You can also find us on Facebook and Twitter!

The new site has multiple authors, and we are looking for additional help! Shoot me an email if you are interested!

Pure came out late last year, but I didn’t give it much notice because I had recently picked up Motorstorm Pacific Rift. While Pure is like Motorstorm in many respects, it actually reminded me most of SSX, the extreme(ly unrealistic) snowboard racer, a series that I have eagerly awaited a new, true sequel (Aka not SSX On Tour or SSX Blur).

Pure: At Its Best

• Pure definitely doesn’t try to be realistic. I think that is its strong point, focusing on tricks and huge jumps rather than actual physics. It can be a ton of fun to throw a double backflip while running on the side of the bike. The trick system is nearly a carbon copy of SSX, with progressing trick “levels” , and right down to the way the music fades during “hangtime.”

Pure: At Its Worst

• While Pure may look and (at first) play well, it ultimately suffers from cheap artificial intelligence, limited track selections along with uninteresting track design, and finally a tiny, repetitive music mix.

Pure: The Verdict

Pure has a lot of shortcomings, especially when compared to franchises like SSX and Motorstorm, both titles which also fight for the attention of the “extreme sports” gamer. The game doesn’t help itself by limiting its vehicle offering to ATVs only, which I expect have much more of a niche appeal than snowboarding or rally racing. 7/10

What did everyone else say?

More importantly, what did you think?

I consider myself a connoisseur of racing games, but in extremes. I love the simulators, like Gran Turismo and Forza, but I also enjoy the over-the-top racers, such as Motorstorm, Burnout, and others. Typically the titles that fall in the middle do not interest me, because they are either not realistic enough, or not ridiculous enough (Need For Speed, Project Gotham, etc). Grid is interesting because while it certainly couldn’t be considered a simulator, it becomes a racer all of its own. Here is what I thought of it.

Grid: At Its Best

• Variety- Something that plagues most racing games, either in tracks, cars, race types, or any other variable. While car choices and tracks aren’t exactly Gran Turismo level, Grid’s strength lies in the variety of race types. Whether you want to race muscle cars, compete in 24 hours at Le Mans, or drift race in Japan, Grid has it.

• Damage- Again, another issue with simulators is damage. Gran Turismo has never had damage in any capacity, Forza has a fairly weak system, but Grid manages to have a well balanced and realistic damage engine that affects both vehicle aesthetics and car performance. While it doesn’t hold a candle to Burnout, Grid still manages to provide a level of realism that most simulators ironically lack. The fact that the player can completely decommission another racer by putting them into the wall makes the races intense indeed.

• Grid World- Grid’s race campaign is very different than the average racer. For one, the game focuses on your team, rather than just you individually. While this doesn’t really change how you play the game, it makes the races a bit more fun.

Grid: At Its Worst

• AI- I have yet to play a racing game with good AI. Grid at least adds a bit of randomness to the other racers, as they will sometimes spin out or go into the wall. Nevertheless, rubber band AI prevails, and even on the easiest difficulty the player will find themselves rammed into the wall and out of the race on frequent occasions.

• Lack of Customization- In many ways Grid acts like a simulator, but it falls short in one crucial aspect: customization. Other than traction control, transmission type, and braking assist, Grid offers no performance customization. Often the choice between vehicles is purely aesthetic, which may have been the developer’s intention, but it doesn’t work well in a simulator capacity.

Grid- Overall

Grid isn’t Gran Turismo, it isn’t Need for Speed and it certainly isn’t Burnout. Instead, Grid takes bits and pieces of each and makes a solid and enjoyable racer. 8/10

What did everyone else say?

While it has been out for quite some time, I got my first chance at Left 4 Dead a couple of weeks ago. Like every Valve game, Left 4 Dead is a polished, balanced, and thoroughly enjoyable game…perhaps one of the most satisfying multiplayer experiences in recent memory. Yet while Left 4 Dead shares many favorable characteristics with other Valve titles, it doesn’t have the feel of games like Half Life, Portal, or Team Fortress.

This aside, Left 4 Dead is a great game. In the case of horror games, most of them suck. Plagued by either poor controls, unconvicing scare tactics or rushed production values, most horror games leave a bad taste in my mouth. Left 4 Dead however is an entirely new beast. Part Counterstrike, part Hunter: The Reckoning, Left 4 Dead is all about fast moves and smart teamwork. With that said, I can’t imagine the game would be fun to play alone; the big draw is the co-op play. The game is thoroughly frightening- particularly the “witches” (I won’t ruin the fun of discovering one of those) Perhaps the most compelling aspects of Left 4 Dead is the necessity of teamwork. Even when playing with AI controlled teammates, sticking together and helping each other out are key. I learned early that running ahead got me quickly picked off by some particularly nasty undead creature.

The combat follows the tried and true first-person-shooter format, albeit a limited weapons arsenal. I really appreciated the concept of scarcity in L4D…In the zombie apocalypse ammo and health packs are  not arbitrarily placed in the middle of the street, and you really have to conserve ammo to make it to the next shelter safely. I haven’t had a chance to play the online gameplay, though it seemed a bit too hectic for my taste. In any case, I am a big fan of co-op, and you can’t get any better than Left 4 Dead.

After playing through the sizeable (1.2gb) but short demo tonight, I am definitely impressed with what Guerilla Games has put together. I am tempted to pick up the game simply for the campaign, as the small sample in the demo blew me away. This, plus the apparently insane multiplayer make it worth the purchase price to me. I probably won’t get around to buying it until march or april though…

Posted in Uncategorized ]]> http://blackholesandrevelations.wordpress.com/2009/02/27/killzone-2-first-impressions/feed/ 0 Jeff http://blackholesandrevelations.wordpress.com/2009/01/31/motorstorm-pacific-rift/ http://blackholesandrevelations.wordpress.com/2009/01/31/motorstorm-pacific-rift/#comments Sat, 31 Jan 2009 01:58:40 +0000 Jeff http://blackholesandrevelations.wordpress.com/?p=206 ]]>

When I first bought my Playstation 3 around a year and a half ago, it was bundled with MotorStorm, an offroad racing game somewhat reminiscent of the Burnout series. While the game lacked a lot- split screen play, level variety, and intelligent AI; it definitely made an impression with its spectacular explosions, realistic mud effects, and  a generally satisfying racing experience.

MotorStorm: Pacific Rift is everything the first game was not, and most reviews of the game reflect this. Evolution Games has improved the already impressive graphics, and wisely set the game in a more diverse environment. The racing is just as hectic (and arguably just as difficult), but each level feels very distinct, something that most racing games seem to have trouble with.

Granted, MotorStorm Pacific Rift is far from a racing simulator. Even so, I love watching a friend’s jaw drop at the over-the-top collisions: burning chunks of tire, bolts, springs, and driver all hurtling through the air. The additional gameplay modes, especially Eliminator, only add to the experience, and multiplayer competitiveness is always welcome.

I’ve been starved for a decent racing game for awhile, but MotorStorm Pacific Rift delivers in every way I could hope for. The AI still isn’t perfect, but nearly every other aspect of the game is. Other racers are going to have a tough time beating this one.

I’m really not into horror games at all, especially those involving gimmicky gameplay and  a contrived plots akin to Alien Versus Predator. You can imagine my excitement when I first booted up Dead Space, but the beauty of Gamefly is that I can affordably prove myself wrong sometimes.

The game definitely isn’t scary, and I am the type of person who scares easily in these sort of games (I am painfully reminded of late night sessions of Doom 3). While it isn’t scary, it is definitely creepy, especially with the game’s clever and masterful use of lighting and sound. Dead Space is an atmospheric marvel; the creaks and groans of a crippled space station matched with intermittent emergency lighting create a chilling setting for a video game. The protagonist Issac’s claustrophobic breathing and holographic heads up display only add to the experience.

While the game is a feast for the eyes and ears, it starts to lose steam after that. I wouldn’t say its a bad game, it is just an average game. The controls are stiff and clunky; The gameplay and plot are uninspired (yes, shockingly, dismemberment has been done before). Like many of EA’s games: worth a play, but not a buy.

Call of Duty is a sore topic for me. As much as I love the series, I hate it for Activision’s stupidity. Developer Infinity Ward has an amazing track record: Call of Duty 1, 2 and 4 (Modern Warfare) were all genre defining games. With this said, I do not understand  why Activision has insisted on using inferior developers like Treyarch (Call of Duty 3, World at War). It seems that they would want to handle an A+ franchise like Call of Duty with extreme care by sticking with an A+ developer and a proven track record.

Thus, you will understand my severe disappointment at the announcement of Call of Duty World at War (the fifth in the series), as it was developed by Treyarch, makers of the abominal Call of Duty 3. Call of Duty World at War, in reality, isn’t as terrible as I assumed, but its only redeeming qualities: the controls, graphics engine and enemy AI, are carbon copies of Infinity Ward’s COD 4. Treyarch played this one extremely safe, but for some ridiculous reason thought that the world needed another WWII game, a major mistake in my opinion.

While the online gameplay was far too unstable for me to reliably experience, I did get to play through the entire campaign. The story ranks somewhere between Call of Duty 2 and Modern Warfare. Many of the missions run together in my mind, but there are a few truly memorable ones. Funny thing is, the missions that stand out most to me are the ones most similar to COD4′s missions. For instance, in “Black Cats”, an “on-rails” turret level, you control a gunner in a PBY Catalina, shooting up Japanese ships and zeroes. It is vaguely reminiscent of Modern Warfare’s AC-130 gunship level, but is even cooler.  There is even a version of the Chernobyl sniper level (in COD 4) in World at War that has an “Enemy at the Gates” spin on it. It is these select few levels in COD 5 that work really well and make the game worth playing at least once.

Overall, COD 5 is decent. I would’ve rather Treyarch never touch the series again, but at least they didn’t totally botch this one. My one consolation is the forthcoming Modern Warfare 2 and the series’ triumphant return to Infinty Ward.

I only just realized that I have had Resistance 2 for nearly two months, and I haven’t really said anything about it. Due to this hectic fall season for gaming, I think a shooter like Resistance 2 is particularly susceptible to being lost in the shuffle, especially up against blockbusters like Gears of War 2, Farcry 2, etc.

I try to be pretty forward with my reviews, so here it is. Resistance 2 is the best shooter exclusive to the PS3, though I doubt anyone would argue that. Its no Call of Duty, but then I don’t think the developer intended such a comparison. It has a solid campaign, fast paced multiplayer, and a unique co-op system. I was a big fan of the first Resistance game, but in many ways it was lacking. Resistance 2 improves on these shortcomings in almost every way, although I wish the opportunity to play the campaign with a friend were still an option. The 60 person online play is pretty crazy, but luckily games don’t often reach that size. The fast paced nature of Resistance 2 sorta reminds me of the Tribes games, and is vastly different than Infinity Ward’s Call of Duty, or Epic’s Gears of War.

This gameplay style definitely is not for everyone; I have already seen several of my friends turned off from the game simply because it doesn’t follow the typical FPS mechanics. Many PS3 games are somewhat of a gamble for online play; people lose interest a few weeks after release.  Luckily the Resistance 2 is popular with enough people that I suspect it is in for the long run, or at least until Killzone 2 comes out (and doesn’t disappoint).

One major criticism in many reviews is the lack of a death penalty in Prince of Persia. Whenever you take too much damage, fall off a cliff, etc, your female cohort instantly revives you back to the nearest solid ground. This tends to make the game extraordinarily easy, especially since the game has very few enemies. Even though the game is easy by today’s standards (and the series, which is notoriously difficult), it is long enough that you won’t find yourself blowing through it in one sitting. I actually appreciated the revive system in the game: it felt realistic for the setting (considering that your companion can teleport anywhere, it makes sense that she can catch you if you fall), and helps the flow of the game: no disjointed loading screens between deaths, etc.

The structure of Prince of Persia is interesting, because it is essentially built on activities within four zones, each housing a different mini boss. While I can tell the developers were trying to create a very unique experience for each boss, the combat system is fairly generic each time, and all but one of the bosses are best dealt with in the same combo patterns. The combat system is visually flashy, but leaves something to be desired, especially compared to the multitude of platforming/adventure games these days. Luckily the focus of the game is not combat, but platforming, a system which Prince of Persia handles flawlessly. Literally, one of the best platforming mechanics in recent memory.  There are a few caveats, but in most cases the system feels extremely fluid.

The story, convoluted at times, accomplishes its purpose, and I mentioned in a previous post how much I enjoyed the voice acting of the prince. The prince character is actually a lot like Nathan Drake from Uncharted (not to mention that they share the same voice actor): a mysterious, suave adventurer with a taste for leaping over tall objects. In any case, I haven’t played another Prince of Persia game, so I do not know how the Prince is typically portrayed.

While Prince of Persia may not live up to its predecessors, I feel like it stands out among other recent adventure games, and is absolutely worth a play through.

I have Call of Duty: World at War coming in the mail through gamefly, and I also recently bought a copy of Motorstorm Pacific Rift, so I will post my impressions on these games soon. Happy Holidays!