Alien Shooter 2: an alloy?

Recently, there have been more complaints lodged against the game criticism community by developers. Apparently these so-called "journalists" don't finish games before assessing their quality.

I am about to describe a game after exactly eight minutes of playing it. Because that's all I was allowed in the time-locked demo of Alien Shooter 2. Though I did have some help from the official site:

This is the unique alloy of arcade action and RPG elements which combines well-established world of classical games and unmatched dynamics of the first part.

Have you ever asked someone a simple question, and in response received an answer that goes into so much terrible detail that the question itself becomes irrelevant to the entire conversation? Sometimes a developer has to know when to leave things alone. In the case of Alien Shooter 2, Sigma Team couldn't stop talking.

Shadowgrounds: another alien shooter

To appreciate Shadowgrounds, you have to ignore the story . Like any other arcade-styled shooter (or your typical run and gun FPS for that matter), the story should be of no consequence next to the action. To its detriment, Shadowgrounds tries to emphasize the story. And like Doom 3, a game that has influenced it in many ways, it has fallen victim to that mistake.

Rise of Legends: conquering a world of fantasy

Rise of Nations was one of my favorite games to be released in 2003. Taking familiar aspects of the Civilization series and creating a highly playable real-time version was a true accomplishment. It also helped make the overall strategic map more accessible to RTS gamers, a feature that may have been intimidating when presented with the depth and relative complexity of the Total War series. When I heard that Big Huge Games was using a completely new fictional setting for Rise of Legends, I have to admit I was apprehensive. I expected them to capitilize on Rise of Nations' success by fine tuning it and selling it as a sequel, a tactic not uncommon in the industry (see Empire Earth). After playing the demo, I am relieved that Big Huge Games have not lost sight of what made their first game so universally appealing. Though I am also a little disappointed, because the demo is a good indicator of what the final product will be like, exposing the limited extent of their vision for the franchise.

tribal trouble

Most of my game time lately has been dedicated to real time strategy, in an effort to gather material for what will likely be another article. After playing Darwinia, I tried out another 2005 IGF award nominee: Tribal Trouble. Though to compare the two would be unfair; where Darwinia is too self-conscious about smashing genre conventions, Tribal Trouble is more of a real time strategy game in the traditional sense. As a result, Tribal Trouble comes off as a considerably more playable game. Even if it is a little too straightforward.

Tribal Trouble uses a fully 3D engine, and the game's minimalist interface adopts enough genre standards to keep the learning curve quite low. The principle of the game is simple enough: you are either the Natives or the Vikings fighting for the control of a series of tropical islands. Battles are fought over small expanses of land, and the bases are almost always close together. Missions will involve rescuing fellow Natives/Vikings, killing off the opposing faction's chief or destroying their base. The unit models are exaggerated and cartoon-like, dovetailing with the game's playful theme.

The game itself isn't very revolutionary, but I was drawn to the subtle innovations it introduced to base building and army creation. The first structure that has to be built is the Quarters, which produces more of the standard Peon unit. The cool thing is that once I selected the structure to build, the peons I started the map with dash off to begin cutting down trees and recovering the materials to build it. The Armory is the next structure that is required, which creates weapons and trains warriors. Though you don't create "new" warrior units, you simply train existing peons to become warriors, and equip them with constructed weapons. But there's no explicit resource collection required. The Armory menu allows you to select the amounts of materials you want to collect, the types of weapons you want to build and the types of warrior units you want to train. All materials are collected automatically, as long as you have peons to do the work. The trick early on in the game is to keep building a pool of peons who will be collecting materials, and have an amount left over to create warrior units. As long as the Quarters is still standing and there are a few peons inside, you will continue to receive peon units. It's a very streamlined system, and allows you to focus on the action at hand.

Since the island maps are so small, it's often a fight for resources at the beginning of the game. Once you've built up enough of an assault force, you send them over to the enemy base to attack. Indeed, the strategy is overly simplistic, but it offers enough of a challenge in the way that you're constantly balancing resource collection, warrior training and launching attacks with the same pool of resources.

Tribal trouble may not break any new ground, but there's still something to be said about the unpretentious gameplay that's offered. Especially when compared with big-budget RTS titles that can easily be reduced to the same principles of total annihilation.

darwinia: perceived brilliance

I wanted to like Darwinia.

I wanted to be able to support independent games that use the incredibly convenient and industry-shattering product distribution model that is Steam. I wanted to immerse myself in a world that was obviously crafted by game designers with their own vision of a well-worn genre. I wanted to fall in love with the abstract shapes and minimalist environments that cleverly integrate an extremely simple, but involving gameplay mechanic. However, as every pessimistic gamer knows, hype is hard to live up to. In fact, when the game is the recipient of the grand prize at the Independent Games Festival, it can be downright antagonizing.

Black: a first person shooter

There is a science in creating an edgy title for a game. Despite its simplicity, I'm positive that a lot of thought went into the name for Black. It's a first person shooter with big guns and destructable environments - definitely appealing to the average gamer. Well, the ones that didn't already play Red Faction anyway. Developers Criterion needed to keep it short and simple, so that no one will forget it easily. Like Halo. Except they have to make it darker sounding, because this game is about killing and blowing shit up. So what's a dark word? Blood. It's already taken. Sin. Nope, that's gone too. Wait a second - Black. What's darker than "Black"? I mean it's black - darkness in a word. The shade of gunmetal. The heart of a mercenary. Perfect!

Now, about the actual game.

The Xbox version was pretty easy to pick up and play, because the control scheme is an exact duplicate of Halo. The demo I played dropped me into the middle of a building on a decimated city block. Shattered glass exploded all around me with the sound of gunfire drawing closer. I blew open the door with my shotgun and ran out into the street. I must have surprised my enemies because they didn't fire at first; though don't think I was able to get the drop on everyone. Bullets ejected from windows on the upper levels of buildings nearby and peppered the street in front of me. I threw a grenade into a nearby wrecked car that someone was using for cover and it exploded in suitable movie-styled fashion, bringing down a nearby wall.

I then rushed headlong into the next group of enemies with my AK-47 blazing, the shell casings decorating the bottom half of the screen. All of the weapons so far felt substantial and responsive, with the accompanying sounds strengthening the effect. I felt tough. I felt untouchable. I was soon entranced by the dull roar of gunfire.

But what was I doing here? Was the objective simply "kill or be killed"? Are we really still at the point where that's reason enough to keep playing a first person shooter?

From what I've read the game is one of the shortest in recent memory. Like the name. I guess the devs wanted to distract you until it was too late, to prevent you from thinking that the game you have been playing for the last 8 hours didn't have a story. Or worse - that it was not anything of consequence in the genre.

massive update to Star Wars Galaxies admits defeat

I still hold fast to my belief that Star Wars Galaxies was the best MMORPG I've ever played. Looking back through past writings, it read like an emotional rollercoaster where my fondness for the game fluctuated drastically over a short period. Through five months of playing, I was exposed to an incredible variety of roleplaying experiences, high-level monster hunts, and taking part in producing average-level goods for the game world's economy. I was quick to dismiss the Jump to Lightspeed expansion as the first nail in the game's coffin, because the mechanics of the land and space-based portions of the game felt so disparate. I didn't want a twitch shooter, I wanted an extension of my adventures planetside. Though in hindsight the "X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter" model is probably the only way it could have been done in such a small timeframe. Three expansions later Star Wars Galaxies has changed dramatically, to the point that players started leaving in droves.

return of Alien Shooter

It's been over a year since I first played Sigma Team's Alien Shooter, an excellent arcade shooter that blurred the lines between shoot 'em up, FPS hallway crawlers and isometric clickfest RPGs.

Sigma Team has since released an informal sequel of sorts, Theseus: Return of the Hero. In it you play Theseus, a lone warrior that crash lands onto the surface of Earth only to find that it has been overrun by the same aliens seen in Alien Shooter. What I want to know is, just where is he returning from? Is this indeed the Greek hero of old? The question just begged to be asked.

Immediately noticeable are the game environments. No longer are you limited to the gray corridors of a research facility teeming with nasty aliens; you are instead transported to a Western-styled post-apocolyptic wasteland, complete with dual six-guns and a suitably twangy soundtrack.

Though I knew something was funny when I saw "Powered by Alien Shooter" on the title screen. Apart from the different objectives and open yet strangely corridor-driven outdoor areas, this seems like a repackaging of Alien Shooter. The monsters are the same, and what's worse, there are less weapons available! Was the intent of Theseus to develop the storyline in the Alien Shooter universe from another perspective? Had the alien creatures escaped from the research lab, despite my best efforts to trap them inside the structure with thousands of packets of dynamite? Why am I asking these questions about a simple arcade shooter? It doesn't matter; I want Alien Shooter 2.

the battle for middle earth rages on

I confess that I needlessly short-changed The Battle for Middle Earth last year, as it was simply one more real time strategy title during a period where anything less than an immediately gripping concept wouldn't warrant a second look. After numerous recommendations I decided to give the game a chance, despite its prevalent ties to another diluted movie license. I was surprised to find that in trying hard to shake its movie license stigma, The Battle for Middle Earth managed to emerge as a satisfying entry in the genre.

empire at war: actual galactic conquest!

Real time strategy often conjures up thoughts of base building, resource gathering and general clickery around an arbitrary map while accelerating through a technology tree. The Total War series added a much needed dimension to the experience - a macro view that provided ample support to the ground battles that would ensue in a campaign. While Rise of Nations slanted towards resource-gathering on a larger scale as well with their "Conquer the World" mode, it didn't offer the grand strategy that future titles like Rome: Total War would so skillfully display. Little did I know that a Star Wars license would be next in line to offer something that could almost be considered innovation.

Waging a war on disparate fronts seemed like a lofty design decision for Empire at War- I didn't think it could be done. In a universe where we have been given six movies' worth of evidence that wars take place planetside as well as in the vastness of space, for once a game provides a battlefield that is similarly all-encompassing.

Star Wars: Empire at War presents a battle map at the beginning of the game consisting of planets. Above each planet are orbit "slots", where ships carrying troops or space cruisers can lie in wait before attacking the planet below. Trade routes and flight paths are easily navigated by using an intuitive drag-and-drop interface. Garrisons can be constructed on planets that have been assimilated into the Empire or liberated by the Rebellion. Smugglers can infiltrate enemy planets and siphon credits to your cause. And I haven't even talked about the actual fighting yet.

If the space around a planet is occupied, a battle for control of this area will take place once you've moved your fleet into position. The battles are kind of like Homeworld, but…they're missing something. They felt flat and almost as if it was simply a land map with no real point of reference to give the impression of space. The purity of space combat was gone, but in its place I was nevertheless immediately entranced by re-enactments of the battles I had seen so many times in the films. The visuals serve their purpose, and seeing TIE fighters and X-Wings darting around like insects next to the gargantuan capital gunships gives the proper sense of scale.

Ground battles aren't particularly ground-breaking; the conventions of standard RTS dominate the experience. Though your troops can take cover to improve defence as in Dawn of War, and the addition of reinforcement points on the map allow you to drop in troops at these locations as long as you have them in orbit around the planet. Then there are the bomber squadrons that can be used to eliminate enemy structures. But once again these must be already waiting to be launched. In games past, calling in an airstrike was simply a button click away - but Empire at War clearly requires the preparation for massive-scale assaults. It ties both battlefronts together.

There is always a place for skirmishes and tank rush battles - they are fun in their own right. But I see the approach of Empire at War as the future for strategy games that possess enough scale to warrant the use of meta-strategy, since it only makes sense in a setting where the battle for supremacy is so far-reaching. Indeed, Empire at War feels like a game of galactic proportions. While each field of battle is merely sufficient on its own, as a whole they provide the scope that was needed to truly convey the menacing Imperial assaults of the films, as well as the calculated tactical strikes of the Rebellion. I fully expect to be playing a game mode that offers the entire Galaxy for the taking, one planet at a time.

despite the metal and wires

quake 4: leftover nightmares

The opening cinematic of Quake 4 pans across the back of a lone space marine, visible against the vast openness of space. The view rotates, and I was shown the marine's face, half of which has been removed exposing the grinning skull beneath. The numerous bodies of other space marines float past the virtual camera amongst the remnants of a space cruiser, foreshadowing the bloodshed that will undoubtedly take place on the battlefields of the planet below.

actors should never quit their day jobs

Especially when they are terrible at it.

According to a few vague quotes in interviews Jessica Alba alludes to being involved in the design of a "non-violent X-Game where you can basically create your own character". This is fucked up on so many different levels I'm having a hard time forming sentences, but I had to record this somewhere so that my future decline into a swirling vortex of insanity can be traced back to this event. Someone hurry up and name the publisher so they can be branded a leper by the gaming community for all time.

I don't even want to speculate what this mystery "extreme sport" is; I'm sure it's whatever is currently airing in between the music commercials on MTV. When you see that this is considered "extreme", can an announcement for a game based on this dexterous display of everyday housework be far behind? I'll bet an actor somewhere with a career in a tailspin is just aching to get involved.

In the 80s, we were inundated with actors that stepped away from the camera in pursuit of short-lived musical careers: David Hasselhoff, Patrick Swayze, Rick Springfield...I'm disgusted with myself that I can actually put that kind of a list together. The embarrassing displays at the Spike TV awards last year showed both actors and music industry personalities wanted a slice of the video gaming scene. Is gaming the fashionable arena for this generation's hip-with-the-times celebrities?

This isn't to say that all actors should avoid the game industry. All you have to do is look back on Escape from Butcher Bay, one of last year's movie-based games that was actually well-produced, had design input from the movie's main actor and stood tall on its own as a game. I cannot hold the same sentiment, however, for the mind-numbingly incomprehensible movie it was based on. The irony!

sort of rotten and insane

Dungeon Siege II: a successor is named (again)

Through a mixture of flagrant opinions and glowing reviews, Diablo II has come to define the action RPG. After the recent release of the 1.11 patch I reinstalled, hoping to pull myself away from the steely grip of World of Warcraft. Playing Diablo II again reminded me of a few things that one should come to expect when playing an action RPG, creating an ideal opportunity to prepare for the Dungeon Siege II demo.

Ever since Diablo II's release five years ago, many games have tried to claim its mantle. In the past I've named Divine Divinity, Dungeon Siege, Guild Wars and World of Warcraft as successors to the game until Blizzard sees fit to revisit the world of Sanctuary. Even Wild Tangent's Fate has been recently compared to the elegant simplicity of Diablo II, but for me it plays more like a clone of Darkstone than a true homage.

Dungeon Siege II is probably the closest anyone's come to duplicating the Diablo II experience. Overbearing story aside, every single gameplay mechanic is intact - complete with the waves of monsters intent on your destruction.

Maybe it's nostalgia, but I remember Dungeon Siege having fairly impressive visuals. Dungeon Siege II seems to have taken a downturn, or at least assumed that we wouldn't notice a significant advancement of their three-year-old engine. Character models and environments appear meager in comparison to Neverwinter Nights. While the expansive canopy of trees in the demo's first mission can be impressive, it gets to be distracting when you're trying to click on the swarms of monsters heading in your direction. Thankfully, the original game's camera system is still in place. I also liked that the automap actually follows you this time, complete with auto rotation. I can't even describe how livid I was at having to determine what direction I was going on Dungeon Siege's static maps.

When Gas Powered Games said you would have more control over your character in Dungeon Siege II, they came through with their promise. In addition to leveling one of the four main skills through use (Melee, Ranged, Combat Magic or Nature Magic), you gain points to spend on "specialties" for each of those skills. Specialties are passive abilities that add bonuses to your character's attacks such as improved fire spell damage, or more accurate shots from ranged weapons. On top of that, these passive skills contribute to what Powers your character can use. Powers are a unique twist - they're one-off abilities that are separate from your mana pool, but take time to recharge. My fire mage gained a Power called "Flame Nexus" early on, which does a great amount of damage - but is indiscriminate in its sphere of casting.

The "Kill-Reward" philosophy is alive and well in Dungeon Siege II, and for the most part that's the only reason I kept playing. The story is absolutely horrid, and the voice acting does little to alleviate its hollowness. Though this could hardly be considered a weakness, as both the original Dungeon Siege and Diablo II focused very little on developing the backdrop for your quests, and instead stressed the need to level up and get more powerful gear to take on The Big Boss Monster. The truth is, this meta-concept didn't matter during play - it was always about one more level, one more quest, one more chapter - the act of clicking itself became an addiction of sorts. I'd say the biggest problem I have with playing Dungeon Siege II is that you must click every spot you want your party to go. This is infinitely annoying during the many retreats I had to make from its intimidating larger monsters.

I think what impressed me the most about this demo is the amount of gameplay included - there's enough in there for anyone unsure of delving into the final product to make an educated decision. It's very clear that Gas Powered Games has gone through great lengths to try and duplicate the experience of Diablo II; that it should come five years after the fact is probably a testament to Blizzard's original design. That Dungeon Siege II should succeed in doing so is an indicator of its own quality, and I fully intend to be playing the full version when it hits next week.

fresh blood through tired skin

trial of the isle

I never thought I would see the day where a company like SOE would issue a completely stand-alone demo of an MMORPG that's only been out for four months. That's what you get in Everquest II: Trial of the Isle, a 16 MB client and close to 24 hours worth of updates. Now that World of Warcraft has reached 1.5 millions users worldwide, Everquest II is looking pretty meek in comparison - even next to its predecessor. It's also quite telling that Everquest II is now selling for about $39.99 CDN, while World of Warcraft is still at its launch price of $59.99-69.99. I thought I would give Everquest II the benefit of the doubt with this seven day trial, and try and get an idea about what it was offering. In a couple of words: not much.

swat 4: compliance is your only option

SWAT 4 successfully integrates a fluid interface, real time tactics and a completely believable simulation. And like its predecessor, it's a welcome change from the tactical shooters that typically let you shoot first and ask questions later.

The SWAT series has changed form three times since its first release as Daryl F. Gates Police Quest: SWAT, a spin-off of Sierra's recognized adventure brand. Tacking on Gates' name to the title would add credibility, as the former Los Angeles police chief basically invented the whole SWAT (special weapons and tactics) concept and had a hand in the game's design - though it ended up as some kind of one-man FMV adventure. SWAT 2 would take an isometric real-time strategy approach, introducing more of an action element to the game but also allowing you to control an entire squad. Finally, SWAT 3: Close Quarters Battle would arrive after Rainbow Six established a new genre: the tactical first person shooter. Sharing similar design elements, SWAT 3 would still hold its own as a fairly realistic interpretation of these elite police units.

I played SWAT 3 shortly after I completed Eagle Watch, the first expansion for Rainbow Six. The inability to completely plan a mission beforehand made me extra cautious in my approach to the gameplay, because in SWAT you were dropped into a mission and had to deal with tactical situations as they happened - you were never informed of how many adversaries you were facing or their last known locations. The situations were often chaotic, and the civilians weren't always being held at gunpoint - they would sometimes be running around just trying to get to safety, creating a highly distracting battlefield.

I liked that you were able communicate directly with the aggressors: yelling such things as "drop your weapon!", "Stay down!" or "hands in the air", sometimes causing them to open fire. Though they would occasionally comply, allowing you or one of your squad mates to approach and restrain them. It was an obvious movie-like interpretation of this kind of police work, but it allowed every mission to unfold in a believable manner, where not every guy with a gun in his hand was necessarily a threatening target.

Along with a new engine adapted from Irrational's Tribes Vengeance, all of these elements are back in SWAT 4. Though where the game really impresses me is the interface. It fosters a completely seamless experience where the novice can issue "default" commands as the situation applies, or the experienced can delve deeper into the on-screen context sensitive drop down menu and issue a particular command to be executed. Moreover, the interface seems to be designed to let you sit back and let your team do all the work, allowing the player to effectively become the leader. The team AI is very adept in this regard - the only time a team member was incapacitated was because of my carelessness, after I asked them to run into a room without using proper breach and clear tactics. The enemy AI is also unpredictable - rarely will they immediately open fire, and this causes you to approach each possible hostile with caution instead of running nonchalantly through the mission, finger poised on the "Fire" button.

Though this is all seen through the eyes of a fan of SWAT 3; I would hardly call the mission selected for the demo exciting. This may be detrimental for prospective newcomers, and that's a damn shame. In SWAT 3 and the first two Rainbow Six games, reconaissance and non-deadly force missions were always part of the package, conveying the message that to "win" doesn't mean putting a bullet in the enemy. Though sound in their presentation of tactics, games like Full Spectrum Warrior and Close Combat: First to Fight are putting less of an emphasis on enemy apprehension or de-armament and instead opt for simple neutralization - adapting the aforementioned mentality of shooting first and asking questions later. It's nice to know SWAT 4 is taking a more civilized approach, even though the game essentially revolves around the same "player versus the bad guy" model. I'm fully aware of what's happening to the Rainbow Six series, so I'm glad that Irrational has taken care in trying to reproduce what made SWAT 3 so enjoyable. I'm looking forward to getting my hands on the full version this April.

attack of the commando clones

With Republic Commando, Close Combat: First to Fight, Brothers in Arms, Rainbow Six: Lockdown and SWAT 4 all arriving in the next couple of months, PC gaming appears to be fixated on squad tactical shooters for the moment. Which is fine by me, as long as they're offering something more than genre lip service.

I guess it wasn't much of a stretch for LucasArts to develop its own take on the genre with Republic Commando: take the nameless, faceless clone troopers from Episode II: Attack of the Clones and put them in close combat engagements, picking and choosing from the featuresets of games to come before it, and creating what can only be called a mediocre first person shooter.

I downloaded the demo last week after hearing a mixed bag of opinions. I was interested to see if LucasArts could tackle the squad tactics genre on its own, as this would be the first Star Wars game in some time that was actually developed-in house. The first thing I noticed was only one of the four squad members actually sounded like Temuera Morrison (Jango Fett). They also had their own "nicknames", and different personalities. I thought they were supposed to be a cross section of an army of clones? Why get tied up in things like "cameraderie" and "sassy one liners" when you're essentially a one man army multiplied a thousand times?

LucasArts definitely took some liberties with the character design, but everything ended up looking like Galactic Heroes. Of course, it's up to the player whether they like this interpretation or not. As someone who enjoys employing precision tactics when facing my enemy, I'd rather not be looking at a chunky, obtrusive interface and even chunkier avatars. I'm really not a fan of the "visor view" either, and in my mind it goes down in history with the likes of Deus Ex: Invisible War's HUD. I can only imagine what this view will be like in Rainbow Six: Lockdown.

I liked the way squad commands felt intuitive, but I wouldn't call it tactics. It doesn't require any real problem solving by the player: simply mousing over points on the map will show "hot" areas, or actions a squad member can complete. Clicking on these points will issue the associated command, but it's not like you get the option of storming a room with thermal detonators or sneaking in quietly. The objectives and their solutions are completely transparent. In the demo's mission, Republic Commando does a good job of making you feel surrounded and overwhelmed, but I never feared for my life. There's a pretty good chance when you go down with 0 health a squad mate will be by to heal you up with seemingly unlimited medkits.

All the weapons felt insubstantial, like toys. I've played Star Wars FPS before, and I know what a repeater blaster should "feel" like. I also find it hard to believe that every character has the entire Republic arsenal at their disposal. Wouldn't it make more sense for the squad to have a Heavy Blaster unit, a sniper unit and a support unit? That way your men become indispensable - not interchangeable. In the face of existing and soon to be released squad tactical shooters, the whole game feels like a toy. More like squad tactical action figures.

The biggest thing this game has going for it is that it's suprisingly polished given LucasArts' past foray into 3D. Perhaps the campaign is really interesting, and eclipses the shortfalls of the game's core mechanics. However I'm not willing to take the time to find out. If you're looking for another Star Wars FPS that doesn't involve the words "Jedi Knight", then I suppose Republic Commando is for you.

Now I'd like to talk about Ash. Ash is a band from Ireland that was introduced to me during the end credits/blooper scenes from the North American release of Rumble in the Bronx. Their catchy tribute to old martial arts films, the aptly named "Kung Fu", played in the background. The next day I bought the album it was from, "1977". Opening with the sound of a tie fighter flying by, and later learning that the album was named after the year Star Wars was released (despite any of the members not being born yet), I knew these guys were for real. I even had the chance to meet them when they came to Toronto back in 1996 to promote that album.

This week I found that one of the songs off of their upcoming album was selected to be on the Republic Commando soundtrack. Once again falling back on their clever songwriting skills, "Clones" will also appear on an exclusive EP called "Commando" which includes a playable demo for the game. I can't vouch for their popularity at the moment, as I've been into Ash for years. Though if anyone will benefit from this multi-media promotion it will be the band. Incidentally, Ash will be back in Toronto at the Opera House April 13th. I will be there.

I don't know if you knew that

another shooting spree

Playing both Metal Slug Advance and CT Special Forces in the past couple of weeks awoke in me a renewed desire for the simplistic arcade shooters of old. It's been a year since I last checked out Kraisoft's offerings, and it seems they have been busy crafting an entirely new shooter to join their collection: After the End. The game is an isometric clickfest that pits you, a lone human soldier, against hordes of evil mutants as you blast your way through 73 levels and a variety of locations on the planet Rydon 7. Though they seem to have a strange obsession with the word "hot" when describing the game's many attributes.

Anyone familiar with Reflexive's Crimsonland will have seen this approach before: your character is dropped into an arena and you must destroy a certain amount of monsters before proceeding. And while After the End allows you to switch between weapons, the power-ups and basic gameplay elements are almost identical. Though After the End feels more open, as the later levels in the demo have more objective-based missions where you must fight your way to a point on the map. In both cases, it feels like the develoeprs tried to merge a space shooter with a ground based battle. Crimsonland's graphics are more polished, and definitely has the better soundtrack, but they're equally fun if you don't mind seeing your character rotate 360 degrees about his waist.

And then there's Alien Shooter. Such a simple, unassuming name. Why are you brought to a mysterious facility full of corridors and power switches and barrels of green goo? To shoot aliens, of course. In the same vein as Crimsonland and After the End, the game is an isometric shooter with a simple objective: destroy everything on screen while completing various mission objectives, and collect money that can be spent on better weapons, skill upgrades or extra lives at the end of each level. It feels a lot more complete, and has more in common with games like Quake and Doom than Crimsonland or After the End. The sad part is that the demo only lets you play for six minutes at a time. It's like they give you the needle, but only let you stick it part way in before snatching it from your eager hands. So what was I supposed to do? Buy the full version, of course. And I'd be lying if I didn't fire it up at least once a day, if only to see myself be swarmed by endless waves of monsters, my chaingun slowly running out of ammo.

Clearly English is not Sigma Team's native tongue, but I won't hold it against them. In games like these it's really hard to accept the story for why you're unloading buckets of lead into alien creatures, let alone how you got your hands on the weapons in the first place. For an arcade-style game, Alien Shooter is great - though the 10 missions in the campaign go by pretty quickly once you get accustomed to the basic "hit and run" strategy. Survival mode will keep this game on my computer for a long while indeed; much like some will load up Bejeweled or Alchemy to kill some time, I'll be trying to survive the endless waves of aliens.

After playing Alien Shooter for hours on end, it's hard not to notice how much actual detail went into the creation of the game's engine. The majority of the items in the game are movable or destructable, certain walls can be blown up to reveal secret areas and the explosive weapons have area/splash damage. If there was one thing I would change for an added touch of excitement, it would be the load times on the weapons. Both Crimsonland and After the End have magazine-style weapons, and once you run out of ammo there is a short delay while it reloads. This adds a lot of tension when you're being attacked from all sides. As long as you have a lot of ammo in Alien Shooter, you could basically stand in one part of the screen and completely unload on anything that approaches. Anyone who's interested in more Alien Shooter action after the first game can check out Sigma Team's two expansions, a bit ridiculously priced for what they're offerening (only 5 more levels each) and considering the cost of the original game.

Back to the realm of traditional shmups, Wings of Megaira is an entry in the 2005 Independent Games Festival student showcase. I read about it on this blog, a collection of Shockwave and Flash games that I could easily dedicate another post to (the port of the original Prince of Persia comes to mind). You'll need Direct X 9.0c to enjoy Megaira's commendable 3D graphics, and I'm not sure if it's just my computer, but there was no sound in the game. It would have added a much needed dimension to the experience, because visual feedback alone in such a fast paced game almost becomes irrelevant. Megaira uses two features to make this game interesting: you can absorb enemy weapons to use them on your own ship, as well as create a "Time Shift" that stops time and allows you to dodge tougher spread-fire attacks. You get a meter on the side of the screen similar to the Sands of Time that fills up when you kill enemies. As a complete game experience it still needs some refinement, but it was nice to see what the next generation of game developers are up to.

A fucking rock concert of an experience, Jets 'n Guns is another shoot 'em up that lives by its name. I wish all developers were this straightforward. Instead designers love to obfuscate the game's intentions by giving it a title like "Project: Snowblind" or "Splinter Cell". Why not just "Generic futuristic first person shooter" or "Stealthy espionage action-adventure that is suprisingly realistic for a multiplatform release"? Never mind. The game has style, too: the cartoonish, Crimson Skies-inspired aircraft and exaggerated environments are mixed with an incredibly catchy soundtrack by video game metalheads Machinae Supremacy. Like Alien Shooter, the whole point of the game is to complete missions while making money to upgrade your equipment; in this case, the parts on your jet. A great addition is the temperature monitoring of your weapons - the longer they are in use the hotter they get, eventually making them unusable. This deters players like myself that just lay on the fire button flying their ship all around the screen. Based on some recent reading, this game might even be available in arcades thanks to the FlexArcade PC-based cabinets.

There's something to be said about this simplistic approach to game design, because the end result is just as fun to play as the latest FPS or 3D platformer sporting a licensed engine. If you can look past the low-tech visuals, you'll find they share more in common with their big-budget counterparts than initially apparent. In fact, all this makes me think about what Andrew Phelps said about the game industry needing B-sides. Why not include these experimental, simplistic games as a side order to the main course? I mean Valve did this by releasing nuclear vision's Codename: Gordon over Steam. I think it would be entertaining to see developers have a little fun with their properties and create mini-games based on the main game. Better yet, give an independent developer a chance to show off by including their game as part of a larger package - this will increase their visibility or perhaps create a cult favorite, while adding value to the purchaser. There are way too many underground developers out there trying to save dying genres (adventure games are a classic example) while big publishers keep pushing out sequels or rehashes of proven formulas. For the industry to survive in the long term this symbiotic approach is almost necessary.

one finger parallel to the sky

warrior within

Prince of Persia: Warrior Within casts a blood-soaked shadow over its mostly kid-friendly original. Looking back on the Sands of Time, the theme was pretty dark, but combat was fairly sterile in its presentation. In the PC demo for Warrior Within, a more flexible combat system opens up some new ways in which you can gut, decapitate and otherwise eviscerate your enemies, complete with copious blood sprays and slow-motion for particularly violent kills.

Unfortunately the title screen has some kind of nu-metal band playing the main theme which doesn't even come close to the middle east meets west themes of the original. Stuart Chatwood is back on soundtrack duties, but I wasn't able to determine if vocals had simply been added to the title theme or if this is an entirely separate song. In any event, fans of The Sands of Time's soundtrack will be disappointed in the direction it has taken. I mean if we wanted cock rock, we would be playing Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit 2. The official site has some other examples of in-game music, complete with unnecessarily overwhelming guitars.

At first I was captivated by the new look for the Prince and the game world - it certainly looks more gritty - but I think they went a bit overboard with the character and monster design. The amount of straps, buckles, thong-wearing bosses and bondage costumes make me think that American McGee was advising the art director. Once you get past these cliches, the game looks incredible. I was impressed with the PC demo for The Sands of Time, but the environments in this game are a lot more detailed, if a bit more..er...brown.

The demo is set up so that you must complete certain attack sequences that open up new areas of the level, and gradually introduce you to wielding two weapons. Every monster's weapon is up for grabs, which is neat, and depending on what you're carrying your fighting style will change. While some felt that combat was the weakest part of Sands of Time, this new focus on fighting doesn't mean there isn't a shortage of wall leaping and puzzle solving. The Sands of Time are also back, and do not require a dagger to collect this time around. Whenever an enemy is killed, a cloud of sand is automatically absorbed into the Prince, fuelling your ability to rewind time as in the last game.

Against my better judgement I played through the whole demo, but not without some serious stomach churning along the way. If the demo can be considered an indicator, the camera will be the death of this game. Playing Sands of Time on the Gamecube was a very different experience from the PC, as one control stick was dedicated to rotating the camera at any point when the viewing angle became unwieldy. Even though you can choose controls to redirect the camera in Warrior Within, none of the positions "stick", and so you're stuck with whatever angle the game feels it should be giving you. Most often this is through a wall, or looking straight across over the action, which was completely useless in battle. Wrestling with the mouse to get a good angle for the jumping and wall running puzzles was an unfortunate excercise in frustration.

Technical problems aside, there are two things that trouble me about this game. The first is the November 30th release date. From what I played, Warrior Within is in no way fit for shipping. I'm not sure if UbiSoft is trying to make something of an anniversary release, but I wouldn't be the least bit upset if it was delayed until 2005 for some final polishing. Based on the demo, the experience just doesn't feel as complete or seamless as the original. The second is this god awful blog that was set up as some kind of forum for the corporate shills team behind the game. I'm going to hold out for the final product, as I'm sure most fans of its predecessor will, and for that reason the game will probably do well. I just don't expect it to garner the same accolades as one of last year's best games.

you can't cross the desert outside

tribes vengeance

In the past, demos were a pretty good indicator of what games would be like. You can thank id Software for that, because most often the demo would be the entire first mission of their games. I'm not saying that other developers (or publishers, for that matter) don't do the same, but recently it's been tough to gauge how good the final product will be when they take a mission out of context from the middle of the single player game, ask you to play through, and attempt to enjoy it. Far Cry easily comes to mind in this regard, while Thief: Deadly Shadows did an excellent job of convincing you why you should be buying the game. Multiplayer demos by their very nature are a little easier to create: the inclusion of a few maps and game types should keep the fans happy until release. My first exposure to Tribes: Vengeance was the multiplayer beta, which was fairly satisfying as a reimagining of Tribes gameplay. Having a single player campaign thrown in goes back to the game's roots, although at the time Starsiege seemed like more of a poor man's Mechwarrior.

I played the hell out of the final multiplayer demo, whereas the single player mission acted like more of a distraction. In a sad parody of the opening cutscene of Unreal Tournament 2003, the mission lets you to play as the leader of the Phoenix Tribe dropped into an arena to fight for his life. Because the mission was clearly taken from a point midway through the game, the preceding cutscene only served to confuse things.

The action overall is certainly fast-paced, but the small to medium sized maps and trigger-happy combat would be more suitable in Unreal Tournament or others of its ilk - hell, I could easily deal with having jetpacks in a deluxe version of Onslaught. But what this approach does is take out the large-scale team efforts that were probably my fondest memories of Tribes 2. There was something epic about the fields of battle in Tribes 2, a feeling that is unfortunately lost amongst the hustle of Vengeance. There were times where I was able to launch a coordinated assault for the enemy's flag, but most often it was simply bunch of sequential solo runs for the opposing team's base with a vehicle, which is the type of activity you would see on a BF1942 server. Even the spinfusor, the flagship member of the Tribes arsenal, feels a lot different and is a real bitch to aim properly. Granted, it does as much damage as a grenade launcher (including splash/area damage), but the rate of fire makes it a liability to wield.

The Unreal engine looks good, and Vengeance conveys the same types of bright colors and similarly detailed models as you would find in Unreal Tournament 2003. Attractive as this game is, players of Tribes 2 may find something missing. Vengeance almost feels stripped of the soul that made its forerunners so engaging. Some of the new included multiplayer modes like Fuel and Ball just seem uninspired, and if you really want to run across the field with a ball while being shot at, you should be playing Bombing Run.

All that being said, I found "Winterlake" to be the closest map that gave me that old school Tribes feeling. Seeing the enemy's fearsome dropship on the snow-peaked horizon making an approach for our base, I would often run to one of the stationary cannons and cut loose on the ship and its heavy-armoured escorts. I think many of my favorite moments while playing Vengenace was defending the base, simply because attacking felt so haphazard.

Because multiplayer feels like a Tribes skin on an existing game, I think the average player's reaction to Vengeance will boil down to the single player campaign. This is most unfortunate for a game that pretty much pioneered multiplayer combat on a massive scale. I guess it's only natural that something like this would happen - as we have seen in the past, multiplayer focused games will almost always short change on the single player. In the case of Tribes Vengeance, they just got it backwards.

three completes the five

why would Heaven need a hitman?

The Painkiller single-player demo quietly debuted last week, while most people were still recovering from UT2004. More accurately, I'd be willing to bet money on the fact that people probably didn't care enough to put the demo down, fearing that they might fall out of practice. I must admit playing Onslaught is not like the UT2003 I grew accustomed to. The battles seem to simmer with a kind of intensity, as if Unreal Tournament players were waiting for this mode of play since the original game's release.

But back to the matter at hand - the Painkiller demo. The ambient music at the menu screen made me feel like I was playing some variation of the Diablo-meets-Quake theme. Playing the introductory "Town" level made me forget for a second that there hadn't been any advancements in level design colour palettes in the past eight years. People Can Fly's PAIN engine is simply gorgeous, but the conventions of the genre become clear after about 3 minutes of playing. Using the Stake Gun versus the swarms of meat-flinging zombies was great for a while, I mean they really get impaled. There is visible recoil and if your target is near a wall they just kind of hang there until exploding to offer up their soul for collection. And those zombies sure know how to aim.

I was about ready to stop playing as I loaded the second level: "The Temple". Although consisting primarily of greys and uh...dark greys, some of the design elements are almost reminiscent of Act II in Diablo II or wouldn't be out of place in The Sands of Time. I can see what the developers were trying to do with this game, and I haven't decided if this is a spiritual successor of sorts to Quake or Doom. With the dark, satanic imagery and constant waves of monsters the designers want you to feel overwhelmed. But I just couldn't get into the game because I felt I had been there before. I can give Painkiller credit for inventing some interesting weapons: the default melee weapon "Pain" is a set of spinning blades you can cut through an angry undead mob with, and almost made me want to watch Krull. Almost.

The “boss” mission in the final level was a nice touch, and once again brought me back to fighting the Cyberdemon at the end of Doom. This time around the sense of scale is really there – this monster wields an enourmous fucking hammer. I watched him knock over pillars in his wake with little effort, while imagining new ways to bludgeon me with his massive weapon. Overall I can't say I was impressed, and I was kind of looking forward to this one. The lack of mid-level saves proved to be frustrating as well, and coupled with the overly familiar execution of a classic FPS theme, I fail to find a compelling reason to play this game.

I also tried out the demo of the first RPG from the developers of the Patrician series of RTS/Trading sims. Sacred is yet another Diablo clone, lodged firmly in the pigeonhole of "action RPG". It's a half decent imitation, but nowhere near being a replacement. The most unique feature being that you can ride a horse - if that's your thing - and attack enemies from horseback. There are a number of special abilities you can gain and combine to form your own "custom attacks", which is kind of a riff on the skill tree in Diablo II. The interface is simple enough; nobody is going to get lost. Combined with a decent engine this could be a good game for someone desparate enough for a PC RPG.

I'm of the belief that 2004 needs a solid PC RPG in this turbulent market, where consoles and PCs are constantly fighting for attention. I was expecting a lot from Sacred, but it just didn't come through for me, even as a clone of one of the greatest games of all time. If anything, this game got me to reinstall 2002's suprisingly excellent Divine Divinity, and got me looking forward to Dungeon Siege II (or even Beyond Divinity).

I picked up PC Gamer's annual awards issue, and as expected Knights of the Old Republic picked up top honors. You really know it was a bad year for PC gaming when a console port could achieve such a feat in a publication that has traditionally been such a stalwart supporter of PC games. I also caught some rumours about KotOR 2, the inevitable successor. Apparently Bioware has been in talks with Feargus Urquhart, formerly of Black Isle and currently the head of Obsidian Entertainment. He obviously brings a veritable banquet of experience to the table when it comes to developing a solid RPG, so if the rumour proves to be true, we can at least rest easy knowing that the series will be handled professionally. In the same issue, out of nowhere Gothic II gets RPG of the year. Usually PCG are content to let a game win its category and game of the year; I guess they think this game is deserving of the praise. I may have to put aside part of my current playlist to go back and check out this forgotten game of 2003.

As an awkward closer, I have to relay that I've seen Lost in Translation. I know now what everyone was talking about. Sofia Coppola has created a very thoughtful film, and not such a departure from The Virgin Suicides. Indeed, there were some laugh out loud moments, but there was always that underlying tone of melancholy and lonliness that left you really associating emotionally with the main characters. I suppose it will win some more awards on Sunday in the same ceremony that will praise Johnny Depp's performance in Pirates of the Caribbean while being hosted once again by the amazingly unfunny Billy Crystal.

when you got that spider bite on your hand

far cry

One of the games I had on my watch list for 2004 - Crytek's Far Cry - released their single-player demo last week. At a whopping 500 MB, it hardly seems worth it for another first person shooter. But I caught the torrent, installed and played it through. I should probably note up front that one of game's features, the so-called "farthest viewing distance in a First Person Shooter", I am inclined to agree with. You start off in a zodiac boat, and all around you are the typical environs of an island paradise. Complete with waving palm trees and pretty, glistening water effects.

Vehicular combat is very Halo-like, and you can quickly upgrade your zodiac to a gunboat and blast away at enemies on the coastline. The dune buggy you pick up in the jungle portion of the map controls like the cars in Enter the Matrix - absolute crap. The sound is truly an accomplishment, though; I found my teeth were chattering when I fired the pistol, never mind the automatic weapons. The AI is very cunning, and the ragdoll physics are more convincing than the exagerrated HAVOK Engine in games like UT2003 and Raven Shield. The many paths through the jungle towards your objective gives a pretty good impression of non-linearity, and it also allows you to avoid some unnecessary firefights. Unfortunately as I progressed through the map it quickly became a pixel-hunt – it seems the swarming AI went to marksmen school, and you're stuck with a wobbly aiming reticle. It doesn't exactly make for balanced combat. Did I mention the lack of mid-level saves? You have to hit prescribed auto-save checkpoints that aren't visible to the eye. Overall a good effort, and the toolset that comes with the game may catch the interest of some modders that will provide some additional multiplayer content.

I also downloaded the Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time PC demo, just to see what it looks like alongside my experiences with the Gamecube version. It's very hazy looking, possibly a side-effect of being a console port, but still remains as beautiful as when I saw it on the Gamecube. The camera seemed to be locked in at some points, making some of the obstacles difficult to navigate and aggravated further by default Mouse-keyboard controls. This is not the game's fault though, having had my hands on a Gamecube controller for my first experience with the game.

You remember The Bard's Tale, don't you? And how everything was controlled by the keyboard while the sum of your sensory inputs were a collection of stills and inanimations? The team behind Devil Whiskey has engaged the replicator and created an identical experience. Don't get me wrong, however - the recently released version 1.4 of the demo is a fine homage. I just can't see myself dedicating time to it when there are other RPGs worth investing in. If you're still following the official remake helmed by one of the original game's designers, you can check out some new screens. Can't say I'm impressed though; I'd sooner pick up the highly discounted Dark Alliance for my Gamecube.

Curiosity got the better of me and I tried Gunbound after reading about it on PA. Can someone please tell me what makes this game different from Worms? Other than the fact that you can buy your Avatar a jaunty cap with the points won in battle. The official site's manual is full of so much broken english, if you're brave enough to read through the whole thing you'd end up shooting yourself in the ass. And I think I'd rather not mention the player community, or frustrating lack thereof ("This guy is teh suk. He doesn't know how to shoot!!!1 lol lol lol").

On the bright side, we did manage to dig ourselves out yesterday.

I have a mandolin, I play it all night long

retro space shooters

I know a lot of old school gamers were feeling pretty nostalgic when they learned that Space Invaders would be returning to arcades in its original state. The cabinets are being manufactured and distributed by Namco at $2,772 US apiece, and they plan on selling 10,000 of these. A bit optimistic in my opinion, but it's still kind of cool to think that present-day gamers will have the chance to pay homage to a game that helped shape an industry.

We've come a long way since those green-on-black pixelicious graphics. But if you still crave some modern, low system requirement space shooter action, Moonpod Games has an excellent Asteroids clone called Starscape. I played that for a while earlier this year when the boys at PA were advertising them. It's not a bad time waster, but you have invest a lot of time before it actually becomes interesting to play. The initial missions are of the tedious debris-destroying variety, and are mainly intended to build up your resources so you can upgrade your ship. Once you get past those though it's a great throwback to the button-mashing space shooters of old.

Another company that's putting out the same kind of gaming is Kraisoft Entertainment. On this month's PCGamer CD they included a demo of the highly addictive Alien Sky. This is basically a mixture of Space Invaders and Galaga with some updated graphics, that manages to look exceptional at a meager 800x600. However if you must try one of their games, I highly recommend Astrobatics. I wasn't a fan of reverting back to keyboard bashing for Alien Sky, so controlling my ship using only the mouse in Astrobatics was most appreciated. This game takes its cues from Gradius, Nemesis, Lifeforce and R-Type - side-scrolling space shooter classics. If you don't want to deal with the hassle of shareware, but still want a nice looking Asteriods clone, the kind programmers at Kraisoft have made the extremely low-tech Trashkiller 2 a free download.

I keep meaning to mention that I saw Return of the King this weekend in this sudden profusion of posts. Although just a tad long, I enjoyed it immensely. It provided a fitting end to this absolutely magnificent series. I think Mr. Jackson needs to be commended for his utmost respect for the source material (despite his many subtle deviations). I'm currently writing a full review, so look for it sometime soon.

is it chemically derived?

demo: silent storm

At first glance, my reaction to Silent Storm was "Good lord. Another WWII-based game." And by the same guys that made Blitzkrieg, a WWII RTS game that ended up being pretty good, incidentally. Either Nival was feeling particularly unimaginative after their cult hit Etherlords, or they are on to something. I was extremely pleased by the demo for Silent Storm, so I'm leaning towards the latter.

The game sports a great looking 3D engine, and an easily maneuverable camera similar to Dungeon Siege and Neverwinter Nights. I found the graphics to be a bit taxing at some points, though, because I had to turn down the resolution a notch (1280x1024) to get a decent framerate. Hopefully these video optimization issues are worked out for the North American release. The tutorial is well laid out and teaches you the subtle nuances in game mechanics, which I highly recommend playing through before getting started on the included campaign levels. Players of Fallout, Jagged Alliance or even the largely overlooked Shadow Watch may find themselves battling through familiar territory here though; the turn based squad tactics are surprisingly complex.

Objects in the game such as walls and obstacles are destructible, allowing a new dimension of tactics to be revealed. Your characters can run, walk, strafe, crouch or crawl in the prone position, each taking different amounts of action points. The accuracy of the weapons seem realistic enough: you can shoot more with an MP40 or snap off multiple shots with a rifle, but if you can spare the action points you can aim carefully which will result in a higher chance of scoring a hit. Cover and elevation play an important role, as they should; you'll have more of a chance hitting a target far away if you are at an elevated position. This may not seem like anything groundbreaking, and it isn't. However the implementation of the combat mechanics is exceptional, and you barely have reason to think about the combat engine's flaws.

There are two separate campaigns in the full version of the game, Axis and Allies. You're given one mission from each in the demo, and they are both equally challenging and calculatingly paced. The continuous playing of Final Fantasy Tactics Advance has prepared me for this type of gameplay, but some may not like the slow pacing. However the deep customization of skills and ordinance loadouts for each character make this a game you must play slowly, for the rewards lie in heeding the finer points. For each demo mission you start off with a preselected squad, but the full version of the game boasts a selection of over 40 operatives of varying nationalities and classes (assault, demolitions, sniper, recon, etc.). The character models all looked great in-game; they seemed a bit cartoony but were still extremely detailed.

The game is only available in Europe currently, and is garnering a few encouraging reviews. We can expect it to hit stores in North America in late January; I plan on preordering over the holidays. It looks to be a solid turn-based strategy/RPG and as always the subject material makes the game that much more fun for me to play. An expansion for Silent Storm has already been slated for release next year, showing that Nival has high hopes for this series. As do I.

You can grab the demo here to partake in this high-quality gaming experience.

demo: XIII (single player)

I finally got around to playing a couple demos I have been meaning to try for a while: Silent Storm and XIII. I downloaded them last weekend but really only got to play in small, condensed doses during the week and managed to finish them off this weekend. I want to end on a positive note so I'll get to XIII first.

I hate to put out that type of negativity up front without actually getting to the game, but that's the way it has to be. Seeing the previews that were so cleverly put together and proudly displayed at this year's E3, I expected XIII to redesign the way we interpret the visuals of a first-person shooter. Everyone was quick to throw around terms like "cel shaded" and "comic book shooter", but really, what are words without action?

The visuals are unique enough, though a little too bright for the subject matter. You're supposed to be someone with a shady past who wakes up with no memory and at the heart of a sinister plot with people trying to kill you. It may be a highly stylized emulation of a comic book, but the sense of danger and atmosphere was not there. There is interesting usage of comic-style panel-in-picture to show off-screen or distant action, but it doesn't look that great. The small panels that pop up are blurry and kind of ugly, which most likely are a result of this being a console port. A think another design carryover from the console port were the outline boxes that appear to highlight important objects or enemies that come into view. This kind of handholding definitely detracts from the experience.

In XIII you can "see" sounds, such as the crash from a window breaking or the final gurgle from your latest kill. This came in particularly useful in the military base level where you have to sneak around, paying careful attention to the "tap tap tap" of guards walking nearby. However in this game sneaking around with hamfisted AI gets annoying pretty fast; the only way I could get past the mission was to snipe one of the guards with my crossbow and then blast my way through once the cover was blown. And even then it took multiple attempts - not being able to save mid-level proved to be quite the pain in the ass here.

One thing the game does well is the original soundtrack that was put together by San Fransisco music collective Future Primitive Sound. It's a catchy fusion of jazz, hip hop and 70s funk, adding to the game's arty feel. According to the latest issue of PC Gamer XIII's soundtrack is a hot commodity, seeing the same type of success as the soundtracks for the Grand Theft Auto games. You can check out some MP3 samples at the official site.

Besides the gimmicky trappings, there really isn't much about XIII that I like. Sure it's stylish but as that old bitch from the Wendy's commercial says, "Where's the beef?". There is nothing in this game's mechanics that can distinguish itself from another FPS. I might as well be playing Quake II. Of course the merits of this game are open to discussion; you can grab the demo here if you must determine them for yourself.

enter the epoch

I'd like to continue the train of thought that began with yesterday's post, especially making due reference to the demos I have acquired and played. My original assessment of Empires: Dawn of the Modern World may have been a bit hasty, as making offhanded comparisons to the magnificent Rise of Nations is probably unfair. Still, beyond the brief impressions of the game, it's hard to discern just what Stainless Steel Studios is trying to attempt, because their official site has little to no information to really base an opinion on.

From what I have read so far about the game, it's really unfair to judge the mechanics based on the two demos, since they actually take small pieces out of the three story-based campaigns available in single player mode. However there is also an Empire-building mode, which is the basis of multiplayer engagements. I am hoping that this is available in single-player as kind of a free-form experience akin to Rise of Nations, except only taking on the past 1,000 years of human history up to WWII. I wouldn't doubt that this style of play will be similar to Empire Earth even, which Stainless developed back in 2001. With a game like Rise of Nations still fresh in my mind, though, I really can't see a reason to pick up E:DotMW except for the story campaigns, which still don't seem much beyond the typical RTS fare.

I should have noted that upon the release of the War of the Ring demo, an announcement was made regarding EA's "top secret" RTS that was in development (consequently, it also made the cover of the latest PCG). The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth is to use a tweaked version of the C&C: Generals engine, and provide epic battles in the same vein as the unsung Total War series. As an aside, if you haven't played Medieval: Total War, you really are missing out on a fantastic RTS experience. I am leaning more towards this incarnation of LOTR-style RTS, as I found The War of the Ring to be uncannily similar to playing Warcraft III. I give Liquid credit for at least being able to duplicate that glorious game engine. Unless you're some sort of Hobbit completist there is really no reason to pick up WotR. I'm sure someone has already created a mod for WCIII.

While on the subject of LOTR licensed entertainment, I should also touch upon PCG's main cover story: The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. I'd firstly like to ask EA where the fuck the other two went for the PC. I mean we got this half-assed attempt at adapting Fellowship, then The Two Towers went direct to console. Something to do with property licensing, or shitty gameplay...anyway it doesn't matter, because the demo on the PCG CD quite frankly is a colossal waste of time. The camera system is absolute shit, and actually makes it harder when things shouldn't be. The action is a clickfest at best; I didn't care too much about Gandalf's fancy moves or that blue light trailing his staff. Sure, dispatching the endless waves of orcs and Uruk-Hai are great in theory, but when you get trapped on obstacles and receieve the killing blow from unseen foes it tends to leave you wanting to strangle the developers. Not to mention the lack of a mid level save or shitty low-res HUD display. This is yet another movie licenese port gone bad, and I could care less about the exclusive movie footage included in the game. I'll wait for my extended edition of The Two Towers.

but wait! there's more!

I do very much love the creators of PC Gamer, but I find myself questioning their review of Lionheart. Matthew Peckham gave it a 61%, and in the same sentence called it "polished and relatively bug-free". He did seem to have given it a thorough play through, but I still can't understand how much success he had with the game. It was not a finished product and I think a lot of Black Isle fans were burned on this one. Lionheart is coming close to being my biggest game disappointment of 2003.

Lastly, Half Life 2 has been delayed. Fuck, are we going to have to wait until 2004 for both of them now? I got hyped with the best of them over the new screens and gameplay descriptions for Doom III, but the guys over at PA seem to have enjoyed ripping into them. I dunno, is that the same as being iconoclastic? Or are we really putting too much faith in id software's ability to craft an involving story to use their new engine? Carmack says it himself: "A large part of the work is us just not looking stupid."