Further to my review of Shank over at Rules of the Game, I wanted to examine the fight with Cesar, the man responsible for the murder of Shank’s girlfriend and the last encounter of the game. It stuck in my mind as something particularly interesting about Shank, in the way this fight feigns openness for the player’s attack strategy to make it seem different from the rest of the game. It is set up to be the “true” culmination of the skills learned in Shank, as if the previous boss encounters were merely warmups. Even though this encounter is the only thing I found interesting about Shank, it’s not something that would have been very useful in the middle of a review.

I said in my review that the traditional boss fight is challenging in the way it represents the culmination of each set of encounters at the end of a given “chapter” or “level” of a game. The tactics for each boss fight should be no surprise, as they should collect the skills developed during the course of the game. However, the challenge of a boss fight is removed when “tactics” become prescriptive of player action: whether it is requiring a particular attack to be used, or a weapon or ability that was obtained during the course of the preceding level. In the interest of player accessibility, the prescriptive boss fight is the easiest to grasp without a full understanding of the combat system. This was the approach that Klei Entertainment took with most of their boss characters in Shank.

In Shank’s fight with Cesar, there are two main differences from other boss encounters that should be evident to the observant player. Firstly, it is a fair fight. While he is a little bit taller, the size and appearance of Cesar is consistent with Shank and the goon characters that have already been faced. He is equipped with a sword, two pistols, and a knife. Secondly, it is not immediately apparent that a special activity must be performed as in the other boss encounters. That is, in the fight with Cesar the player is never explicity told to perform a one-button act to deal damage once the boss character is stunned by regular hits.

The fight is set up very similar to the one with Cassandra in the second level; however, she is much easier to defeat with persistence and repetitive attacks within a shorter period, when compared with Cesar’s overall toughness.

The use of weapons and melee attacks do not behave as they do in the regular encounters of Shank; against Cesar they are not nearly as effective. However, this can be accepted in the context of Cesar being the final boss and less susceptible to basic attacks. In the way most games increase difficulty by making enemies tougher, Cesar is simply given characteristics to absorb more damage.

Instead of an instruction, Shank gives some non-specific advice for the fight with Cesar: “Wait for an opening, and then counter-attack.” This strategy is always available to the player, though it is rare that it must actually be applied during the course of the game. Instead of reinforcing the combat philosophy – which should be typical for any self-respecting beat ‘em up – the amount of player skill is largely the result of finding ways to bypass it completely. As a result, this sudden encouragement to use the combat system may come as a surprise for some players that have had no reason to explore it until this point.

The player is then forced to come up with a strategy that may have worked in the typical encounter, but now this strategy is met with much deadlier resistance. This will result in the player becoming frustrated with the lack of feedback that had previously been so liberally granted. Since the player was able to get away with the typical buttonmashing strategy, those unfamiliar with the other aspects of combat (blocking, dodging and grappling) may not necessarily have the skills to figure out this fight for themselves.

This will result in two approaches, assuming the player doesn’t give up:

1. Chip away at him: the slow and steady approach where damage is done by the weapons, just not at the rate that the player may want.
2. Find an exploit.

Chipping away is the safest option, as it is controllable and the most predictable. There are three phases to the battle with Cesar, based on amount of damage inflicted. At the start of each phase, the player is presented with two health potions. As long as the player can survive through each phase, they are guaranteed a power-up and should (theoretically) emerge victorious without their health reaching zero.

However, chipping away at a boss can be tedious. This is despite the fact that the solution will eventually work given enough time and endurance with a rudimentary attack combination such as dodge, shank, jump away, dodge, shank, jump away, etc. None of the weapons prove to be more effective than the others with this approach, however. A katana/shank combination that was devastating in the game only provides a moderate increase in damage to the standard shank combo, and therefore isn’t worth the trade-off in losing speed from a heavy attack. The grapple move cannot be performed arbitrarily, which is consistent in the game for all enemies bigger than Shank. The disembowel move with the katana, which proved to be extremely useful against large enemies in the rest of the game, will only cause Shank to be locked into one of Cesar’s counter-moves after dealing only a moderate amount of damage. The chainsaw takes too long to recover from, and all of the guns may as well be doing nothing. The quick fire rate of the dual pistols allows the player to keep a safe distance, but they take the risk of Cesar returning fire, and his pistols do more damage. Attempting this first strategy reminded me of my time with Lucifer at the end of Dante’s Inferno¹. It wasn’t pleasant, and I did not learn anything except patience, perseverance, and the true strength of my thumb muscles (something I’ve learned many times before, but in much more palatable video game experiences).

“Wait for an opening, and then counter-attack.”

The player is thus forced to find a weakness, and exploit it.

In Shank, a “counter” move is available when Shank is in close quarters with an enemy, and the left trigger icon appears on screen. If Shank is in close quarters with Cesar, this same icon will pop up. And as long as the player hits LT in time, they can counter him and do a little more damage than with a normal attack.

However, this counter-attack isn’t enough to deal substantial damage. The player must then fall back to chipping away at Cesar until receiving the opportunity to counter again. The timing must be perfect, and by moving in close the player runs the risk of some of Cesar’s highly damaging combo moves that they have no way of blocking. The player is stuck in a loop that may require several attempts to be able to beat Cesar.

The player then starts to optimize: If I am going to get close, how do I maximize my return on applied damage?

If the player experiments – or visits online forums, if they are impatient – they will learn that the best way to beat Cesar is to grapple him. But this isn’t possible! The player complains. You can’t grapple characters larger than Shank! And this would be true, if the developers were following the rules they have set. But as evidenced by the previous boss encounters, the rules of the game in the levels leading up to these encounters don’t necessarily apply.

The grapple can only be performed without the katana armed, because the right trigger is used for the special heavy attack for the katana. All other heavy weapons can be equipped, but the chains are particularly effective. The way to perform this move is actually very similar to the “double-team” throwing move in the co-operative campaign. Once the player is able to move in for the counter-attack, they must quickly hit “RT” to grapple after the counter. Shank will pick up Cesar and perform a pile driver, taking almost a quarter of his health bar. After the player performs a few of these attacks the battle is won.

Once the counter-grapple is learned, it is incredibly easy to perform. The only skill required is the ability to time the counter and grapple button presses, not use Shank’s arsenal of weapons in attack combinations. The weapons are available for this, of course – they just aren’t as effective. And all things considered, next to useless.

Cesar doesn’t change up his fighting style except for a “gutting move” with his sword, which is similar to what Shank does with the katana. This new move appears during the second phase of the fight. The attack can be easily avoided, as there is a red blinking “tell” like every other boss and large character encountered in the preceding game.

The lack of dynamics for this fight based on Shank‘s combat system makes it predictable, and as long as the player can minimize damage taken to set up this counter-grapple move, they will win. And there are plenty of health potions to correct any missteps, when the return on risking close-quarters damage is suddenly increased.

The battle with Cesar is not as open as the initial setup impresses on the player. The counter-grapple is the skeleton key for this fight, and Cesar can be bested quite quickly using this method. This is compared to a more substantial investment of time spent optimizing a “chip away” strategy. Keeping this technique hidden from the player may give the illusion of openness, but as anyone experienced with video games knows the player will use any means necessary to maximize their success in the least amount of time used for trial and error. Ultimately the battle with Cesar is no different than the other boss fights in the way it uses one move to deal the most damage, and although a disappointing finale it fits in well with the rest of Shank.

Shank is overconfidence in a borrowed design that is only partially understood. It is a one-button brawler that adds depth in the most unnecessary of areas for a video game of this genre: story. In all favorable reviews, comparisons list off the beat ‘em ups that came before it – whether it’s the gun and swordplay of Devil May Cry or the rudimentary street fighting of Streets of Rage – as if Shank belongs in their company. And perhaps it was inspired by these titles, but inspiration is very different from execution.

Read the rest over at Rules of the Game.

I took advantage of the Boxing Day shopping frenzy over the weekend and picked up an XBox 360 Pro Holiday Bundle at a discount that was hard to ignore. This is a purchase I had been deeply considering since my life-altering experience with Gears of War 2‘s Horde mode. My familiarity with the console was mostly limited to some time with it shortly after launch, so I’ve been relatively out of touch with what has been released for the console since then. I was also a bit disappointed at the lack of hardware upgrades: the Elite is still hoarding the 120 GB hard drive, and there is still no Wi-Fi out of the box even after three years. Though I guess I should be thankful that the power supply hasn’t burst into flame yet.

Since getting back into gaming this past summer, I’ve tried to keep myself aware of the titles capturing the most buzz on all of the next generation consoles. Over the past few days I familiarized myself with the new XBox dashboard and downloaded a grab-bag of demos: the critically acclaimed and a few others that I was interested in. I’m still looking for a good RPG other than the obvious selections of Mass Effect, Fable 2, or Fallout 3. Feel free to add any other recommendations in the comments; this is my second leap into the console world since the Gamecube in 2003.

Braid (demo)

I went to this game immediately. Not only was it the most talked about title on XBox LIVE Arcade for 2008, it was the most talked about game, period. Fiery debates raged between those that thought it was overwrought twaddle and those that believed it would change your life. Skeptical as always, I went in expecting twaddle.

After being available for four months and topping many year-end lists, Braid carries with it the burden of enormous expectations. This isn’t usually how I like to approach a game, but I just couldn’t wait to try it for myself to have some snide comments for my own year-end wrap up to fuel the continuing debate. But after completing the meager demo levels, my initial reaction was a feeling of emptiness. That’s it? Super Mario Bros. meets Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time?

The loosely strung together story, which amounts to a bunch of text that can optionally be read at the beginning of each level, is a collection of the most purple prose I have ever read in a game. If this is the reason reviews like Dan Whitehead’s famous wank-session at Eurogamer are produced, I want no part of the future of games criticism.

When the Barney look-alike says “I’m sorry, but the Princess is in another castle”, the reference might have actually been funny if Braid wasn’t so busy taking itself too seriously. And I don’t want to hear another drone telling me I’m “missing the point entirely” or “don’t get it”. The point of any game is to be entertaining, and if a player must peel back the disguises of obscure cultural references behind some interchangable protagonist’s life story to “get it”, I think the game’s designers are the ones missing the point (the atomic bomb? Seriously?). The in-game art is exceptional, but the game itself is not art. It is a platformer.

Dead Rising (demo)

Dead Rising is one of the games I regretted missing in 2006. It certainly feels like a Resident Evil game in the way it over-dramatizes the laughable storyline, but it does away with things like atmosphere and contrived suspense in favour of what people really want to do in a Resident Evil game: kill lots and lots of zombies.

The slow moving zombies practically allow themselves to be destroyed with all manner of weapons provided by the game’s environment. This is a definite change of pace from the chaotic action of Left 4 Dead as the massive, undulating crowds are rarely overwhelming. Weapons are also breakable, and this provides a bit of tension when that bat you were swinging has suddenly turned to splinters in your hands.

Based on what I was able to play in the demo, the action in Dead Rising seems pretty superficial, but I’ve read that there’s a lot more to do in the game than just kill zombies. I’m trying to track down a copy of the full version so I can make a better assessment.

Mirror’s Edge (demo)

If I could get every minute back spent reading self-appointed game criticism pundits fiddling with this game…Oh, forget it. The aesthetic of Mirror’s Edge is breathtakingly original, and I have to give DICE credit for creating something that isn’t another war-themed first-person shooter. These sterile environments are host to what is essentially an expansive jumping puzzle in a first person shooter. Except I can’t see my feet. It’s been a thorn in the side of any first person shooter player (even for Metroid Prime!) So why are these complaints absent from every review? Easy. They are too busy praising its originality.

I don’t care about the trend of “parkour” or “freerunning” or whatever the hell they are calling it now, but I will certainly give DICE their due for attempting such a game. But let’s be totally honest here: if you’re going to focus on jumping, let the player see their environment from a reasonable perspective. You know, like Brad Borne did with Mirror’s Edge 2D. Hopefully this is being created for XBox Live Arcade, because I will be getting it. As it stands, for washed out parkour fun I’d rather be playing Assassin’s Creed.

Castle Crashers (demo)

This shameless throwback to medieval beat ‘em ups like Golden Axe is a fucking revelation, brought to you by the creators of Alien Hominid. The visual comedy and overt references to its influences are hilarious to behold. After playing this game it becomes perfectly clear why XBox LIVE Arcade succeeds on the backs of these no-frills action games. I will be getting the full version.

Castlevania: Symphony of the Night

Since its release on XBox LIVE Arcade last year, there have been a lot of people waxing poetic about its greatness in the pantheon of 2D platformers. But does anyone really know why this game is a 2D classic, and one of the best games of all time? Or do game reviewers and journalists just keep citing it because they know that’s what they’re supposed to say? (I also see this a lot with Gunstar Heroes – note to Microsoft, toss this one on XBL Arcade, too!).

The game is a curiosity for the Playstation generation, bravely released in an era that advanced 3D graphics for non-computer users. It is also difficult in an old-school platformer kind of way, from the days where it actually took patience and skill to run through a sequence instead of relying on auto-saves or save points that pop up like weeds all over a level. It was a refreshingly original take on the Castlevania universe by not giving you a whip, but arming you with other weapons, allowing the use of armour and providing a set of unique spells. It was before the series got unnecessarily complicated with 3D iterations and the convoluted magic systems of the portable series. This was the last great Castlevania, and for a while, the last great 2D platformer. I’m going to have to a write a full god damned review, aren’t I?

Though it is labelled as HD I probably could have played this on my PC with a decent emulator, as the sprites and animations feel like they were just bumped up to 1080i. Otherwise, the game plays like I remember it.

Kung Fu Panda

The first of the bundled titles that came with the console. Incredibly, this is a licensed game that doesn’t make me want to jump out of a window. Kung Fu Panda smartly focuses on straightforward action, fluid controls, and (thankfully) professional voice acting including Jack Black himself. It integrates well with the storyline of the movie, without veering too far off to make it seem that missions were thrown in to make the whole thing a game. My daughter also enjoys the cartoon violence and sound effects. This might actually be worth finishing.

Lego Indiana Jones: The Original Adventures

The second of the bundled titles that came with the console. This is the first I’ve played of the Lego series of games that seem to be all the rage lately. Its cute factor is frequently nauseating, but it is fun to play. I can’t see myself spending too much time with it, though. Well, except when the little one asks for it by name (Indiana Jones bricks?)

Ninja Gaiden II (demo)

After playing the family-friendly Kung Fu Panda for close to two hours while my daughter watched in excitement, this was a welcome bloodbath. Atrocious cutscenes and polished spandex abound in the sequel to one of the original XBox’s premier titles, a game I always wanted to play for myself. The new Ninja Gaiden may be set in the same universe as Tecmo’s Dead or Alive, but do we really have to continue to watch Ryu hopping around in plastic pants through carefully constructed environments almost entirely devoid of character and substance? Is that really the best Team Ninja can do with the 360?

However, pushing graphical boundaries is not what this game is about. The combat is fast and merciless and aggressive. The mutated ninja sent to kill Ryu have no tactics, except to close in and repeatedly cut him with swords and beat with fists and throw shuriken.

With only the first level included in the demo, it’s tough to make a call on the difficulty. It’s challenging, but not impossible. It also doesn’t lend itself well to button mashing as some might have us believe. It’s no Assassin’s Creed, but the combat requires a bit of timing and proper use of blocking techniques. There is a new regenerative health system that rewards the calculated assault. There is also Ninja Magic.

There is so much blood in this game, I actually wondered if I was getting sensitive to the violence. But then I realized that the people who I was cutting up were actually coming back for more without any arms, or hopping on one leg, to finish the job. It was both ridiculous and satisfying to put the sad bastards out of their misery. I miss Shinobi, and for twenty minutes this game filled that void. I want to play more.

Devil May Cry 4 (demo)

This list is getting long, so I’ll mix it up with a Haiku to express my feelings for Devil May Cry 4.

Fancy pants wields sword
and glowing devil gauntlet
wind sighs through white hair

Wow, even writing that poem makes me want to go back and slice off bulging mutant limbs in Ninja Gaiden II.

Fracture (demo)

Maybe I’ve been too much into Gears of War lately, but Fracture seems like such a poseur in the latest deluge of third person shooters set in an embattled future.The big problem with this game is wasted potential. The ability to harness the earth itself to create cover and move through obstacles seems like a great concept gone to shit in the designers’ efforts to capitalize on the angry, futuristic shooter market. I don’t care that there’s a civil war – make a game that is fun to play!

The controls are passable, but the combat is not nearly as satisfying as Gears. And the earth shaping dynamic seems limited to certain areas of each level, which makes it completely useless as player advantage. If I can only use the ability when the game tells me to, what’s the point of introducing it in the first place? Also, game reviewers: please stop using the word “romp” when reviewing this type of game. It undermines their grittiness.

Gears of War 2

Now that I’m over how great the controls are and how enjoyable this series is to play, I can pay attention to the reasons why I’m supposed to be killing things. I had no idea it would be so disappointing. The story is a crippled mess of wartime cliché and forced emotion, and the dialogue seems less snappy and immediate this time around. Maybe it was bad in Gears of War and I just didn’t notice.

There are many notable additions to the game’s combat dynamic, and they only serve to further substantiate a solid formula. It is action all the time; it is shameless bravado; it is endlessly appealing. The Gears of War games are slowly becoming some of the greatest I have ever played. It continues to amaze me.

I hate commercials, but I have to give American Express credit for tapping into the trendiest internet meme at the moment. The mashup mixes real life action and a piece of video game history, creating a pretty surreal display. The commercial is also mixing two different sports. However, the “Roddick vs. Pong” game that adds an extended “interactive” element to the commercial is probably the biggest accomplishment, because they could have left it at the commercial itself. Instead, they understand that structuring a passive advertisement around a video game is easily transferrable to the form that inspired it, while lengthening the exposure of their brand.

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.

I have to admit they did a great job of darkening things up, and this is a game that actually needed it. As much as I could make excuses for the rudimentary scenery based on the preposterous story, Alien Shooter still looked like a cartoon. Everything was bright and colourful, which is a nice change, but there was no contrast to the levels. If the game was dark at any point, it was because the lights were off and you had to go find a power switch. The setting and scenery in Alien Shooter 2 are painted with the all-too-familiar Aliens brush, but there’s really no other way to do a game of this type. The aliens have been completely redesigned and are a lot more detailed, with a few new ones making their debut.

The game’s arsenal has been increased significantly; the new selection of tools to fend off this new invasion is quite impressive. Probably the best modification to the weapon loadout is the five slot limit. Similar to some FPS, the slots represent classes of weapons: light, machine, heavy and special classes. The farther you got in the original game, the more weapons were available and the threat of running out of ammunition became less apparent. This new system requires the player to prioritize. The addition of an inventory in Alien Shooter 2 allows you to carry weapons to switch out among the available slots as necessary.

This is where things get a little strange. I said inventory, because that’s exactly what it is. Think Diablo, or any action RPG where you spend as much time in the inventory screen making stuff fit than you do in the actual game. But it doesn’t stop there. You get experience points for completing misison objectives and killing aliens. When you gain a level you can upgrade a series of six physical skills (such as improved health, accuracy, strength), or spend points in weapon specializations. At the beginning of the game you can customize your character’s appearance. The money you find strewn about the missions have become the gold coins of any other RPG.

It’s quite obvious that Alien Shooter 2 has been enhanced in every possible way. But instead of trying to figure out if these are good additions, the important question to ask is whether these additions were even necessary in the first place.

Drawing a comparison with the FPS, is it reasonable to expect anything more than a visual upgrade between WorldWarIIShooter 2.0 and 3.0? Squad AI and scripted setpieces aside, do we want to focus on the details of our avatar in the game world, or do we want to keep shooting? Alien Shooter and its sequel pride themselves on overwhelming the player at every possible opportunity. In fact, Alien Shooter 2 often explodes walls or opens holes in the ground behind you so that you’re constantly surrounded. But these aren’t the same as monster closets; at least the isometric view lets you see them coming.

In an arcade shooter, you’re either starting the game or on your way to beating it. Adding these RPG elements into the equation forces an investment of thought into your avatar on screen, and in a game where the only purpose is to survive the onslaught of enemies it seems like an unncessary distraction. Like Shadowgrounds, Alien Shooter 2 tries to be bigger than the genre affords, when there is no need to complicate matters.

This was eight minutes. And unlike last time, I’m not sure I want to play much more than that.

In summary, GameWorks wants to position itself in the same realm as Dave and Buster’s or Sega’s own Playdium chain: providing alcohol and food in an arcade-like setting to lure in adults, while providing a “safe, clean atmosphere” that would be just as comfortable for kids. In other words, an arcade that is less about the games, and more about the social interaction between patrons. You wouldn’t go to one of these places to play games – you’d go to eat or watch a football game or drink some beers, and then maybe play a few games. Manny elaborates:

The Arena Sports Bar & Grill has so much synergy between the gaming and the action and the environment that’s created on the arcade side – taking that to a bar and grill environment where you’ve still got that energy and excitement – there’s so much synergy between those two.

But wait, there’s more synergy:

There is that synergy between the game floor and back-and-forth in a social environment where you’re not sitting at home in front of a screen with two friends playing a game. Now you can compete, be the star, really shine, but you can also be there watching the latest and greatest on the flat-screens that we have which works really well on the gaming side.

At this point it’s clear that Manny is looking to pitch the company line, and not address the fundamental problem behind the current model for arcades. I don’t see how being able to hit my opponent in the back of the head in the comfort of my living room differs from hitting him in the back of the head at GameWorks with a menu.

Gamasutra poses the question: “What kind of people do you think visit arcades now?” The answer:

It’s probably much more diverse than what people would think from the outside, and I think once people experience it and can experience either a personal experience or an event experience at any of the locations that are more glorified than just the standard arcade. I think that they can see themselves in that experience…We’ve created a great “team-building” program in corporate America now, where you can actually go and be with your boss to talk about your sales goals and initiatives for the year, and planning for the quarter – all of those things. Then you can go out on teams and compete against each other and it really brings the team together.

So Corporate America loves arcades? He’s losing me. Just what is GameWorks supposed to be, anyway?

We understand that we’re not trying to be all to everyone, but what we are is as the generation grows, you and I grew up where we could go to the convenience stores and play Pac-Man and Asteroids. Then later we started getting into other games and we understand gaming…I’ll still go in with my ten-year old girl and my seven-year old girl and my wife and I’ll play the games. I’ll also wander over and have a beer and check out the score of the college football games. That’s a nice environment for me.

Yes, it does sounds like a nice environment for the majority of the U.S. – but what about gamers? Providing a casual setting like this is great to attract people that want to get together with friends and family, but I don’t see how this is preserving video game culture.

And now Manny addresses the rise of networked gaming, both on consoles and PC:

I think what we’re starting to see is more and more of that integration, and taking that and putting it in a social environment and setting. Most people are not going to be able to sit at home and play on their flat-screen with great-surround sound in a leather chair and be playing [the] latest and greatest console gaming.

Actually, yes they are. And they will choose to do that because it’s free. Let’s consider this for a second – and I know in the article they mention House of the Dead 4 – but what was the last exclusive must-play arcade game? My sister plays Dance Dance Revolution on her XBox, complete with floormat. It just doesn’t make financial sense anymore to put an exclusive in the arcade and expect people to play it for $4 a round, when they can achieve the same experience at home.

The title of this interview was frustrating, because I actually thought for a second that someone had taken the lead to bring back what made arcades such a fun experience. But the sales pitch was so prevalent in this interview, and used not-so-tactfully to obfuscate the real questions of where they are taking this concept. I realize now that the arcade as we knew it is gone forever. It has been replaced by multiplayer gaming both on the console and PC.

Though most disturbingly, the trend of adding a “sports bar” dilutes the culture that established this activity in the first place. Once again I am reminded of the people who shoved video gamers into lockers when I was in high school. Now, they’re playing with us in some bid to preserve their youth. It’s simply another stage in the commercialization of gamer culture – and GameWorks’ plan sounds incredibly insincere.

Now it’s time for the long answer.

Accessibility is important for anything to be popular, and therefore profitable. That’s why games have been on a downward spiral since the Playstation (mass generalization of course). Developers and publishers trying to capitalize on proven designs, sequels, and generally lowbrow gameplay have been steadily growing the games industry for the last 10 years. And yet a game like New Super Mario Bros. comes along as a fitting reminder of what got me into games, and why accessibility really is important – but also that it does not mean it results in a game of lesser quality.

A game like this could have easily found its way onto the Gameboy Advance. There are still games being released for the platform, after all, and aside from the multiplayer minigames that were repeated from Super Mario 64 DS, New Super Mario Bros. doesn’t go out of its way to use the DS’s features. But it was important to release New Super Mario Bros. on the DS because it will sell units. This is a game that is immediately recognizable to anyone who’s even touched a video game console. It will lure in the people that have long been considering the DS as a distraction. This game was made for them.

At first inspection the game reminds me of what Donkey Kong Country did for 2D platforming, but the rendered sprites on subtle 3D backgrounds of New Super Mario Bros. gives the series a more rejuvenated look. In fact, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if this approach to 3D backgrounds is what we can expect in the upcoming Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin. Having this adventure in two dimensions was as important as making it a Mario adventure. Asking a player to struggle with a camera while trying to jump on things that aren’t visible are grounds for any beginner to put the game down permanently. The difficulty in this case hinges on the available technology – not the game itself. As a result the player feels stupid. Not for lack of skill, but because they have allowed themselves to be led along by a camera system that gives the impression that it operates separately from the action on screen. The 2D plane is more managable.

There are some new additions to the Mario canon – but nothing especially world-changing. New power-ups include Mega Mario, which lets you destroy everything in your path – though it doesn’t do much good in lava levels where you often break the bricks you’re supposed to be running across. Mini Mario fits into smaller places and has a longer lasting “floating” jump. Shell Mario can be as powerful as Invincibility in levels where there are a lot of ramps and slides. You can ground pound and wall jump, opening up some avenues that in the past would have only been accessible through a well-kicked shell. Though there isn’t any flying in the New Super Mario Bros. – triple jumping is the closest you’ll get. With this game’s focus on finding secrets and harder to reach Star Coins, it’s an unfortunate shortfall in the game’s design.

And so New Super Mario Bros. feels conventional. But that sounds too negative. I’d settle for “classic”. Every experienced gamer has seen these worlds before, just maybe not as vibrantly colored. The core set of power-ups and their behaviors are the same. There are the basic concepts for the player to master: jump, dodge and don’t fall off the screen. And yet they are still challenging in the way that a shoot ‘em up is challenging: the way it forces you to learn through repetition and pattern recognition. The frustrations return. Timing is everything: no matter how much you scream at the screen for losing Super Mario right after you got it because you swear that Koopa wasn’t walking there before, the game is never to blame. Player skill is back at the forefront of gaming, where it belongs.

This isn’t a game that has health meters or multiple weapons or combo attacks. It gives you a single serving enhancement, and when you lose Fireball Mario or Super Mario, it really feels like you’ve lost something. There are levels when everything depends on having fireballs to clear off floating platforms. One slip of the d-pad and you’ve lost it, and then there’s the feeling of hopelessness – there is no point in continuing forward. But you can and do and triumphantly raise your fist upon jumping on the flag at the level’s exit. That is the reward for playing Super Mario Bros. Not experience points or shiny new weapons. To say that you’ve actually beaten the game.

Though the prospect of beating the game isn’t as hard as it sounds – it practically throws 1Ups at you at every turn. The game is based around an overhead map, similar to that seen in Super Mario Bros. 3 and Super Mario World. There are a total of 8 worlds, but you really only have to play through five of them to finish the game. That’s because at the end of each World there are alternate exits from the Boss castle. There are also alternate pathways through each world, which can be accessed by opening them up with Star coins on the world map, or finding the secret exit to one of the levels. This does a fine job of adding replayability to the game, because of the apparent lack of difficulty that shortens its overall length.

There’s nothing new about New Super Mario Bros. It’s actually a game that feels very, very old. Yet if it was any other game, I’m sure this would be one of its biggest criticisms. But nostalgia plays a large part in the reviews that this observation is strangely absent from. Aside from the game’s length, the only real complaint that I have is the lack of flight – it makes the worlds of New Super Mario Bros. seem a little smaller, and almost a step backwards from what we’ve already seen as being possible. It’s a tough feeling to describe, but when you’re running across the bottom of the screen, and all of a sudden you’re not running – you’re flying beyond what you thought were the limits of the game world and shedding the constraints of having to find a higher block to leap to. It feels like you’ve reached some uncharted territory where you’re not supposed to be, but it was put there for you, for a reason – to explore. And yet somehow New Super Mario Bros. limits its exploration to things you see on the screen, whether it’s small pipes or obvious gaps in walls. But this game wasn’t made with me in mind, because I’ve done it all before. To the average person, this game will pose a challenge, and there will be enough new material to explore and for it to seem fresh and exciting. And that’s why it works. Because when I stop thinking about the past and enjoy the game for what it is, the details don’t matter. I just try to make it through with Fireball Mario.

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.