End of 2010 eh? What a year. A fair bit happened but then it's blurred like so much of the past has. I'll focus on what I liked about this year and what I didn;t.
Music of 2010
I spent a fair bit of the year finding out about music from previous years that I should've known about earlier. I picked up probably fewer recent releases but still managed to stumble across a couple of gooduns'. Namely;
Deftones - Diamond Eyes
Such a solid album all over, awesome pacing, awesome flow. Was totally taken by surprise with this. Really keen to see them next year live (if I can) because these songs have the potential to go explosive live.
My Disco - Little Joy
Being from Melbourne I'd heard the trendster undervibe about this band a fair few years ago. I really got into Language of Numbers which was an angular art-rock piece. It was really interesting, but the band seemed so withdrawn (probably not a fair assessment) almost that it was hard to access anything else they had done.
Stumbling through my local JB uncovered this new work. "Holy shit is this a new album by the My Disco?!" I had heard nothing about it but was shocked enough to buy it on the spot.
While it is different from previous releases in being more minimalistic and pared back than anything I've heard by them before, it's still markedly them and a real joy to listen to.
Arcade Fire - The Suburbs
I get a lot of crap from my 'hard as nails' mates who don't listen to anything without a chug or a wail about liking this band. this album repaid my faith and mental scarring tenfold. What a ripper. Going along the same path but spreading out the range and pace so that as an album, it might not be as tight but the subsequent exploration is definitely worth sitting through.
Other albums worth noting but which I will not espouse upon greatly;
Dillinger Escape Plan - Option Paralysis
Miles Away - Endless Roads
Coheed & Cambria - Year of the Black Rainbow
I Exist - I: A Turn for the Worse
The Sword - Warp Riders
Kanye West - My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy
Fuck, I'm sure I listened to more music, but trying to place it within the space-time restraint of a year is pretty hard when you've had half a case in a morning. So I'll have to append this with epiphanies of awesome music if need be.
And onto the albums that made my need to listen to list;
There's a few albums from 2010 that I've ordered, got on my to order list, or just been plain neglectful of.
Deerhunter - Halcyon Digest
The National - High Violet
Drake - Thank Me Later
Titus Andronicus - The Monitor
Kvelertak - Kvelertak
Film
Not really talking about to be honest. I have drastically reduced the number of times I've been to the cinema. I guess i'm losing interest? I will say that I loved Inception. I guess some might say I'm just some impressionistic wannabe brainheaded whatever but fuck me if I didn't find it interesting, DiCaprio's performance awesome and the effects worthy of the budget. Felt like it's fundamental's were more interesting than anything barfed up that I saw this year.
I'll add gaming in at another time because really, I'm inebriated as hell and this is most definitely the one that requires the most thought for me to express upon clearly.
Friday, December 31, 2010
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Pre Christmas Blues and 'Goaties'
It has been a fair while since I bothered adding to this thing. I've not been particularly busy, just not of a mind to write anything.
I jumped on the WoW bandwagon, I don't think it'll last, still no story, even the launch of Cataclysm has a greater reverberation in the internets than anything I truly perceive as worth a squeak or squeal at all. But maybe I haven't been one to see the changes within WoW, the shaping it has endured directly from external sources. It has taken elements from other MMOs to increase it's success but this isn't something to maligned or derided, it simply is. It's almost like watching the evolution of a creature that mimics it's predators to then predate upon them in a more efficient method of it's own hunting style. Or something...
But in doing so I feel that it has become pretty good at most things but not great a any. Well maybe apart from Dungeons, which are a blast. But I hate it's PvP. This is enough to know in and of itself, it's not something that they could tweak to get me on board, it is simply flawed in it's concept not to mention it's execution.
Along with WoW, I've been playing a bit (read 100+ hours) of Bad Company 2. After going through the start of the year with this gem (which anointed my new computer as a gaming beast) I tried my hand at other vices. Starcraft, Medal of Honor and so on. But I've come back because I realise that it is truly worth time invested, as long as you aren't on a crappy Public server with no clue on what the Q button does. (Here's a tip; IT SPOTS ENEMIES!)
The Christmas sales are on and inevitably my Pile of Shame will increase. I've already added Metro2033 to it thanks to Steam and also GTA4 + Liberty City Stories for very cheap thanks to an EB Pre Christmas sale.
But there is nothing upcoming in the next month that I'm really hanging for so hopefully these coming weeks will be a chance to go over the stuff that eluded my sight during the year.
Talking about the year I'm going to talk about the games that I felt were best this year. I'm not going to numerate them, trying to cheapen one, or laud one especially. Each of these games were great, great enough to play repeatedly and get them right now, for bullion if needed. And that is all you need to know.
Mass Effect 2
Red Dead Redemption
Limbo
Battlefield: Bad Company 2
These are the games that I felt I had the most fun with, found the most interesting and did the most for gaming in general (what a crap nebulous statement).
Anyhoo, back to Laguna Presa!
I jumped on the WoW bandwagon, I don't think it'll last, still no story, even the launch of Cataclysm has a greater reverberation in the internets than anything I truly perceive as worth a squeak or squeal at all. But maybe I haven't been one to see the changes within WoW, the shaping it has endured directly from external sources. It has taken elements from other MMOs to increase it's success but this isn't something to maligned or derided, it simply is. It's almost like watching the evolution of a creature that mimics it's predators to then predate upon them in a more efficient method of it's own hunting style. Or something...
But in doing so I feel that it has become pretty good at most things but not great a any. Well maybe apart from Dungeons, which are a blast. But I hate it's PvP. This is enough to know in and of itself, it's not something that they could tweak to get me on board, it is simply flawed in it's concept not to mention it's execution.
Along with WoW, I've been playing a bit (read 100+ hours) of Bad Company 2. After going through the start of the year with this gem (which anointed my new computer as a gaming beast) I tried my hand at other vices. Starcraft, Medal of Honor and so on. But I've come back because I realise that it is truly worth time invested, as long as you aren't on a crappy Public server with no clue on what the Q button does. (Here's a tip; IT SPOTS ENEMIES!)
The Christmas sales are on and inevitably my Pile of Shame will increase. I've already added Metro2033 to it thanks to Steam and also GTA4 + Liberty City Stories for very cheap thanks to an EB Pre Christmas sale.
But there is nothing upcoming in the next month that I'm really hanging for so hopefully these coming weeks will be a chance to go over the stuff that eluded my sight during the year.
Talking about the year I'm going to talk about the games that I felt were best this year. I'm not going to numerate them, trying to cheapen one, or laud one especially. Each of these games were great, great enough to play repeatedly and get them right now, for bullion if needed. And that is all you need to know.
Mass Effect 2
Red Dead Redemption
Limbo
Battlefield: Bad Company 2
These are the games that I felt I had the most fun with, found the most interesting and did the most for gaming in general (what a crap nebulous statement).
Anyhoo, back to Laguna Presa!
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Upcoming Twitch Releases
There are two games vying for the title of Twitch Game of 2010 at the moment. Call of Duty: Black Ops is a Cold War era title by Treyarch which looks to take the systems of Modern Warfare 2 and expand upon it greatly. Medal of Honor is a reboot of an old series and is set to be a romp through Afghanistan. The Multiplayer is being done by DICE who are the old hands behind the Battlefield franchise.
I've pretty torn as to which one I'll purchase because I don't have the time, nor the money to play both.
Looking at Black Ops first;
The strong points of Modern Warfare 2 were the customisability you could employ in making your classes. I had a heap of fun unlocking weapons and skins and completing challenges. Added a real action-RPG feel to some of the underlying gameplay. Black Ops seems to evolve this system slightly by not putting you on a step ladder of unlocks, but allowing you to choose what you unlock by putting an XP value on most (if not all) unlocks. Seems like a really great idea.
The terrible IWNet system from MW2 has seemingly been partially scrapped in favour of controlled dedicated servers hopefully addressing a lot of the issues I had with MW2. The addition of zombie mode should be great as well.
But here are the things that don't sit easy with me.
The gameplay of MW2 lent itself to running and gunning, jump proning all over the place wielding dual shotguns. It didn't sit right in my belly and ultimately, fighting through the lag and such didn't seem worth it because I wasn't really enjoying it after a couple of months.
I do not have high expectations for the single player either as it is being done by Treyarch and none of the games Treyarch have made, I've not really enjoyed as much as those done by Infinity Ward.
Now onto Medal of Honor;
Putting aside Civilization 5 in quick order has left me some time to try out the new Medal of Honor Beta. I've put in 5 hours now and to be honest I'm surprised by the level of diatribe being slung its way by the online community.
The graphics are good, but then they are probably on par with Bad Company 2. The sounds are great, nice deep rolling sounds, great effects. There is a real visceral feel to the environments and the combat. Choppers fly over head, radio chatter adds a nice atmosphere and it feels great overall.
My problems lie with weapon balance and accuracy. Many a time has a carbine out aimed a sniper across a large distance. I've been both on the giving and receiving end of this and I think weapon spread needs to be dramatically increased at both hip firing and long burst firing while only tweaked slightly for short bursts of the main class weapons.
I hope that the options for each class and for the customisation of your character is increased. Dramatically.
Server lag and stability has not really been an issue for me, and assumingly that was the point of the Beta, to test system and network functionality.
All in all I'm enjoying the Beta, can see that it needs improvements but trusts in DICE to deliver them.
The single player videos are interesting and seem to carry the visceral feel that is captured well in the multiplayer Beta.
So to decide;
Black Ops multi seems like an upgrade of the current MW2 system. For me, I don't think better server support and more customising options are going to make up for the fact that this will be a run and gun spam-fest. For some people that's ok, and power to them. I think that it seems to be more style over substance than anything. And I think that a single player campaign may have taken a back seat to improving multi.
Medal of Honor on the other hand, seems different enough than Bad Company or Modern Warfare. It is quicker paced than Bad Company 2 but none of the games I've been a part of have turned into uber spam fests.
So ultimately....I still don't know for sure but I'm leaning toward Medal of Honor. The factor that might push me over the line is that Black Ops is the bastard spawn of Activision whom I have no love for. EA aren't a heap better but I know DICE are so bullshit brand loyalty might come through on this one.
I've pretty torn as to which one I'll purchase because I don't have the time, nor the money to play both.
Looking at Black Ops first;
The strong points of Modern Warfare 2 were the customisability you could employ in making your classes. I had a heap of fun unlocking weapons and skins and completing challenges. Added a real action-RPG feel to some of the underlying gameplay. Black Ops seems to evolve this system slightly by not putting you on a step ladder of unlocks, but allowing you to choose what you unlock by putting an XP value on most (if not all) unlocks. Seems like a really great idea.
The terrible IWNet system from MW2 has seemingly been partially scrapped in favour of controlled dedicated servers hopefully addressing a lot of the issues I had with MW2. The addition of zombie mode should be great as well.
But here are the things that don't sit easy with me.
The gameplay of MW2 lent itself to running and gunning, jump proning all over the place wielding dual shotguns. It didn't sit right in my belly and ultimately, fighting through the lag and such didn't seem worth it because I wasn't really enjoying it after a couple of months.
I do not have high expectations for the single player either as it is being done by Treyarch and none of the games Treyarch have made, I've not really enjoyed as much as those done by Infinity Ward.
Now onto Medal of Honor;
Putting aside Civilization 5 in quick order has left me some time to try out the new Medal of Honor Beta. I've put in 5 hours now and to be honest I'm surprised by the level of diatribe being slung its way by the online community.
The graphics are good, but then they are probably on par with Bad Company 2. The sounds are great, nice deep rolling sounds, great effects. There is a real visceral feel to the environments and the combat. Choppers fly over head, radio chatter adds a nice atmosphere and it feels great overall.
My problems lie with weapon balance and accuracy. Many a time has a carbine out aimed a sniper across a large distance. I've been both on the giving and receiving end of this and I think weapon spread needs to be dramatically increased at both hip firing and long burst firing while only tweaked slightly for short bursts of the main class weapons.
I hope that the options for each class and for the customisation of your character is increased. Dramatically.
Server lag and stability has not really been an issue for me, and assumingly that was the point of the Beta, to test system and network functionality.
All in all I'm enjoying the Beta, can see that it needs improvements but trusts in DICE to deliver them.
The single player videos are interesting and seem to carry the visceral feel that is captured well in the multiplayer Beta.
So to decide;
Black Ops multi seems like an upgrade of the current MW2 system. For me, I don't think better server support and more customising options are going to make up for the fact that this will be a run and gun spam-fest. For some people that's ok, and power to them. I think that it seems to be more style over substance than anything. And I think that a single player campaign may have taken a back seat to improving multi.
Medal of Honor on the other hand, seems different enough than Bad Company or Modern Warfare. It is quicker paced than Bad Company 2 but none of the games I've been a part of have turned into uber spam fests.
So ultimately....I still don't know for sure but I'm leaning toward Medal of Honor. The factor that might push me over the line is that Black Ops is the bastard spawn of Activision whom I have no love for. EA aren't a heap better but I know DICE are so bullshit brand loyalty might come through on this one.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Barbarians at the Gates; The Fall of Civilization?
The past week has been a fevered one, where my mood has followed an astronomical parabola. All because of Civilization V (5) being released and played until my computer, and mind become a withered husk.
I haven't played Civ 4 for a while. I put hundreds of hours into it, but I'm not a hardcore 'Civver' and eventually something shinier distracted me. But for me Civ has always been a well polished game with maybe a few tweaks needed. Yet always a plethora of options are available to succeed and there has been a flexibility within it's systems that allows you to shift your paradigm without too much hassle.
I dove into a session of Civ 5. Absorbed and delighted in the changes made to the foundation game. Hexes, great. One unit per tile. Awesome. Animations and graphics. Superb. But after a few hours I felt unsatiated, that the feast in front of me was made of paper, or clay, or some other item of undeliciousness. It was a strange feeling. It was like being invited to a heaven where I'd have 100 virgins, but all of them had herpes.
So I tried again. And again. Aaaand again (about 30 hours worth of again). Each time it has felt somewhat hollow and overall, unpolished. I even made a list of the things that really irked me but I'll focus on what I see as most important here;
Multiplayer implementation is terrible. For a series famous for 'tacking on' multiplayer, this iteration seems to be held together by old chewing gum and older prayers. No saving in game, lag to the hilt and animations turned off by default and unable to be tweaked. Not to mention lack of matchmaking or hotseat options. Needs severe reworking
Information and choices were meant to have been streamlined but seem to have been omitted in some cases and severely pared back in others. Why does another Civ not like me? No way to know. Why does this tile cost 70gp to buy and the one right next to it 250? No way to know.
Limitataion of choice. I like the idea behind the civics tree but it ends up being an immutable upgrade tree. The beauty of past games was being able to switch your focus onto a certain field where you may be lacking. Want to wage war? Tailor your civics to suit that period of the game. The options available are great but not allowing people to change them (hell make it cost culture!) removes a lot of the depth that the system could bring.
Overall focus on military aspects. I feel that every game I get into I'm being shoehorned into becoming a military superpower, it feels less like a Civilization Sim game and more like a Turn based Wargame. The mechanics of combat are great, but the AI is way too stupid to use the more tactical combat over previous iterations where it could stack 10-15 units and take you on because tactics were minimal, stack and rush isn't hard for the AI.
Diplomacy is terrible, once again bad AI shines through. There is no transparency to the relationships between Civilizations. I want to know if Montezuma hates Nobunaga so I can get them to go to war. As it stands I've got to go to every other civ and just ask them, might make them angry at me if I do but hell I wouldn't even know if it does because of the lack of information. Also, being unable to access key information (such as relative military strengths, technologies etc.) when someone asks to declare war or go into a defensive pact is annoying as hell.
Finally, the lack of options and information at start up. Things like allowing the razing of City States and Capitals would be a welcome option. Knowing just how changing the age of the earth in relation to map generation and so on.
Overall I feel this game was not sufficiently tested. It feels like a lot of good ideas and a few bad ones patched together without thinking how the game as a whole would work. I'm pretty disappointed overall with this game and it requires a heap of patching to get it up to speed.
If there has ever been a case of style over substance this is it. 6/10
I haven't played Civ 4 for a while. I put hundreds of hours into it, but I'm not a hardcore 'Civver' and eventually something shinier distracted me. But for me Civ has always been a well polished game with maybe a few tweaks needed. Yet always a plethora of options are available to succeed and there has been a flexibility within it's systems that allows you to shift your paradigm without too much hassle.
I dove into a session of Civ 5. Absorbed and delighted in the changes made to the foundation game. Hexes, great. One unit per tile. Awesome. Animations and graphics. Superb. But after a few hours I felt unsatiated, that the feast in front of me was made of paper, or clay, or some other item of undeliciousness. It was a strange feeling. It was like being invited to a heaven where I'd have 100 virgins, but all of them had herpes.
So I tried again. And again. Aaaand again (about 30 hours worth of again). Each time it has felt somewhat hollow and overall, unpolished. I even made a list of the things that really irked me but I'll focus on what I see as most important here;
Multiplayer implementation is terrible. For a series famous for 'tacking on' multiplayer, this iteration seems to be held together by old chewing gum and older prayers. No saving in game, lag to the hilt and animations turned off by default and unable to be tweaked. Not to mention lack of matchmaking or hotseat options. Needs severe reworking
Information and choices were meant to have been streamlined but seem to have been omitted in some cases and severely pared back in others. Why does another Civ not like me? No way to know. Why does this tile cost 70gp to buy and the one right next to it 250? No way to know.
Limitataion of choice. I like the idea behind the civics tree but it ends up being an immutable upgrade tree. The beauty of past games was being able to switch your focus onto a certain field where you may be lacking. Want to wage war? Tailor your civics to suit that period of the game. The options available are great but not allowing people to change them (hell make it cost culture!) removes a lot of the depth that the system could bring.
Overall focus on military aspects. I feel that every game I get into I'm being shoehorned into becoming a military superpower, it feels less like a Civilization Sim game and more like a Turn based Wargame. The mechanics of combat are great, but the AI is way too stupid to use the more tactical combat over previous iterations where it could stack 10-15 units and take you on because tactics were minimal, stack and rush isn't hard for the AI.
Diplomacy is terrible, once again bad AI shines through. There is no transparency to the relationships between Civilizations. I want to know if Montezuma hates Nobunaga so I can get them to go to war. As it stands I've got to go to every other civ and just ask them, might make them angry at me if I do but hell I wouldn't even know if it does because of the lack of information. Also, being unable to access key information (such as relative military strengths, technologies etc.) when someone asks to declare war or go into a defensive pact is annoying as hell.
Finally, the lack of options and information at start up. Things like allowing the razing of City States and Capitals would be a welcome option. Knowing just how changing the age of the earth in relation to map generation and so on.
Overall I feel this game was not sufficiently tested. It feels like a lot of good ideas and a few bad ones patched together without thinking how the game as a whole would work. I'm pretty disappointed overall with this game and it requires a heap of patching to get it up to speed.
If there has ever been a case of style over substance this is it. 6/10
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Post Reconstruction
I have spent the last couple of weeks putting myself into a framework of readiness for the avalanche of titles that are to be released in the immediate future. Indeed I'm somewhere along this path and have had little time to stop and recollect because something new has demanded my attention.
The games that I have so far lay my devotions at, like some twisted shrine to sleeplessness and responsibility avoidance, have invoked respect and both disappointment in nearly equal measure and I'm going to spend a bit of time on why;
So going from the freshest experience to the not so most recent.
Halo: Reach
There is so much hype around Halo it's sometimes hard to not be sucked into it. In fact being sucked in and surrounded by it all is something that can be enjoyed in and of itself outside of the actual game. I've talked about my feelings on the Halo universe before and they remain consistent here. My hope for Reach was that, as working in a team of Spartans, there would be an opportunity for Bungie to explore the characters in a setting that could make you really connect to them. Halo: ODST I felt was bettered by it's quirky narrative and it's noir detective style than it ever was in it's shallow attempt at exploring the character relationships.
Reach tries in some parts to make you relate to the characters, but ultimately it feels forced with only one part with Jorge, the heavy weapons guy, really connecting with me. What really irks me is when 'professional' reviewers pass this off as being ok for a Halo title, what a crock.
I also felt that this was a chance for some really epic scenes in the game. And in the cut scenes in delivers, these are the best cinematics in the Halo series. No overwrought emotive pap, no wannabe space opera. I just wish that the epic cinematics translated into some of the gameplay. I felt that some of the bits that could have been truly innovative for a Halo game, space combat, MAC Turret point and shoot; they all felt tacked on.
I feel that I've more than griped about the (minor) negatives, onto the positives.
The Gameplay is solid, it's a marginal evolution and improvement on the gaming styles of previous Halo games. Armour abilities I feel need tweaking but work much better than pickups.
The Elites are a great adversary, moving about with aggression and being pretty hard to take down singly let alone in packs. The placement of enemies and the pacing of combat remains fantastic. The pacing of the campaign in general is really good, never do you feel like you've hit a wall or a dead patch and there is only one instance of tunnel crawling in the whole game (which Halo has never really done well).
Multiplayer is as strong as the gameplay, Invasion is a nice tweak but Firefight is a great addition. The choice to allow people to kick after one teamkill (accidental or not) needs to be reversed, simple as that.
Forge is also a great addition with a strong suite of tools and options with a pretty good learning curve. Bungie have also continued with implementing tools that allows as many people as possible to feel like they are participating in the Halo community which is a great plus to their effort.
The one thing I was most impressed with however, was the redesigned sound. Plasma weapons come across as violent and not lifted off a kids Saturday morning cartoon. I felt it was one of the greatest improvements over the previous Halo games.
Overall the depth of the gameplay and the multiplayer options available makes up for the shortcomings in true innovation within the campaign and the (lack of a) story and missed opportunities. Still over rated as hell, but worth the ride.
8.5/10
The games that I have so far lay my devotions at, like some twisted shrine to sleeplessness and responsibility avoidance, have invoked respect and both disappointment in nearly equal measure and I'm going to spend a bit of time on why;
So going from the freshest experience to the not so most recent.
Halo: Reach
There is so much hype around Halo it's sometimes hard to not be sucked into it. In fact being sucked in and surrounded by it all is something that can be enjoyed in and of itself outside of the actual game. I've talked about my feelings on the Halo universe before and they remain consistent here. My hope for Reach was that, as working in a team of Spartans, there would be an opportunity for Bungie to explore the characters in a setting that could make you really connect to them. Halo: ODST I felt was bettered by it's quirky narrative and it's noir detective style than it ever was in it's shallow attempt at exploring the character relationships.
Reach tries in some parts to make you relate to the characters, but ultimately it feels forced with only one part with Jorge, the heavy weapons guy, really connecting with me. What really irks me is when 'professional' reviewers pass this off as being ok for a Halo title, what a crock.
I also felt that this was a chance for some really epic scenes in the game. And in the cut scenes in delivers, these are the best cinematics in the Halo series. No overwrought emotive pap, no wannabe space opera. I just wish that the epic cinematics translated into some of the gameplay. I felt that some of the bits that could have been truly innovative for a Halo game, space combat, MAC Turret point and shoot; they all felt tacked on.
I feel that I've more than griped about the (minor) negatives, onto the positives.
The Gameplay is solid, it's a marginal evolution and improvement on the gaming styles of previous Halo games. Armour abilities I feel need tweaking but work much better than pickups.
The Elites are a great adversary, moving about with aggression and being pretty hard to take down singly let alone in packs. The placement of enemies and the pacing of combat remains fantastic. The pacing of the campaign in general is really good, never do you feel like you've hit a wall or a dead patch and there is only one instance of tunnel crawling in the whole game (which Halo has never really done well).
Multiplayer is as strong as the gameplay, Invasion is a nice tweak but Firefight is a great addition. The choice to allow people to kick after one teamkill (accidental or not) needs to be reversed, simple as that.
Forge is also a great addition with a strong suite of tools and options with a pretty good learning curve. Bungie have also continued with implementing tools that allows as many people as possible to feel like they are participating in the Halo community which is a great plus to their effort.
The one thing I was most impressed with however, was the redesigned sound. Plasma weapons come across as violent and not lifted off a kids Saturday morning cartoon. I felt it was one of the greatest improvements over the previous Halo games.
Overall the depth of the gameplay and the multiplayer options available makes up for the shortcomings in true innovation within the campaign and the (lack of a) story and missed opportunities. Still over rated as hell, but worth the ride.
8.5/10
Sunday, August 1, 2010
Starcraft 2 Impressions
I was having mixed feelings about Starcraft 2 up until about a month away from launch. It had been 12 years since the first title and the focus and direction Blizzard has taken in the intervening decade in regards to matters external to their game development left me somewhat hesitant as to the final form that Starcraft 2 would take and it's ability to mindfuck me as surely as the first.
I really need not worry so much. The two parts of Wings of Liberty are finely crafted and polished to a golden pearl. I'd be comparing it's qualities to a blood diamond if I thought it was entirely appropriate. The single player uses a similar foundation to that of multiplayer but employs it in a range of fantastic scenarios that never feel derivative despite the aged mechanics the game employs so masterfully. The narrative arc of the game is not as high reaching as the gameplay it supports but is interesting enough to keep you playing through the missions.
The use of the Hyperion as an in between mission stop off is a great addition with the ability to research and purchase upgrades, hire mercenaries and talk to the other characters adding a bit more meat to the campaign.
The Multiplayer is the true behemoth of Starcraft though. A complex piece of competitive gaming that will be hard pushed off it's mantle as choice e-game. It's not hard to see why after a dozen or so games. Enjoyable, rewarding skill in micromanagement but still able to cater the casual gamer I'm looking for this to be my next staple game for a while coming.
If you like RTS games on any level this one is a must have, the definitive RTS that is heavily skill based, one of the games of the year.
I really need not worry so much. The two parts of Wings of Liberty are finely crafted and polished to a golden pearl. I'd be comparing it's qualities to a blood diamond if I thought it was entirely appropriate. The single player uses a similar foundation to that of multiplayer but employs it in a range of fantastic scenarios that never feel derivative despite the aged mechanics the game employs so masterfully. The narrative arc of the game is not as high reaching as the gameplay it supports but is interesting enough to keep you playing through the missions.
The use of the Hyperion as an in between mission stop off is a great addition with the ability to research and purchase upgrades, hire mercenaries and talk to the other characters adding a bit more meat to the campaign.
The Multiplayer is the true behemoth of Starcraft though. A complex piece of competitive gaming that will be hard pushed off it's mantle as choice e-game. It's not hard to see why after a dozen or so games. Enjoyable, rewarding skill in micromanagement but still able to cater the casual gamer I'm looking for this to be my next staple game for a while coming.
If you like RTS games on any level this one is a must have, the definitive RTS that is heavily skill based, one of the games of the year.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
A Love to Hate or Simply Squeamish? - Halo
Bit of a delay between posts as my Grandfather passed away and I travelled interstate to attend the funeral, I've had plenty of time to allow things to broil about in my head and there is a particular franchise I've been trying to wrestle with in my mind.
I've had an uneasy relationship with the Halo series. I try and love it for it's gameplay qualities and great design but then the things that I like to think as integral to my enjoyment of a game; namely things like story, characterisation and so on, rear their heads and bring it crashing back down from a lofty height.
Why is this? Why do I have such a hard time swallowing the whole, shiny package that Bungie offer up to hordes of delirious gamers? What other straight up action FPS games even offer a skerick of what Halo offers?
It's taken a bit of brain churning to really find the things that snare in my brain-net and spoil the heady broth that is Halo. I'm not at all saying that Halo as a series, or as individual games, are particularly bad. In fact, they've been pretty crucial to the developing strength of console FPSs in general. But then it also highlights the trends with the casualisation and mainstreaming of the gaming scene which as a collective sit kinds of uncomfortably in my stomach. Like a beautifully braised duck without all the fat trimmed.
My main problem with the series as a whole is it's attempt at hard sci-fi that comes off as cliche riddled and much more like a comic book ripoff to a bunch of sci-fi staples rather than any kind of true homage.
It also borrows pretty heavily from Aliens, I noticed that in some parts but the link belows shows in greater detail just how much of an influencing factor it actually was.
http://blog.ascendantjustice.com/old-familiar-feeling-aliens-part-one/
The relationship between the three factions (and the Forerunner)of the Halo Universe is probably the greatest thing about the overall Arc, but the flood themselves? Yuck. ODST felt like a better game for not having them zombifying the place up.
But when I look at the dynamic between the races in Halo compared to the dynamic of cultures and races in say, Mass Effect, Halo gets blown away like a paper mache parade in a hurricane.
Despite all this I am really looking forward to Halo:Reach. Not particularly for the story or anything like that, but for the gameplay and multiplayer.
I've had an uneasy relationship with the Halo series. I try and love it for it's gameplay qualities and great design but then the things that I like to think as integral to my enjoyment of a game; namely things like story, characterisation and so on, rear their heads and bring it crashing back down from a lofty height.
Why is this? Why do I have such a hard time swallowing the whole, shiny package that Bungie offer up to hordes of delirious gamers? What other straight up action FPS games even offer a skerick of what Halo offers?
It's taken a bit of brain churning to really find the things that snare in my brain-net and spoil the heady broth that is Halo. I'm not at all saying that Halo as a series, or as individual games, are particularly bad. In fact, they've been pretty crucial to the developing strength of console FPSs in general. But then it also highlights the trends with the casualisation and mainstreaming of the gaming scene which as a collective sit kinds of uncomfortably in my stomach. Like a beautifully braised duck without all the fat trimmed.
My main problem with the series as a whole is it's attempt at hard sci-fi that comes off as cliche riddled and much more like a comic book ripoff to a bunch of sci-fi staples rather than any kind of true homage.
It also borrows pretty heavily from Aliens, I noticed that in some parts but the link belows shows in greater detail just how much of an influencing factor it actually was.
http://blog.ascendantjustice.com/old-familiar-feeling-aliens-part-one/
The relationship between the three factions (and the Forerunner)of the Halo Universe is probably the greatest thing about the overall Arc, but the flood themselves? Yuck. ODST felt like a better game for not having them zombifying the place up.
But when I look at the dynamic between the races in Halo compared to the dynamic of cultures and races in say, Mass Effect, Halo gets blown away like a paper mache parade in a hurricane.
Despite all this I am really looking forward to Halo:Reach. Not particularly for the story or anything like that, but for the gameplay and multiplayer.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Call to Conference
So the AFL has called for the public to give their ideas in regards to a possible review of the way the football year is carried out. From the pre-season, to the season proper, to the finals.
The idea I have put forth is as follows;
Go with 3 cofnerences of 6 teams. Three of the teams (9 all told) will be seeded according to where they finished the year before. The remaining 9 teams will be placed by the AFL with consideration to travelling and other factors such as arranging for blockbuster matches.
They would be arranged as follows;
Conference A: Teams who finished 1st, 4th, 7th and 3 more teams chosen by the AFL.
Conference B: Teams who finished 2nd, 5th, 8th and 3 more teams chosen by the AFL.
Conference C: Teams who finished 3rd, 6th, 9th and 3 more teams chosen by the AFL.
Each team would play each team within it's own conference twice as well as each team outside of it's own conference once. This totals to 2 games per season.
At the end of the season proper; the 1st and 2nd team of each conference are automatically granted entry into the finals series but also play each other for title of Conference Champions and a better position in the finals series.
The 3rd placed teams among the conferences along with the best performing 4th placed team across the conferences would then play off for the remaining two positions in the finals.
The top 6 teams in the finals would be seeded from the results of the Championship matches the previous week, while the 7th and 8th places in the finals series would be sorted by the results of the playoffs.
The finals then would be played out as per usual.
I can appreciate the flaws of this system but hope that they would be mitigated by the fact that it'd be an exciting arrangement for the entirety of the year.
Anyway, hope it all makes sense and I'm eagerly anticipating the AFLs next move.
The idea I have put forth is as follows;
Go with 3 cofnerences of 6 teams. Three of the teams (9 all told) will be seeded according to where they finished the year before. The remaining 9 teams will be placed by the AFL with consideration to travelling and other factors such as arranging for blockbuster matches.
They would be arranged as follows;
Conference A: Teams who finished 1st, 4th, 7th and 3 more teams chosen by the AFL.
Conference B: Teams who finished 2nd, 5th, 8th and 3 more teams chosen by the AFL.
Conference C: Teams who finished 3rd, 6th, 9th and 3 more teams chosen by the AFL.
Each team would play each team within it's own conference twice as well as each team outside of it's own conference once. This totals to 2 games per season.
At the end of the season proper; the 1st and 2nd team of each conference are automatically granted entry into the finals series but also play each other for title of Conference Champions and a better position in the finals series.
The 3rd placed teams among the conferences along with the best performing 4th placed team across the conferences would then play off for the remaining two positions in the finals.
The top 6 teams in the finals would be seeded from the results of the Championship matches the previous week, while the 7th and 8th places in the finals series would be sorted by the results of the playoffs.
The finals then would be played out as per usual.
I can appreciate the flaws of this system but hope that they would be mitigated by the fact that it'd be an exciting arrangement for the entirety of the year.
Anyway, hope it all makes sense and I'm eagerly anticipating the AFLs next move.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
The Lament - A White Crosses Review
I'm going to attempt to write an album review. My last attempt was way back when The Bronx released their first self titled album. It was horrible! About that same time though, Against Me! released 'As The Eternal Cowboy' an album that I would now consider in my 10 ten, if forced to consider such things.
I have no qualms with what direction AM! have taken career wise. I tried to be outraged when they went from Fat Wreck Chords to Squire but found it's a baseless and unloyal claim that someone shouldn't try to make money, and increase their distribution base, from their music.
The last release by the Gainesville sing-along merchants, 'New Wave', was a clean pick up, put down collection of pumping radio friendly punk rock tunes. Not a bad album but not one I'd say was doing anything great either. The most interesting song on that album though, for me, was 'The Ocean'. It featured an interesting line of lyrics and an extended 'Turn Those Hands...' vibe that I hoped heralded the future of the band as a more alt-punk, considered band seeing as they have matured away from the vitriolic stylings of the past.
White Crosses and New Wave are not totally dissimilar. But what we have with White Crosses is a leaning toward the Green Day style arena-rock. Usually I retract painfully from this kind of music which is as pandering as it is accessible. But I know AM! are a cut above, especially lyrically. Tom Gabel has continued to write some very good songs with a more deliberate approach to catchiness instead of a blistered 2 minute assault, but we now have more singalongs and, I feel less relevance. Maybe they got sick of the politics, I don't know, but for me Against Me! was all about the outrage and now I guess, continuing on from New Wave, they're just more introspective and ironic. I can't begrudge someone for that but I think it has left the band a bit hollow sounding.
The title track isn't a bad opener but I feel 'I Was A Teenage Anarchist' carries the vibe of the album a bit better. The musicianship is still tight and blustery. The prevalence of piano within tracks is a bit distracting but works on the whole to carry that arena rock vibe. My favourite track on this album is the closer 'Bamboo Bones' which, to be sure is arena rock, but really captures the boisterious feel they were shooting at with the chorus "What God doesn't give to you, you've got to go and get for yourself".
If you like the new Green Day, or that similar arena-rock vibe, then you'll love this. If, like me, you love your punk raw and uncompromised, you might feel this to be a bit lacking.
I have no qualms with what direction AM! have taken career wise. I tried to be outraged when they went from Fat Wreck Chords to Squire but found it's a baseless and unloyal claim that someone shouldn't try to make money, and increase their distribution base, from their music.
The last release by the Gainesville sing-along merchants, 'New Wave', was a clean pick up, put down collection of pumping radio friendly punk rock tunes. Not a bad album but not one I'd say was doing anything great either. The most interesting song on that album though, for me, was 'The Ocean'. It featured an interesting line of lyrics and an extended 'Turn Those Hands...' vibe that I hoped heralded the future of the band as a more alt-punk, considered band seeing as they have matured away from the vitriolic stylings of the past.
White Crosses and New Wave are not totally dissimilar. But what we have with White Crosses is a leaning toward the Green Day style arena-rock. Usually I retract painfully from this kind of music which is as pandering as it is accessible. But I know AM! are a cut above, especially lyrically. Tom Gabel has continued to write some very good songs with a more deliberate approach to catchiness instead of a blistered 2 minute assault, but we now have more singalongs and, I feel less relevance. Maybe they got sick of the politics, I don't know, but for me Against Me! was all about the outrage and now I guess, continuing on from New Wave, they're just more introspective and ironic. I can't begrudge someone for that but I think it has left the band a bit hollow sounding.
The title track isn't a bad opener but I feel 'I Was A Teenage Anarchist' carries the vibe of the album a bit better. The musicianship is still tight and blustery. The prevalence of piano within tracks is a bit distracting but works on the whole to carry that arena rock vibe. My favourite track on this album is the closer 'Bamboo Bones' which, to be sure is arena rock, but really captures the boisterious feel they were shooting at with the chorus "What God doesn't give to you, you've got to go and get for yourself".
If you like the new Green Day, or that similar arena-rock vibe, then you'll love this. If, like me, you love your punk raw and uncompromised, you might feel this to be a bit lacking.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Sundown for Marsten
The end of Red Dead is a special thing. It completes the arc of John Marsten with a typical western elegance that most films set in the period would struggle to attain.
Yet it also opens up the world to post-story exploring in a way that changed my perspective of the game world.
The first thing I did after the ending was kill me some lawmen.
I don't know if the ending truly opens the way for a sequel but I'd be happy if they didn't go down that path.
Alas, gaming today lends itself to franchises but here's hoping that the maturity found in the narrative of RDR can also be discovered outside of the game medium in itself.
My gripes with the game are minor; the Mexico part of the arc is something that I felt should have been looked at more critically and restructured. The way you end that phase of the game also seems somewhat disjointed. Nevermind though because
it is well worth trudging through that middle sequence in order to taste the virility of the final stanza. What a ride.
As I have recently acquired a laptop, I have given myself to games that suit that platform, something a bit more casual, a bit more 'pick up put down'. So at the present I am gorging myself upon Plants vs Zombies (typical Popcap brilliance) and something I've been meaning to do forever, a replay of Baldur's Gate.
Baldur's Gate was something I almost stumbled across. I was in my early teen years when it came out. I didn't have a bevy of friends who were into fantasy or Dungeons and Dragons and so it emitted signals that my radar was not properly attuned to pick up. Diablo was the drug of choice among gamers in my knowing and when I did pick up Baldur's Gate, merely on it's boxart, I found it foglike in it's accessiblity. But it, and especially it's sequel, proved to be the experience that further formed my nascent ideas of gaming and the importance of story within gaming more than any other.
So I have made a Male Half Elven Mage/Thief named Arahain. He'll be something of a magic dueller, using longswords
and shortbows and lots of magic missile. I've put in a heap of mods from Gibberlings 3, The Sorcerer's Place and others particularly the mod called BGTutu, a program that imports the BG2 upgraded infinity engine into BG1 making it look more playable and presentable than the previous iteration.
Yet it also opens up the world to post-story exploring in a way that changed my perspective of the game world.
The first thing I did after the ending was kill me some lawmen.
I don't know if the ending truly opens the way for a sequel but I'd be happy if they didn't go down that path.
Alas, gaming today lends itself to franchises but here's hoping that the maturity found in the narrative of RDR can also be discovered outside of the game medium in itself.
My gripes with the game are minor; the Mexico part of the arc is something that I felt should have been looked at more critically and restructured. The way you end that phase of the game also seems somewhat disjointed. Nevermind though because
it is well worth trudging through that middle sequence in order to taste the virility of the final stanza. What a ride.
As I have recently acquired a laptop, I have given myself to games that suit that platform, something a bit more casual, a bit more 'pick up put down'. So at the present I am gorging myself upon Plants vs Zombies (typical Popcap brilliance) and something I've been meaning to do forever, a replay of Baldur's Gate.
Baldur's Gate was something I almost stumbled across. I was in my early teen years when it came out. I didn't have a bevy of friends who were into fantasy or Dungeons and Dragons and so it emitted signals that my radar was not properly attuned to pick up. Diablo was the drug of choice among gamers in my knowing and when I did pick up Baldur's Gate, merely on it's boxart, I found it foglike in it's accessiblity. But it, and especially it's sequel, proved to be the experience that further formed my nascent ideas of gaming and the importance of story within gaming more than any other.
So I have made a Male Half Elven Mage/Thief named Arahain. He'll be something of a magic dueller, using longswords
and shortbows and lots of magic missile. I've put in a heap of mods from Gibberlings 3, The Sorcerer's Place and others particularly the mod called BGTutu, a program that imports the BG2 upgraded infinity engine into BG1 making it look more playable and presentable than the previous iteration.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Foul on Folau
I've spent the entirety of the day somewhat conflicted. I'm trying to measure my response to the announcement of Israel Folau's defection from NRL to AFL by some quantifiable means. I've trawled through the tripe of forums and news site vitriolic comments boards (yeesh) in order to gauge opinion and come up with some kind of response to it. So hopefully in this discourse, my opinion will call itself into being in a shape more coherent than the spasmodic ramblings that have trawled across my brain all day.
I may have come across before as some kind of frothing anti-League douche. I'm really not. Honest. I may prefer Australian Rules as a sport, but I know Rugby League has it's place in Australia. As an outsider, I can see where NRL is falling over and get equally frustrated when it's administrators do nothing to fix it's ailments. I'm not wringing my hands gleefully when seeing every missed opportunity or blow against it as some kind of 'death knell', nor do I see such a thing as a desirable outcome.
Yet actively targetting and striking against the NRL is what the AFL as an administration is doing. It's almost trying to conduct some kind of aggressive business takeover. I can sympathise with people who may enjoy the game but see the conduct of the AFL as innappropriate at best and as a major factor for them watching these recent events with anger.
Now talking specifically about the moves to recruit Karmichael Hunt (The Kanye of sport?) and Izzy, there are the following parties to consider; The Gaining Club (GCFC and GWS); The AFL; The NRL; The Losing Club, (The Brisbane Broncos) not to mention the players (referred to as poachings).
Firstly, the Gaining Clubs are getting major concessions when it comes to the AFL drafts in the first year(s) of entering the AFL. The quality of players coming through the draft today is unquestionable; one only has to look at Lucas, Trengove, Scully, Martin and of course Barlow (among many others) as a sign that not only is AFL development solid and fruitful in it's heartland states, but it is also immediate and broad in it's impact. Any claims that these poachings are for lack of talent in AFL stocks are ignorant and misguided.
But rookie players don't demand high salaries, they take time to appreciate in value. Barlow will be of equal value with the top 5% of AFL players if he keeps up this years form; but not for another two to three years at least. The planning that is going into these clubs, I can assure you, has been meticulous and long reaching. The time periods these poachings will play for are formative, the new clubs are not counting on running onto the park with a premiership side (how can they?). They are planning to run onto the field with a future premiership side. In the 3-5 years it will take for these teams to become true challengers, the poachings will reach the end of their contracts. If they are worth the coin they will be offered it (again).
But more likely is that the poachings will have done the development and promotional groundwork for the future stars to build on; stars they'll acquire in the draft or from trades. I think it truly doesn't matter if Folau is getting the same money as Judd or Ablett. Putting Judd in GWS means more to current AFL states than it ever would in NSW. Putting Folau in there has much more potential (and dare I say it, opportunity) than putting a developed player as a marquee star. Look at the impact it has created on the day it occured itself, it will resonant across both communites for weeks. People saying he'll be forgotten in a year must have very selective memories. I don't think it matters how good the poachings are individually because as a whole team they won't be able to seriously compete for several years. The value of these players cannot be measured against the same scale as that of Chris Judd and Gary Ablett Jr because the purpose of their employment is for different objectives.
N.B. That said, I still think they are being overpaid and ridiculously so.
The AFL itself has more than one agenda here. It is happy to further the Polynesian example set by Nic Natanui, it is happy to promote to more people of varying regions to try and come into the game. Mike Pyke, Canadian; Setanta O'hailpin, Irish and so on. But the deliberate, strategised targeting of NRL specifically is something I find distasteful and potentially damaging to the image of Australian Rules in general. Most NRL supporters agree. They aren't following NRL because of an individual player, they're following it for the game itself. The game is bigger than Israel Folau and Karmichael Hunt. These events do however, undoubtedly boost the legitimacy of the new franchises. Not as AFL clubs, but as social and community entities. People are talking, and that is points on the board for the AFL.
Moving onto the NRL side of the fence is a bit more complicated because I'm not 100% up to speed with every development administration (and player) wise. Giving it a crack though. Pull me up if I'm outright wrong.
As a professional competition of a popular sport in Australia (not to mention NZ and the Islands) the NRL has, and will continue, developing elite athletes. Retaining this talent is of prime importance to the NRL. The main point of contention at the moment in facilitating this, is the salary cap. A million people have said it and I'll say it too. Raise the bloody salary cap. Raise it through the roof because the NRL's players are worth more than what they are getting. No wonder they'll go to England or even switch codes they are an undervalued commodity in the NRL.
If a cap is such a problem to implement, as Gallop seems to repeat ad infinatum, the NRL might consider bringing in the A-League system of having 1 (or more) players paid outside the salary cap as a marquee player. The problem is that the NRL almost seem reluctant to treat the code as a business, the opposite of the AFL's problem. But then his claims can be backed up by the lower TV distribution rights deal, low attendences and membership numbers. The NRL is almost a pokie welfare entity in that regard.
The players themselves are not stupid, nor are they advised and managed by stupid people. These are all business choices. Someone trying to use their athleticism and natural talents to their best ability and make the maximum return on their efforts is not someone to scorn. People playing the loyalty card are absolute hypocrites because loyalty goes both ways. If you were ever loyal to Folau, you'd wish him luck and hope he does well, instead I find people are partisan wankjobs and treat sport like politics.
And as I've said before, NRL and AFL can easily and happily co-exist. The AFL doesn't have to be this juggernaut stomping across the countryside. Yet the NRL has to stop being a suburban wannabe competition and develop it's framework and business model to something competitive not just in Australia but on the World Stage.
Oh and Izzy should represent QLD in SoO2. It's pretty discriminatory to ban a player because they are leaving the code, surely the best players should be picked and that is that?
I may have come across before as some kind of frothing anti-League douche. I'm really not. Honest. I may prefer Australian Rules as a sport, but I know Rugby League has it's place in Australia. As an outsider, I can see where NRL is falling over and get equally frustrated when it's administrators do nothing to fix it's ailments. I'm not wringing my hands gleefully when seeing every missed opportunity or blow against it as some kind of 'death knell', nor do I see such a thing as a desirable outcome.
Yet actively targetting and striking against the NRL is what the AFL as an administration is doing. It's almost trying to conduct some kind of aggressive business takeover. I can sympathise with people who may enjoy the game but see the conduct of the AFL as innappropriate at best and as a major factor for them watching these recent events with anger.
Now talking specifically about the moves to recruit Karmichael Hunt (The Kanye of sport?) and Izzy, there are the following parties to consider; The Gaining Club (GCFC and GWS); The AFL; The NRL; The Losing Club, (The Brisbane Broncos) not to mention the players (referred to as poachings).
Firstly, the Gaining Clubs are getting major concessions when it comes to the AFL drafts in the first year(s) of entering the AFL. The quality of players coming through the draft today is unquestionable; one only has to look at Lucas, Trengove, Scully, Martin and of course Barlow (among many others) as a sign that not only is AFL development solid and fruitful in it's heartland states, but it is also immediate and broad in it's impact. Any claims that these poachings are for lack of talent in AFL stocks are ignorant and misguided.
But rookie players don't demand high salaries, they take time to appreciate in value. Barlow will be of equal value with the top 5% of AFL players if he keeps up this years form; but not for another two to three years at least. The planning that is going into these clubs, I can assure you, has been meticulous and long reaching. The time periods these poachings will play for are formative, the new clubs are not counting on running onto the park with a premiership side (how can they?). They are planning to run onto the field with a future premiership side. In the 3-5 years it will take for these teams to become true challengers, the poachings will reach the end of their contracts. If they are worth the coin they will be offered it (again).
But more likely is that the poachings will have done the development and promotional groundwork for the future stars to build on; stars they'll acquire in the draft or from trades. I think it truly doesn't matter if Folau is getting the same money as Judd or Ablett. Putting Judd in GWS means more to current AFL states than it ever would in NSW. Putting Folau in there has much more potential (and dare I say it, opportunity) than putting a developed player as a marquee star. Look at the impact it has created on the day it occured itself, it will resonant across both communites for weeks. People saying he'll be forgotten in a year must have very selective memories. I don't think it matters how good the poachings are individually because as a whole team they won't be able to seriously compete for several years. The value of these players cannot be measured against the same scale as that of Chris Judd and Gary Ablett Jr because the purpose of their employment is for different objectives.
N.B. That said, I still think they are being overpaid and ridiculously so.
The AFL itself has more than one agenda here. It is happy to further the Polynesian example set by Nic Natanui, it is happy to promote to more people of varying regions to try and come into the game. Mike Pyke, Canadian; Setanta O'hailpin, Irish and so on. But the deliberate, strategised targeting of NRL specifically is something I find distasteful and potentially damaging to the image of Australian Rules in general. Most NRL supporters agree. They aren't following NRL because of an individual player, they're following it for the game itself. The game is bigger than Israel Folau and Karmichael Hunt. These events do however, undoubtedly boost the legitimacy of the new franchises. Not as AFL clubs, but as social and community entities. People are talking, and that is points on the board for the AFL.
Moving onto the NRL side of the fence is a bit more complicated because I'm not 100% up to speed with every development administration (and player) wise. Giving it a crack though. Pull me up if I'm outright wrong.
As a professional competition of a popular sport in Australia (not to mention NZ and the Islands) the NRL has, and will continue, developing elite athletes. Retaining this talent is of prime importance to the NRL. The main point of contention at the moment in facilitating this, is the salary cap. A million people have said it and I'll say it too. Raise the bloody salary cap. Raise it through the roof because the NRL's players are worth more than what they are getting. No wonder they'll go to England or even switch codes they are an undervalued commodity in the NRL.
If a cap is such a problem to implement, as Gallop seems to repeat ad infinatum, the NRL might consider bringing in the A-League system of having 1 (or more) players paid outside the salary cap as a marquee player. The problem is that the NRL almost seem reluctant to treat the code as a business, the opposite of the AFL's problem. But then his claims can be backed up by the lower TV distribution rights deal, low attendences and membership numbers. The NRL is almost a pokie welfare entity in that regard.
The players themselves are not stupid, nor are they advised and managed by stupid people. These are all business choices. Someone trying to use their athleticism and natural talents to their best ability and make the maximum return on their efforts is not someone to scorn. People playing the loyalty card are absolute hypocrites because loyalty goes both ways. If you were ever loyal to Folau, you'd wish him luck and hope he does well, instead I find people are partisan wankjobs and treat sport like politics.
And as I've said before, NRL and AFL can easily and happily co-exist. The AFL doesn't have to be this juggernaut stomping across the countryside. Yet the NRL has to stop being a suburban wannabe competition and develop it's framework and business model to something competitive not just in Australia but on the World Stage.
Oh and Izzy should represent QLD in SoO2. It's pretty discriminatory to ban a player because they are leaving the code, surely the best players should be picked and that is that?
Friday, May 28, 2010
From Blackwater to Silent Stead
When I last (indeed first) iterated my thoughts about Red Dead Redemption, I made a comment on the depicted realism and how this striving for realism might detract from the artistic endeavours within it's dusty bounds.
Well something magical happened yesterday. A true noir moment.
A companion and I had been chased out of Tumbleweed by the resident vagrant banditry after I committed to helping said companion in returning deceased friends from that ruined place to it's graveyard.
As we fled, the storm clouds rolled in and we parted ways. The rain began bucketing down and lightning split the sky. I decided to head to Rathskeller Fork, a small community nestled in the shelter of the cliff faces to the north. The scree and brush that littered this part of the West was being torn at by the wind and pelted by the rain. As a massive flash of lightning and crack of thunder was issued by the sky a challenge was raised by some dark creature to the side of the road.
There, kicking in defiance at the lightning was the most majestic horse ever. Dark as midnight yet strong as steel.
The rain and lightning stopped, the wind settled. At least in my mind it did. My attention was directed entirely toward that horse. I speared off the side of the road, indeed like the wind itself which lustily grabbed at my duster.
My lasoo became an extension of my arm as I twirled it above my head in some kind of strange appropriation ritual. It weaved a message in the sky "I take this horse as my own". I like to think the thunder answered in glorious assent.
The horse saw me and turned, thinking me some demon of the shadow, but it was too late, the rolling thunder had masked my approach. The lasoo flew and held, the horse became stuck fast. I held it there hoping it didn't truly bolt and drag me along, instead it thrashed and kicked in some kind of reproach.
I closed the distance carefully, wary of the slick rocks and puddles forming at my feet. I was quick. Up on it's back. Lightning crashes. Hands in the mane. Shifting weight from side to side as it continued to buck and snort.
It seemed like an hour or so but it was probably only a minute. The bucking slowed to a general jumping about, the whinnying and neighing turned into a gruff snort and I knew that I had my prize.
I set heels to the flanks and bolted into the night. Heedless now. Death could have taken me and I'd be glad because this was the moment to transcend all others.
The rain eased, the sun crested the horizon and the morning greeted us like long lost friends returned home. Our pace slowed and I turned back toward Rathskeller Fork, weary with a night of joy and damp with the rage of a storm.
Approaching the road I spied a cluster of herbs that I knew were in demand back in the towns. For the first time, I jumped off my new horse and walked over to the patch. Nearby I saw a rucksack and the remnants of a small fire. Interested, I went over to check if there wasn't anyone in need of any kind of small mercy.
With a rustle from behind I spied a man spring up from the ground itself. Spouting some kind of profanity he hauled himself up onto my horse. With maniacal glee he sprinted off away back to the place I had come from. Dejected and alone, I walked the rest of the way. I swore I would find that bastard and kill him.
******
This realistic depiction as achieved in RDR could be stylised in another manner but there would be something missing. The realism in the graphics and design with this game grounds it somewhat. This grounding is also reliant on the fact that in a lot of Westerns the environment itself is as big a character as the scarred swear-mongers that inhabit such a place. Would have RDR worked if it had taken on a Blizzard like design? No. Emphatically so.
There was a point in RDR where I had finished a mission and was introduced into a new environ. I do not mean in the manner of from the dusty plain to the frigid nordic icefields but from the dusty plain to a less dusty plain with more lawlessness and a different kind of cacti. As you enter this place the sound dims and a fantastic western song (a conjunction of words I have never used in my life) plays over the top. The sun sets and you look over the mesas and townships below. It was a really good moment. That probably sounds a bit trite considering how flowery the rest of this post is but I don't think I can sufficiently capture it in feeble words. It was as good as a really good thing that makes me think of other good things.
I guess what I am saying is that the graphics and design should be appreciated both on it's own merits but also in it's interaction with the other elements that comprise a game. If this is no amazing discovery for you then I am truly sorry to have wasted your time but I am glad that I wiped taht cobweb from my mind.
Well something magical happened yesterday. A true noir moment.
A companion and I had been chased out of Tumbleweed by the resident vagrant banditry after I committed to helping said companion in returning deceased friends from that ruined place to it's graveyard.
As we fled, the storm clouds rolled in and we parted ways. The rain began bucketing down and lightning split the sky. I decided to head to Rathskeller Fork, a small community nestled in the shelter of the cliff faces to the north. The scree and brush that littered this part of the West was being torn at by the wind and pelted by the rain. As a massive flash of lightning and crack of thunder was issued by the sky a challenge was raised by some dark creature to the side of the road.
There, kicking in defiance at the lightning was the most majestic horse ever. Dark as midnight yet strong as steel.
The rain and lightning stopped, the wind settled. At least in my mind it did. My attention was directed entirely toward that horse. I speared off the side of the road, indeed like the wind itself which lustily grabbed at my duster.
My lasoo became an extension of my arm as I twirled it above my head in some kind of strange appropriation ritual. It weaved a message in the sky "I take this horse as my own". I like to think the thunder answered in glorious assent.
The horse saw me and turned, thinking me some demon of the shadow, but it was too late, the rolling thunder had masked my approach. The lasoo flew and held, the horse became stuck fast. I held it there hoping it didn't truly bolt and drag me along, instead it thrashed and kicked in some kind of reproach.
I closed the distance carefully, wary of the slick rocks and puddles forming at my feet. I was quick. Up on it's back. Lightning crashes. Hands in the mane. Shifting weight from side to side as it continued to buck and snort.
It seemed like an hour or so but it was probably only a minute. The bucking slowed to a general jumping about, the whinnying and neighing turned into a gruff snort and I knew that I had my prize.
I set heels to the flanks and bolted into the night. Heedless now. Death could have taken me and I'd be glad because this was the moment to transcend all others.
The rain eased, the sun crested the horizon and the morning greeted us like long lost friends returned home. Our pace slowed and I turned back toward Rathskeller Fork, weary with a night of joy and damp with the rage of a storm.
Approaching the road I spied a cluster of herbs that I knew were in demand back in the towns. For the first time, I jumped off my new horse and walked over to the patch. Nearby I saw a rucksack and the remnants of a small fire. Interested, I went over to check if there wasn't anyone in need of any kind of small mercy.
With a rustle from behind I spied a man spring up from the ground itself. Spouting some kind of profanity he hauled himself up onto my horse. With maniacal glee he sprinted off away back to the place I had come from. Dejected and alone, I walked the rest of the way. I swore I would find that bastard and kill him.
******
This realistic depiction as achieved in RDR could be stylised in another manner but there would be something missing. The realism in the graphics and design with this game grounds it somewhat. This grounding is also reliant on the fact that in a lot of Westerns the environment itself is as big a character as the scarred swear-mongers that inhabit such a place. Would have RDR worked if it had taken on a Blizzard like design? No. Emphatically so.
There was a point in RDR where I had finished a mission and was introduced into a new environ. I do not mean in the manner of from the dusty plain to the frigid nordic icefields but from the dusty plain to a less dusty plain with more lawlessness and a different kind of cacti. As you enter this place the sound dims and a fantastic western song (a conjunction of words I have never used in my life) plays over the top. The sun sets and you look over the mesas and townships below. It was a really good moment. That probably sounds a bit trite considering how flowery the rest of this post is but I don't think I can sufficiently capture it in feeble words. It was as good as a really good thing that makes me think of other good things.
I guess what I am saying is that the graphics and design should be appreciated both on it's own merits but also in it's interaction with the other elements that comprise a game. If this is no amazing discovery for you then I am truly sorry to have wasted your time but I am glad that I wiped taht cobweb from my mind.
Expansion or Scorched Earth
I'm a devout Australian Rules Football fan. I employ the word devout with deliberation in this instance. Yet as a person currently residing in the ACT I feel that the rest of the Eastern Seaboard holds something of a grudge against Australian Rules and it's governing body, The AFL. The Television stations put the games on at the worst times, putting wonderful shows like The Ghost Whisperer on in favour of a game. Some games are, much to my ever thankful prayers, put on at 23.59 on a Sunday night. Fantastic.
It is not at all helped by the attitude of a great many of the populace of the cities of Sydney and Brisbane who sneer at Australian Rules on the grounds of some misplaced bollocks machismo and an attitude of thinking with your dick. AFL and League can easily co-exist, people are able, and do, follow more than one code of sport "Which is best" is an argument for people who skipped the evolutionary chain from fertiliser to person.
Hopefully with the AFLs spread across the Eastern Seaboard this type of malarky will subside, yet even this very morn, a fragile and chilled thing laying expectant, was shat upon by a member of the moron non-press which caused a stir in my heart that I can't help but try to alleviate.
Let me explain;
The morning shows that exist on the commercial networks are terrible shows. What is more terrible is when these terrible shows give terrible persons of terrible anti-knowledge a chance to pontificate upon all those unwary souls who have been cast adrift and stumbled upon a television in their morning stupor. One such collection of demi-humans were talking about the Greater Western Sydney team that are to join the AFL in 2012. Personal thoughts aside, one harridan whom I am led to believe was a former sportsperson at some stage, declared that because the Sydney Swans couldn't fill a stadium, team GWS was doomed to fail especially with the fact that the team is to be set up in the Rugby League Heartland®. She further enlightened us with the fact (a meaning of the word fact that I have struggled to uncover) that Victorian teams were on the verge of collapse and the AFL should worry about it's own backyard.
What.
Here's a clue for you harpy. The clubs in AFL may have been complacent because they get handouts from television rights and other lucrative business deals but they consistently get crowds over and above 35,000 people with the swans getting an average of 30,000 people.
What pray is the average attendance of a crowd in Rugby League Heartland®? It's waaaaaay down on the list at a paltry 16,000 troglodytes per game, that's less than the Sydney Swans average numbers! Now some clubs, namely the Broncos, have very high average attendance numbers. But hey you know what? Brisbane has both an NRL and an AFL club and the world hasn't ended, it's an example of coexistence with no loss on one side or the other.
Anyway, enough ranting on that.
As a Carlton member I was delighted when Bryce Gibbs announced his resigning with The Club. Next week I will be able to enjoy The Club versus Melbourne who have been on the up this year and then in the week following, versus North Melbourne, who I am led to believe, in watching their staccato-like progression throughout the year, have the shingles.
This pontification has gone on way too long.
It is not at all helped by the attitude of a great many of the populace of the cities of Sydney and Brisbane who sneer at Australian Rules on the grounds of some misplaced bollocks machismo and an attitude of thinking with your dick. AFL and League can easily co-exist, people are able, and do, follow more than one code of sport "Which is best" is an argument for people who skipped the evolutionary chain from fertiliser to person.
Hopefully with the AFLs spread across the Eastern Seaboard this type of malarky will subside, yet even this very morn, a fragile and chilled thing laying expectant, was shat upon by a member of the moron non-press which caused a stir in my heart that I can't help but try to alleviate.
Let me explain;
The morning shows that exist on the commercial networks are terrible shows. What is more terrible is when these terrible shows give terrible persons of terrible anti-knowledge a chance to pontificate upon all those unwary souls who have been cast adrift and stumbled upon a television in their morning stupor. One such collection of demi-humans were talking about the Greater Western Sydney team that are to join the AFL in 2012. Personal thoughts aside, one harridan whom I am led to believe was a former sportsperson at some stage, declared that because the Sydney Swans couldn't fill a stadium, team GWS was doomed to fail especially with the fact that the team is to be set up in the Rugby League Heartland®. She further enlightened us with the fact (a meaning of the word fact that I have struggled to uncover) that Victorian teams were on the verge of collapse and the AFL should worry about it's own backyard.
What.
Here's a clue for you harpy. The clubs in AFL may have been complacent because they get handouts from television rights and other lucrative business deals but they consistently get crowds over and above 35,000 people with the swans getting an average of 30,000 people.
What pray is the average attendance of a crowd in Rugby League Heartland®? It's waaaaaay down on the list at a paltry 16,000 troglodytes per game, that's less than the Sydney Swans average numbers! Now some clubs, namely the Broncos, have very high average attendance numbers. But hey you know what? Brisbane has both an NRL and an AFL club and the world hasn't ended, it's an example of coexistence with no loss on one side or the other.
Anyway, enough ranting on that.
As a Carlton member I was delighted when Bryce Gibbs announced his resigning with The Club. Next week I will be able to enjoy The Club versus Melbourne who have been on the up this year and then in the week following, versus North Melbourne, who I am led to believe, in watching their staccato-like progression throughout the year, have the shingles.
This pontification has gone on way too long.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Opening - Red Dead Redemption Review
A new slate to dirty with words of no consequence.
I am playing Red Dead Redemption at the moment. What a fantastic game. I did not get into the hype around this game at all. GTA4 was a non event for me and while I acknowledge that Rockstar are a great developer, their style of game never really spoke to my inner being as something vital to my engagement with games-media. For me Rockstar's slide away from the blissful carnage and outright embodiment of the term 'run amok' to the more serious cinematic and deliberatly artful was not as successful as most people make out it to be. But RDR really smashes that conceptual bubble I built around my idea of Rockstar. The voice acting and writing have instantly made me give three or four shits about the main character, as opposed to the usual one or none. No shit giving is not the mindframe I am in right now.
The gunplay is also what makes this very enjoyable. Almost like a elegant lifting and retooling of bullet-time from way back when. At first you have the ability to simply slow down time, aim carefully and blow some poor partner's face off, each shot would be determined by when you levered the trigger on your controller. This would have been well and good all in it's own right but it creatively then allows you, after some time, to simply move your reticule over the enemy which then get's 'tagged' showing you exactly which part of the enemy is in line smooshing. This works into the duelling mechanic too. Which I'm still getting my head around.
There is a lot of stuff to do, hunting, gambling, helping random wanderers and so on. I'm not going to go into that too much. Needless to say, despite the large size of the world it isn't as desolate as histories would have you believe.
My main concern getting this game would that it'd be simply Wild West Auto, or Grand Theft Horse, a anxiety held by a great many people. And to be honest, in the back of my mind I'm constantly seeing if any of my RDR experiences are measuring up to or are indeed mirroring any of my GTA ones. And they are there. The way the characters interact. The cinematic introductions to missions and characters. Indeed the way you interact with them, with each having a big letter on the GTA-esque minimap.
But these are all cosmetic, all in the framework and gilding of the game. The core game itself; the gunplay, the horseriding, the content is indeed markedly different.
Artistically it is also interesting. It goes for realism all the way. The animations are superb, the voice acting and music are inspired. Coming off of the back of Darksiders however shows that realism, no matter how realistic can sometimes leave something to be desired. Perfect realism is nice and all but I can't grant it as being truly artistic. Maybe I'm not being fair because the game is still beatiful.
Anyway, I'm goign to sink my teeth into it a bit more and see how it goes getting further in. Fingers crossed!
I am playing Red Dead Redemption at the moment. What a fantastic game. I did not get into the hype around this game at all. GTA4 was a non event for me and while I acknowledge that Rockstar are a great developer, their style of game never really spoke to my inner being as something vital to my engagement with games-media. For me Rockstar's slide away from the blissful carnage and outright embodiment of the term 'run amok' to the more serious cinematic and deliberatly artful was not as successful as most people make out it to be. But RDR really smashes that conceptual bubble I built around my idea of Rockstar. The voice acting and writing have instantly made me give three or four shits about the main character, as opposed to the usual one or none. No shit giving is not the mindframe I am in right now.
The gunplay is also what makes this very enjoyable. Almost like a elegant lifting and retooling of bullet-time from way back when. At first you have the ability to simply slow down time, aim carefully and blow some poor partner's face off, each shot would be determined by when you levered the trigger on your controller. This would have been well and good all in it's own right but it creatively then allows you, after some time, to simply move your reticule over the enemy which then get's 'tagged' showing you exactly which part of the enemy is in line smooshing. This works into the duelling mechanic too. Which I'm still getting my head around.
There is a lot of stuff to do, hunting, gambling, helping random wanderers and so on. I'm not going to go into that too much. Needless to say, despite the large size of the world it isn't as desolate as histories would have you believe.
My main concern getting this game would that it'd be simply Wild West Auto, or Grand Theft Horse, a anxiety held by a great many people. And to be honest, in the back of my mind I'm constantly seeing if any of my RDR experiences are measuring up to or are indeed mirroring any of my GTA ones. And they are there. The way the characters interact. The cinematic introductions to missions and characters. Indeed the way you interact with them, with each having a big letter on the GTA-esque minimap.
But these are all cosmetic, all in the framework and gilding of the game. The core game itself; the gunplay, the horseriding, the content is indeed markedly different.
Artistically it is also interesting. It goes for realism all the way. The animations are superb, the voice acting and music are inspired. Coming off of the back of Darksiders however shows that realism, no matter how realistic can sometimes leave something to be desired. Perfect realism is nice and all but I can't grant it as being truly artistic. Maybe I'm not being fair because the game is still beatiful.
Anyway, I'm goign to sink my teeth into it a bit more and see how it goes getting further in. Fingers crossed!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)