Tuesday, March 24, 2009
More RSV2 online
Getting a little tired of the bull that goes on in Rainbow Six muliplayer. Mostly I hate that selecting a match based on game mode doesn't always mean you'll be playing that game mode. I find that most of the "attack/defend" or "team leader" games that I join have been convened in disguise and are really team death match games. By this I mean that if you actually try to achieve the objective (such as reaching the extraction point in team leader) it pisses off everybody and gets you yelled at. They don't want to play that way they just want to play deathmatch with the respawn twist that team leader provides. That's fine I guess but it's not an excuse to cop an attitude when someone who just came in thinks you are playing an actual team leader match. Speaking of which, that leads me to my biggest issue. Certain people will host a match and simply have everyone in the room agree not to use a certain weapon. That too is fine, but if you have "allow join in progress" turned on newcomers don't know about the rule and again end up getting whined at. The thing is, you can exclude weapons from use in the game rules and then no one can use them, but no one takes the time to do this, they would rather whine after the fact. The thing that really makes me mad is how common this is. I bought a game with 40-some weapons in it and I'd like to play that game please. One time I got so fed up with finding nothing but pistol-only matches I decided to rebel and just use a sniper rifle... in close quarters. Hey, when you're not scoped in it’s like a pistol! Eventually the whiner booted me. But then I joined another match not realizing that it was the same game only on a different map! After walking up behind the host and executing him with a shotgun I was booted again but the parting shot (pun intended) was well worth it. OH! and speaking of getting weird about weapons, what the hell is wrong with using grenades!!! "Oh wow, you killed me with a grenade, how do you feel?" I feel freaking great knowing that you get pissed when I own your camping ass by being smarter than you. Thanks for asking. Then my absolute favorite is people who talk shit... to their teammates. I had one guy who had died and was spectating me telling me how much I suck. The guy who was DEAD telling me how much I suck. Let that sink in for a while. Oh well, he got to watch me make the winning kill... on a camper... with a grenade.
Cough Drop
It occurs to me that the Brian Eno - David Bowie collaborations are like a cough drop. Eno is like the liquid medicine center, soothing relief but hard to swallow by itself. Bowie is like the menthol sweet candy shell, hard, chewy, and a little sticky, but tasty and head-clearing. You don't want to take one every day, only when you need it.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Ranbow Six Vegas 2 - Reviewed
So I think I mentioned before how Rainbow Six Vegas 2 was a surprisingly good game. Or maybe not surprisingly good but surprisingly enjoyable for me as it is not the type of game I'm usually into (tactical shooters). Though, the elements that I enjoy are the ones that are less tactical shooter and more regular old run around blasting things shooter.
The game has several modes, a story mode, a terrorist hunt mode and several versus modes. The story mode is great, really top notch. There is just enough actual story in it to be worth having one, though you may have to play through a couple times to really get whats going on. Basically you and your team mates are pursuing these mercenaries through Las Vegas trying to stop them from blowing up buildings. The line between terrorist and mercenary is pretty thin here. I suppose the main bad guys are terrorists who have hired an army (and I mean a friggin ARMY) of mercs to basically hang around and shoot at you. There is no shortage of generic tangos to mow down. Where did they get all these guys? Who cares. One thing I will note is that certain points in the game allow you to overhear the enemies as they stand around talking. These conversation are hilarious and well written. I recomend waiting to hear the whole thing before you rush in and take them out.
The campaign will take you through a variety of buildings and streets. It's all urban but there is enough change to keep things interesting. The graphics are great, details are sharp and lighting effects um... light stuff... well. They did a good job delivering the flavor of Las Vegas. The game is an appropriate length, and it's paced well. There are opportunities for sneaking around and sniping, and there are 4 or 5 big set-piece battles. One part of the game has you trying to reach the top balcony of a tall square room full of climbing walls, while the enemy shoots at you from all sides. The final battle is just crazy. Crazy.
The story mode can be played solo or co-op. Co-op is a blast. I had the opportunity to play through the whole thing with a friend (in the same room) when he was visiting. We played for a day and a half strait. We couldn't put it down. Co-op online is pretty fun too. I've played both with people who are willing to talk and coordinate and jerks who don't understand the "cooperative" in co-op. It's a grab bag. Fortunately if you are hosting other people can join you or leave (or get kicked) on the fly, without interrupting the game.
Terrorist hunt, fills one of the many multiplayer maps full of bots and makes you go kill them all. This mode is also a lot of fun despite being quite hard. I found myself trying to figure out the zones that the AI was programmed to. Meaning, the bots will spawn and attack based on where you go with your team, so it becomes a game of fishing. You try to lure them out so you can drop them as they charge out into the open. Trying to through the halls Doom style will result in a quick and brutal end. Hunt can also be played in co-op, which is how I beat some of the levels. Let me tell you. there are some people out there who are VERY good at the fishing method.
Ah, mutiplayer. The adversarial modes are attack/defend, control point, team leader, team deathmatch, and deathmatch. I'm just going to come out and say that I don't like the team modes. As I stated in the first paragraph I'm not a big fan of tactical shooters. This is largely because it's team based and I'm never on the good team. Here is what happens:
"OK match started, now what I am I supposed to do? I guess I'll follow that guy I bet he knows where to go BANG! What?! who the hell shot me? Oh well, respawning. OK I'll go this way this time. Hey there's an enemy BANG! Damn that guy's good. OK, respawning. Maybe this time I'll BANG!!! WTF!!!! I didn't even last 5 seconds!!! Well I'll keep trying, oh wait, I'm out of spawns. Now I get to sit here for 5 min while the big kids play. Screw this."
For the most part I'm exaggerating, but that exact scenario happens more than I'd like. I understand that having limited spawns makes it more challenging and makes for interesting game play, but that's only true if you last long enough to enjoy it. I don't really hate team gameplay either, but it's ment to be a co-op versus co-op kind of experience and when no one works together it tends to suck.
Now deathmatch is more my style. The shift from one game type to the other is for me the shift from newbie to motherfucking specter of doom. I've played me some deathmatch. I understand the universal laws that govern it. One such law is, never stand still. Knowing this law has served me well in RSV2, particularly because most people are used to playing the other modes where hiding behind cover and camping is advantageous. Another thing that I love about DM is that you don't have to know where you are going. While it always helps to know the level, all you really have to do is run around and kill anything that moves. Beauty in simplicity. Of course the best part is that it can be set to unlimited respawns so I spend the maximum amount of time actually playing the game.
Team deathmatch can be cool, I'm not actually against team games (I may have given that impression). However, the host has the capability to put whoever he wants on his team. And they always stack their teams. This wouldn't be too bad (after all I like a challenge) if the spawn points weren't static. Instead of randomly placing you around the map, everyone spawns at their team's spawnppoint. In some levels this is OK but most of them are tucked away in a dead end with one, maybe two exits. So the game goes like this:
The match begins and both teams rush out into the map. Eventually the stronger team makes its way to the other team's spawn point. They wait outside and shoot people as they come out. If they game persisted the dead bodies the weak team would eventually be walled in by their own corpses.
So there are some things I like about this game and some things that really frustrate me but overall it's a great game. I have about 12 games for the system so far and I would place it in the top three. I've even considered buying RSV1 just to give it a try.
The game has several modes, a story mode, a terrorist hunt mode and several versus modes. The story mode is great, really top notch. There is just enough actual story in it to be worth having one, though you may have to play through a couple times to really get whats going on. Basically you and your team mates are pursuing these mercenaries through Las Vegas trying to stop them from blowing up buildings. The line between terrorist and mercenary is pretty thin here. I suppose the main bad guys are terrorists who have hired an army (and I mean a friggin ARMY) of mercs to basically hang around and shoot at you. There is no shortage of generic tangos to mow down. Where did they get all these guys? Who cares. One thing I will note is that certain points in the game allow you to overhear the enemies as they stand around talking. These conversation are hilarious and well written. I recomend waiting to hear the whole thing before you rush in and take them out.
The campaign will take you through a variety of buildings and streets. It's all urban but there is enough change to keep things interesting. The graphics are great, details are sharp and lighting effects um... light stuff... well. They did a good job delivering the flavor of Las Vegas. The game is an appropriate length, and it's paced well. There are opportunities for sneaking around and sniping, and there are 4 or 5 big set-piece battles. One part of the game has you trying to reach the top balcony of a tall square room full of climbing walls, while the enemy shoots at you from all sides. The final battle is just crazy. Crazy.
The story mode can be played solo or co-op. Co-op is a blast. I had the opportunity to play through the whole thing with a friend (in the same room) when he was visiting. We played for a day and a half strait. We couldn't put it down. Co-op online is pretty fun too. I've played both with people who are willing to talk and coordinate and jerks who don't understand the "cooperative" in co-op. It's a grab bag. Fortunately if you are hosting other people can join you or leave (or get kicked) on the fly, without interrupting the game.
Terrorist hunt, fills one of the many multiplayer maps full of bots and makes you go kill them all. This mode is also a lot of fun despite being quite hard. I found myself trying to figure out the zones that the AI was programmed to. Meaning, the bots will spawn and attack based on where you go with your team, so it becomes a game of fishing. You try to lure them out so you can drop them as they charge out into the open. Trying to through the halls Doom style will result in a quick and brutal end. Hunt can also be played in co-op, which is how I beat some of the levels. Let me tell you. there are some people out there who are VERY good at the fishing method.
Ah, mutiplayer. The adversarial modes are attack/defend, control point, team leader, team deathmatch, and deathmatch. I'm just going to come out and say that I don't like the team modes. As I stated in the first paragraph I'm not a big fan of tactical shooters. This is largely because it's team based and I'm never on the good team. Here is what happens:
"OK match started, now what I am I supposed to do? I guess I'll follow that guy I bet he knows where to go BANG! What?! who the hell shot me? Oh well, respawning. OK I'll go this way this time. Hey there's an enemy BANG! Damn that guy's good. OK, respawning. Maybe this time I'll BANG!!! WTF!!!! I didn't even last 5 seconds!!! Well I'll keep trying, oh wait, I'm out of spawns. Now I get to sit here for 5 min while the big kids play. Screw this."
For the most part I'm exaggerating, but that exact scenario happens more than I'd like. I understand that having limited spawns makes it more challenging and makes for interesting game play, but that's only true if you last long enough to enjoy it. I don't really hate team gameplay either, but it's ment to be a co-op versus co-op kind of experience and when no one works together it tends to suck.
Now deathmatch is more my style. The shift from one game type to the other is for me the shift from newbie to motherfucking specter of doom. I've played me some deathmatch. I understand the universal laws that govern it. One such law is, never stand still. Knowing this law has served me well in RSV2, particularly because most people are used to playing the other modes where hiding behind cover and camping is advantageous. Another thing that I love about DM is that you don't have to know where you are going. While it always helps to know the level, all you really have to do is run around and kill anything that moves. Beauty in simplicity. Of course the best part is that it can be set to unlimited respawns so I spend the maximum amount of time actually playing the game.
Team deathmatch can be cool, I'm not actually against team games (I may have given that impression). However, the host has the capability to put whoever he wants on his team. And they always stack their teams. This wouldn't be too bad (after all I like a challenge) if the spawn points weren't static. Instead of randomly placing you around the map, everyone spawns at their team's spawnppoint. In some levels this is OK but most of them are tucked away in a dead end with one, maybe two exits. So the game goes like this:
The match begins and both teams rush out into the map. Eventually the stronger team makes its way to the other team's spawn point. They wait outside and shoot people as they come out. If they game persisted the dead bodies the weak team would eventually be walled in by their own corpses.
So there are some things I like about this game and some things that really frustrate me but overall it's a great game. I have about 12 games for the system so far and I would place it in the top three. I've even considered buying RSV1 just to give it a try.
Monday, March 9, 2009
The New Toy part 2
So why the 360? I'll start with the small reasons. Price really wasn't a big issue but I suppose it mattered. Obviously the 360 is cheaper, but it can be argued that the PS3 plays blue ray disks and the online is free. Still the price difference is pretty big, 100 to 200 dollars currently. I don't know I guess price really didn't play too big a roll since you can compare system features and bundles until your face turns blue. I spend several hundred dollars on games a year anyway so whatever.
I think one big thing that got me was that most of my friends had 360s already and being able to play with them was a draw. I'm not usually into doing the popular thing, but in this case it pays off. I have old school friends all around the country, California, Virginia, Florida, Texas, Pennsylvania, even a friend stationed in Italy (who's never friggin online). If they all had PS3s would I have a PS3 now? It would be more likely.
Another thing that drew me in was achievements. The community has grown to have a love/hate attitude toward achievements. Some people think too much emphasis is put on them and that they distract from gameplay. Other people say they create new reasons to play a game and provide more to do. Others are obsessed with bumping their gamerscore. Others hate the people who are obsessed with boosting their score and couldn't give a crap about their own. I think I'm somewhere in the middle. Back before the system came out I was reading about the features and the magazine that had the article described achievements as a way for gamers who aren't into climbing online leaderboards and prefer more single player games to show off what they have accomplished. At that time I wasn't really into online play (and was under-enthusiastic about the online revolution in video games) and I was intrigued with the idea of a gamerscore. Now I have to admit that I am one of those people who are obsessed with it. Getting an achievement is a great feeling and I like seeing my gaming habit tied to an ever-growing number. I even track my gamerscore in a spreadsheet, how nerdy is that? Very. So do I think achievements are ruining my gameing experience, distracting me from the gameplay? Can an addict admit he has a problem?
Getting off topic. A third reason I chose the Xbox360 is the games. Now most of the big games that come out now come out for both systems. There are few noteworthy exclusive titles (percentage-wise). However, It seems like the 360 exclusives are more frequent. I don't have numbers to back that up it just seems that way. I only own a couple at the moment, one of which is Forza 2 (which is awesome and I may have to do a post on why its better than the GT series). Shit, I'm beating around the bush here, allow me to knock that off.
The only game I really care about is Final Fantasy XIII. Originally this game was going to be exclusive to PS3. At E3 last year it was announced that this was no longer so. Coffin nail. In my last post I claimed that I was not a fanboy. This is true to the extent that it does not include Final Fantasy. I will always buy Final Fantasy games. Even if they came out with a really crappy one I would buy it blindly and the next one as well. I short, I like them. When that announcement was made I was already leaning towards the Xbox and that was the final deciding factor.
So now that I have had the system for a few months, what do I think about it? I shall evaluate it in a future post.
I think one big thing that got me was that most of my friends had 360s already and being able to play with them was a draw. I'm not usually into doing the popular thing, but in this case it pays off. I have old school friends all around the country, California, Virginia, Florida, Texas, Pennsylvania, even a friend stationed in Italy (who's never friggin online). If they all had PS3s would I have a PS3 now? It would be more likely.
Another thing that drew me in was achievements. The community has grown to have a love/hate attitude toward achievements. Some people think too much emphasis is put on them and that they distract from gameplay. Other people say they create new reasons to play a game and provide more to do. Others are obsessed with bumping their gamerscore. Others hate the people who are obsessed with boosting their score and couldn't give a crap about their own. I think I'm somewhere in the middle. Back before the system came out I was reading about the features and the magazine that had the article described achievements as a way for gamers who aren't into climbing online leaderboards and prefer more single player games to show off what they have accomplished. At that time I wasn't really into online play (and was under-enthusiastic about the online revolution in video games) and I was intrigued with the idea of a gamerscore. Now I have to admit that I am one of those people who are obsessed with it. Getting an achievement is a great feeling and I like seeing my gaming habit tied to an ever-growing number. I even track my gamerscore in a spreadsheet, how nerdy is that? Very. So do I think achievements are ruining my gameing experience, distracting me from the gameplay? Can an addict admit he has a problem?
Getting off topic. A third reason I chose the Xbox360 is the games. Now most of the big games that come out now come out for both systems. There are few noteworthy exclusive titles (percentage-wise). However, It seems like the 360 exclusives are more frequent. I don't have numbers to back that up it just seems that way. I only own a couple at the moment, one of which is Forza 2 (which is awesome and I may have to do a post on why its better than the GT series). Shit, I'm beating around the bush here, allow me to knock that off.
The only game I really care about is Final Fantasy XIII. Originally this game was going to be exclusive to PS3. At E3 last year it was announced that this was no longer so. Coffin nail. In my last post I claimed that I was not a fanboy. This is true to the extent that it does not include Final Fantasy. I will always buy Final Fantasy games. Even if they came out with a really crappy one I would buy it blindly and the next one as well. I short, I like them. When that announcement was made I was already leaning towards the Xbox and that was the final deciding factor.
So now that I have had the system for a few months, what do I think about it? I shall evaluate it in a future post.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
The New Toy
So to start things out I'll talk a little about what is new in my gaming life. The most significant recent development is the addition of the Xbox360 to my arsenal of systems. I picked it up bright and early on Black Friday of last year, spurred on by a door buster deal. I got the Pro model with the 60gig HD and included double pack of LEGO Indiana Jones and Kung Fu Panda. The Black Friday door buster special was a free copy of Rainbow Six Vegas 2 with the purchase of a Pro or Elite system. At the time I was intending to buy myself the system as a Christmas present anyway and when I saw the ad online I decided that a free game is to good to pass up. I hadn't played a Rainbow Six game since... well the first one on the PC waaaay back in day, I'm gonna say '98? I didn't have any special interest in this game other than that it was free but it has turned out to be one of my favorites for the system so far. So I ended up with a new system and essentially three free games, not a bad start.
So why the 360? I feel obligated to explain myself given the rabid system war that plays out over the net every day. I don't want to be stuck under that dark cloud. I will start by saying that I am in no way a system fanboy, I am not beholden to M$, and I am not an XBot. I have pretty much zero loyalty when it comes to systems. If I did I would be playing a Wii right now and waiting desperately for some decent games to come out. The SNES was my first system and I loved it dearly but I proved to be a fickle consumer when I passed on the N64 in favor of a PS1 (even though all of my friends got the N64). Similarly while I love the PS2 and was initially rooting for the PS3 when it was first unveiled, I ultimately had to go with the Xbox360.
In my next post I'll go into the whys and wherefores.
So why the 360? I feel obligated to explain myself given the rabid system war that plays out over the net every day. I don't want to be stuck under that dark cloud. I will start by saying that I am in no way a system fanboy, I am not beholden to M$, and I am not an XBot. I have pretty much zero loyalty when it comes to systems. If I did I would be playing a Wii right now and waiting desperately for some decent games to come out. The SNES was my first system and I loved it dearly but I proved to be a fickle consumer when I passed on the N64 in favor of a PS1 (even though all of my friends got the N64). Similarly while I love the PS2 and was initially rooting for the PS3 when it was first unveiled, I ultimately had to go with the Xbox360.
In my next post I'll go into the whys and wherefores.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Press Start
Cliche title huh?
"Press Start" as if you were entering some new exciting cyber-world full of techno stuff and... excitement.
Well anyway this post will serve as the obligatory statement of intent to start a "blog" as it is called by the young folks. I solemnly swear to be good and post every day and write a bunch of interesting stuff and bla bla bla... Right, because that always turns out well. Three months later and only two posts, one about how awesome blogging is and another about why they never post. I'll avoid that then and just say what this is about.
My purpose here is to write about video games. I wanted a place to talk about what I'm playing and how I feel about it with out the need to start my own site (we have plenty as it is), and to be able to put in more detail than is appropriate in a forum (and to not have to argue with anyone). So that's what this is. I intend to talk about the industry and review some games, most of which will be old games you don't care about but that I'm just getting around to playing. I'll do my best to bring some insight that you wouldn't find elsewhere.
Alright then. Begin.
"Press Start" as if you were entering some new exciting cyber-world full of techno stuff and... excitement.
Well anyway this post will serve as the obligatory statement of intent to start a "blog" as it is called by the young folks. I solemnly swear to be good and post every day and write a bunch of interesting stuff and bla bla bla... Right, because that always turns out well. Three months later and only two posts, one about how awesome blogging is and another about why they never post. I'll avoid that then and just say what this is about.
My purpose here is to write about video games. I wanted a place to talk about what I'm playing and how I feel about it with out the need to start my own site (we have plenty as it is), and to be able to put in more detail than is appropriate in a forum (and to not have to argue with anyone). So that's what this is. I intend to talk about the industry and review some games, most of which will be old games you don't care about but that I'm just getting around to playing. I'll do my best to bring some insight that you wouldn't find elsewhere.
Alright then. Begin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)