hope they succeed. If they fail, then Microsoft has no reason to start catering to us again until it fits their timetable.
Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony are businesses. The most powerful way we can communicate with them and control them is not with blind loyalty, it’s with our wallets. There are no awards for getting abused as a consumer.
I find Microsoft’s loss of the exclusivity of the Mass Effect franchise disturbing, but not because I am a fan boy of the 360. True, I don’t own a PS3, but that is due to money constraints and I will freely say that what I have played on PS3 with friends has been excellent.
The reason I find it disturbing is that it is indicative of what Microsoft has been doing this year . . . neglecting the things that attract serious gamers.
Does Microsoft think that they can outsell 360 head to head so that they don’t need any exclusives?
I would concede the point that the 360 has a larger install base than PS3. However, I will be very interested to see what happens with the ME3 release. I expect more exclusive content for the PS3 such as guns, armor, and extra characters. I expect the PS3 to be more visually impressive. ME3 should only be on one disk for PS3, but it will most likely be multiple disks for the 360. Bioware has already stated that the PS3 version will be the definitive ME3 expereince . . . Strong implications for a game that was once an Xbox exclusive. I think that among people that own both PS3 and 360, the vast majority will buy the PS3 version.
Does Microsoft think that xbox live is so good that they can support themselves solely on multiplayer?
In my experience, the only time people will buy a non system exclusive game on 360 over PS3 is when it has a strong multiplayer component. Common opinion is that PS3 has a leg up over the xbox when it comes to visuals and single player experience, so the main advantage of 360 is xbox live . . . which they just raised the price on making it less appealing. If Sony ever got their act together and created something that could truly rival the xbox live service, Microsoft would be in trouble.
Do they think kinect is the answer?
We have yet to see kinect be integrated into anything in a meaningful way. So far it has produced only social and wii-like games. Therefore we really can’t say if kinect will have a huge impact on the way we play serious games. As of right now, it hasn’t and therefore can’t be seen as a reason why serious gamers should continue to pay attention to the 360.
E3 yada yada yada Microsoft blah blah blah Kinect. Zzzzz. Ooo! Dead Space 2. oh sports games. Yawn. Hey, Crysis 2 looking good even on the 360! more blah blah blah. Bioware get your hand off my wallet! Do you take checks?
Somehow, with all the sound and fury (what do you mean E3 hasn't even started yet?) I almost missed this. Just when I thought all the freakiness was out in the open after the end of Alan Wake, we get this trailer for the DLC.
"[N]ightmares exist outside of logic, and there's little fun to be had in explanations; they're antithetical to the poetry of fear."
Alan Wake (the video game) begins with Alan Wake (the character) quoting this line from Stephen King (2nd page, 3rd paragraph, last sentence). It is an early warning that the video game is not going to give us a nice tidy ending. Of course, the fact that an additional episode will be available as DLC in late July may have been a clue as well.
Despite the warning from Mr. King and it's being repeated by Alan Wake, after the jump I'm going to review the story of Alan Wake and provide my take on how to interpret the ending. To do this there will be spoilers, and I highly recommend if you have not played Alan Wake and have any desire to do so, wait until after you've played to read this post.
Take the plunge into the dark world of Bright Falls.
To try to keep this as brief as possible, the main story elements will be touched on in chronological, not story, order. This will help to sort through some of the issues and make the questions, though not necessarily the answers, more clear.
A couple of additional comments before the jump. You can skip the story summary if you are well versed in the events of the game. This was written primarily to help me clarify my thoughts on what was important and secondarily as review for the future when the game is not as fresh in my mind. Also, having now completed this post if it were not for the time investment I would delete it. I have more sympathy for Mr. King's comment and perhaps explanations will only ruin the fun. So I will not be disappointed if you elect to skip this all together and just enjoy the game. Besides, having done this I'm not very confident in my theories.
Having completed the first episode of Alan Wake, the game appears to be well worth the wait. From the opening monologue where Alan introduces us to his story to the cliff hanger reveal at the end of the episode, Alan Wake is a well crafted story. The game introduces major characters well, especially Alan. The town of Bright Falls stands out to almost be a character itself, giving you the feel of a small northwestern town. Shadow and light set a great mood in the chapter, particularly as the story progresses into the main sequence.
All was not roses, however. In many of the discussions I had read or heard from people who had early copies of the game, much was said about how tight and polished the controls were. This was not my immediate experience. I struggled with the controls for some time, most notably the camera which effectively turns Alan, much as the mouse would on a PC (what I wouldn't give to be able to use a mouse and keyboard for controls in this game). But once I lowered the sensitivity in the options, it worked much better. (more after the jump)
Despite the burnout and the back log of games I've yet to play, like the junkie I am I've pre-ordered Splinter Cell: Conviction and Alan Wake, both in their Collector's Editions. As if that's not bad enough, we started getting details for F.E.A.R. 3 (F3AR) including a teaser trailer that doesn't contain much gameplay footage, but definitely has me interested to learn more.
But this post isn't about any one of those three games. Instead, this post is about another game that we knew was coming but for which we are starting to get more details, including the following trailer.
"Crysis's enemies are miles smarter than the trip-trigger robots you square off with in arcade-style shooters like Modern Warfare 2."
Yes, Crysis 2 (www.sosnewyork.com) is on it's way, this time not just to PC but also to the X-Box 360 and the Playstation 3. While I have some reservations, primarily that this doesn't seem to be continuing the cliff-hanger ending from the original game, based on what we know so far I'm excited for this game.
One big factor in that excitement is that the story is being written by Richard Morgan who is a Philip K Dick award winning science fiction writer. For more details check out Matt Peckham's blog. The quote below the trailer is actually from Matt. I realize that most MW2 players are not playing for the single player aspect of the game so the AI in the game probably doesn't receive much attention. I don't think Crysis 2 will come close to MW2 numbers. But I do think it might be the sleeper/surprise hit of holiday season. Start spreading the news.
