Halo 4 (Xbox 360)

I'm ongoing fan of the Halo franchise, and have been eagerly looking forward to the latest entry in the series.

Halo 4 is the first entry in the franchise to be done my Microsoft (343 Studios) after the separation of franchise creator and developer Bungie (to be fair, a chunk of those ex-Bungie folks are at 343).

There's a lot riding on the title, both to show that Microsoft and 343 Studios "can do it" solo from Bungie, and to justify the game being the most expensive in Microsoft's history.

I'm several hours into it, and I can tell you -- it's great.

I'm burning through the campaign now, and then will be doing co-op campaign, and a whole lot of multiplayer. More arcade-y than Call of Duty / Modern Warfare franchise, Halo hits a sweet spot for me of pure, unadulterated multiplayer fun. I've got a number of overlapping clans, so I don't waste my time with the stereotypical, racist and/or juvenile effluence of the anonymous Xbox Live online masses. That means I don't have to waste time mashing the mute button, and can use the game as yet another conduit for connecting with friends and game developers around the world.

The campaign is harder -- in a good way. Normal mode on this game is tougher than "Normal" on previous Halo  iterations, and they didn't just "dial up the hard" -- there's more complexity to the fighting, and I can't go into every battle exactly the same; which I like quite a bit.

Visually, this is the first new engine in the franchise, and it looks simply stunning. I'm digging the work on the material system and lighting models (though I think "prism reflection" might become the next, overused "lens flare"), and the detail in the characters and environments is (for the most part) top-notch. I had to endure more braggadocio and chest puffery about upcoming lighting changes than I'd like, but I do admit -- looks good.

One of the other things I'm excited about is the explicit in-the-press nod to Certain Affinity -- an Austin indie studio made of great guys who 343 is fully supporting in trumpeting their part in the success of Halo 4 (if you like multiplayer and Forge mode in the new game, you have them largely to thank). There's a good article about all of that GameIndustry.biz.

Borderlands 2 (Xbox 360)

I'm sinking a lot of time across multiple characters in Borderlands 2.

I dig any sort of sequel that is not just "more of the same", and not "just a bit better" -- but actually holds onto all of the good of the previous version, and blows the lid off with new [gameplay|story|polish|features|etc.].

No, it's not perfection -- It's still way more compelling for me to play the game in a group than it is alone -- but this "Diablo looter as a slick stylized shooter with its own identity" is a ton of fun.

Me? I play a lot of games. A lot a lot.

But my clans? I can't seem to pull them away from Call of Duty or Halo (both of which I really like, BTW). Borderlands 2 has done what I couldn't do on my own -- show them there are other games out there.

And the writing? The acting and voice over delivery?

Fun, fun stuff.

Batman: Arkham City (Xbox 360)

Batman: Arkham Asylum was one of my favorite games.

I'm multiple hours (but not done) with RockSteady Studios new Batman: Arkham City, and it pretty much surpasses everything I dig about the first game, without losing the stuff that made that first game great.

It could be a little overwhelming if you're not big into games, and/or haven't played Arkham Asylum  -- there's a ton of gadgets; I even find myself having to stop and look at all of the stuff available to me. But that's a good problem to have (teh Bats has teh gadgets, after all).

I do like that the rogues gallery is a lot more complex this time around. Less "muah-hahahaha!" and more "I haz motivashuns. I haz needs. I haz issues."

The "detective" aspect of the Greatest Detective in the World is also way better, and the side missions compelling enough to pull me from the main quest (though I could care less about the AR training opportunities).

All of this makes the game a lot more fun -- beyond the solid stealth-or-brawler-or-gadget-or-investigation gameplay.

I'm mixed on the Catwoman missions, but I think that's just me -- it's somewhere in-between "different"{ and "not-different" gameplay, and I don't seem to be transitioning well. She is fun to watch in motion, though.

And being able to play as 70s Batman, or the Frank Miller's Dark Knight? Awesome. (As a fanboy, seeing that latter bad boy in motion gives me goosebumps). I also dig that it's not just the skin that changes -- there are changes to audio and animations, too.

I'm not done with the game yet (Mainly because I'm jumping between it, Dark Souls, Uncharted, and Skyrim) -- but I'll be joyfully investing in this game for a long, long time.

(And apologies for my brief fall into the pit of can haz cheezeburgers cat-speak. Not sure what happened there.)

X-Men: Destiny (Xbox 360)

I mentioned a while ago I was looking forward to what Silicon Knights was going to to with the X-Men franchise, and picked I picked up X-Men: Destiny yesterday to check it out.

I'm a Marvel fanboy, and a Scott Porter fan. Scott's a good actor, a nice guy in person, and he voices Adrian Luca, one of 3 characters you can choose to play through the single-player only game.

I'm only a a few hours in to the game so far, and to be honest, I'm pretty torn about how I feel about the game. Mainly because even though I'm a multi-fold fan, I'm finding I have to make myself play the game.

First, let me clear that I know nothing about the development of the game (time, budget, external publisher or IP impacts, etc.).

That said, I'm trying to figure out if the game is a great example of a super budget treatment of a high-shelf IP, or it's a cautionary tale of game design that hasn't evolved from 7 years ago.

The game is rough; I mean, really rough. Not just with "maybe-they-ran-out-of-time-and-that's-why-there's-invisible-collision-everywhere", but with "seriously-those-are-really-your-pre-rendered-character-assets-in-the-main-menu?-because-they're-in-your-face-and look-very-very-off".

There's even way too much legacy game design, opportunities to miss triggers and get stuck at a checkpoint, spawning enemies that stand idle-but-visible in the wings, and level layout that maybe is meant to be throwback-simple (driving the Player in a set direction), but is implemented badly. If you do somehow find a way to get off the path (by, y'know, walking around), you'll have to spend a ton of time running to get back to that point. No gameplay - just getting your avatar back to where it's supposed to have been before you fell off the path.

As far as playing the game, after picking my character (Adrian, so I can hear Scott's VO), I've decided to arbitrarily choose each of my upgrade paths. I figure, "If I was a mutant, I wouldn't have control over what powers manifested, so I'll play that way."

That's added a surprising amount of interest for me to the title, because it disorients me a bit, and makes the gameplay feel a bit more "real". I kind of wish Silicon Knights and other comic book devs would roll the dice like this intentionally -- it would possibly give Players more unique play experiences from each other.

That additional interest is needed, because while I'm glad there's a simple skill tree mechanic in the game, it's not as simply implemented as say, what's in Borderlands. And the "mutate" mechanic (think power mix-ins) is interesting, if a bit overwhelming in actuality (it doesn't seem to change gameplay significantly). Honestly, my main beef with the mutate mix-ins mechanic was it didn't work for the fiction -- but get far enough into the game, and it's explained enough to make sense for the game story. Ish.

Overall, if you're an X-Men fan, you might be able to look over the title's rough edges, and get more out of the game. If you're an X-Men fan and either a heavy gamer or a game developer, you might have a rougher time enjoying the title.

Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood

I'm about a quarter of the way through the single player side of Ubisoft's Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, and a few nights into the multiplayer mode.

Color me wicked impressed.

The single player -- the third installment in the series -- maintains its high production values, a coherent story and themes across titles, and refines the gameplay mechanics that worked well in the first two console titles.

And the multiplayer? A first for the franchise, think of that "assassin" game you maybe got to play in college, married to action stealth, having a tryst with a refined perks / streaks / customization mechanics system (a la Modern Warfare).

There are some core game modes for being killed by your friends, and all are points based. "Wanted" is an individual slayer mode, but more cat-n-mouse(ish) -- up to eight players are trying to kill their own assigned mark, and avoid getting killed. Killing the wrong mark (an NPC lookalike) loses the "contract", delays you getting a new one, and puts you at risk of getting killed yourself. You can't kill (but you can stun) your would-be assassin.

"Alliance" pits three separate two-person teams against each other (think an Assassin's Creed version of the Gears of War "Wingman" multiplayer mode).

Both "Wanted" and "Alliance" have "Advanced" versions of the gametypes, removing or nerfing regular gaming staples like height indicators, text cues, and the like (think Left 4 Dead's "Realism" mode", but not taken as far).

The final game mode (so far), is "Manhunt", with two opposing teams (assassin's and victims). Hunters score with assassinations, and the huntees get the same for staying anonymous ("incognito"), escaping or stunning their attackers. I don't think there's an Advanced mode for this.

That's what I have so far. These are just the first (positive) impressions so far -- not a review -- and I'll hopefully circle back when I've finished the single player game, and spent more time with the multiplayer.

Vanquish (Xbox 360)

I played the Vanquish demo on my Xbox 360, and I'm stoked and sad at the same time.

Stoked, because I like how slick, polished, and punishing Platinum Games titles can be.

I just noticed my Bayonetta review seems to have been lost to the ether. I've been calling that particular Platinum title, "The slickest, wildest I-don't-know-what-to-do-with-this I've played in some time." Production values are high, it's filled with actioning, platforming, motorcycle racing, quadruped scampering, and ... uh ... volleyball madness. Designers do things you shouldn't do (because they're hard) -- like take Mario Galaxy's 360-degree rotating sphere and drops it in a zone that also has 6 "floors". Camera hell, that.

And Platinum's black-and-white (and bloodsoaked) Madworld (on the Wii?) -- awesome.

I'm sad, though, because like Bayonetta, Vanquish might get lost in the piles -- between Metroid: Other M, Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions, Halo: Reach, and the other [BigTitle-Colon-Subtitled] games coming out at the same time.

I don't know if Vanquish will be as awesome as Bayonetta. And its early nineties, corny dialog might not be as laughtastic as its giant, high-heeled cousin -- it might be sad, ethno-centric bad-translation instead.

But, given the demo, and its pedigree, I'm willing to give it a try. I hope you do, too.

Halo 3: ODST (Xbox 360)

(Here are my single-player impressions for Halo 3: ODST. I'd like to give co-op and Firefight impressions as well, but my yahoo friends who also bought the game never have time to play this title, so updated impressions will have to wait.)

First, to get things out of the way, I'm a bit of a Halo Whore. This is partially because of the gameplay, universe, and mythos; partially due to my being impressed with the cohesive marketing juggernaut behind the franchise; and partially due to my affinity for alliteration.

That aside, Halo 3: (I-should-have-been-called-Recon) ODST is a great game -- and an uneven one, all at the same time.

The game is genuinely fun, has some depth, is genuinely different than the previous Halo games, and has more polish as well.

Those strengths are also weaknesses, though, because there are expectations around the Halo franchise, and losing the über-bad-assery of Master Chief takes some getting used to, in addition to the gameplay feeling a bit gimped by removing the the Halo 3 "X-button specials" (especially since enemies still have them).

But I've admittedly got a bit of a skewed perspective, because you have to play a bit more cautiously as an ODST than as a spartan (health doesn't regenerate), and I recently started playing on a level above normal on games (so, "Heroic" on ODST), which made the gameplay and "easy-to-die" experience waaay more stark than it might otherwise have been.

And while the engine feels visually tweaked, and for the most part I really liked things like the HUD mechanics, Modern Warfare or the Frostbite Engine are kind of the technical bars for cutting-edge FPS games, so I'm really looking forward to Microsoft's and/or Bungie's making a break from their current tech to do something technically even more exciting.

Going back to the positive aspects of gameplay, there are some intense, almost amazing moments where you have to retrench in intense firefights that genuinely made me feel good when I finally busted loose and wiped the floor with wave after wave of Covenant. My criticism is I wish the checkpoints were more deterministic, because while playing the game on "normal" mode would make replaying inconvenient, replaying on "Heroic" or "Legendary" is a non-trivial time-suck.

And while I said I mostly like the HUD mechanic in the game, it is a bit confusing, and I can't tell whether the mechanic is slightly different for each ODST member, or if it varied based on environment, or what the issue was, but there were times when it felt like both the standard and enhanced HUDs were versions of unusable in the heat of battle. Which sucked a bit.

Oh, and game designers (all of you), please stop with sucky-ass escort missions. I get irritated enough at bone-stupid AI either running too far ahead or falling too far behind, but when I'm doing a mission where Buck is my gunner, and it's not an AI, but a pathing issue that gets him stuck for 15 minutes in a box corner? Give me a break.

This a rambly, back-and-forth assessment ODST, but make no mistake, it's a really good title, and I'm glad Bungie tried something variant from their previous formulas, and included a lot of the mechanics from other titles (theater, file share, etc.).

Is it worth $60? No -- no title is. But wait until I try out the Firefight and online co-op modes before I decide whether it's any worse than other over-priced sixty-buck games. Oh, and no one should pay $60 for games, between promos, Amazon pricing, etc. -- I try not to spend more than $40-50 for 360 titles, and $30-40 for Wii titles.

And for Halo 3 fans who haven't bought all of the add-on maps, you do get 24 additional maps as part of buying the game -- the 21 previously released, and 3 all-new jobbies. Not bad.

Marvel Ulimate Alliance 2

(First Impressions.)

OK, I need to spend more time with Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 ("M-UATU", for those who have been paying attention).

I've been looking forward to it for a looong time, and it's ambitious as all get out -- multiple combinations of players and powers; two continuity arcs re-imagined; truly taking advantage of next-gen hardware (the last one was early in the hardware cycle); hitting multiple platforms and control schemes; and the whole "licensing IP that has rabid fanboys" thing.

And it's fun. But it's not as fun (for me) as the original MUA. I'm trying to figure out if that's because it's not new like the first game was (which wasn't new, per se, but was a good franchise evolution over the excellent X-Men Legends titles). Maybe it's that it's competing with too much coming out at the same time that I'm playing (including stellar same-genre (IP, not game) offering Batman: Arkham Asylum).

Maybe it's because all of the stuff that I mention above is too ambitious, and the project struggles a bit under all of that weight.

For whatever reason, out of my current game queue (which also includes Batman, ODST, Bowser's Inside Story, Scribblenauts), MUA2 is last on the priority list. And I don't know if I'll be able to get it cleared out before I move over to Modern Warfare 2, Brütal Legend, L4D2, and New Super Mario Bros.

What I haven't done yet is multiplayer. Since I'm a big co-op fan, the "fusion" gameplay mechanic looks tailor-made for it, and it feels like they've fixed the camera over the original MUA, this may be a serious additive grace for the game.

Hopefully, more detailed thoughts soon.

Batman: Arkham Asylum (Xbox 360)

I'm playing the new Batman: Arkham Asylum game on the Xbox 360, and I've been pretty impressed so far.

This is a solid, dark treatment of the license, the full game is more polished than the demo (which itself was a good concantenation of a few segments of the game to show scope and diversity), the detective mode has been tweaked (and is pretty slick), the art direction is cool (and consistent), fanboy unlockables are solid and slickly implemented, and I like the progression, the open-endedness(ish)ism of the title. And (yay!) the video tweak settings let me brighten the game without washing out the graphics -- very important for playing on a projector.

Mark Hamill (who is the Joker) and Kevin Conroy (who is the Batman, at least until I am), are fantastic -- as is a lot of the primary voice acting (some of the secondary (like the guards) doesn't come close to the caliber, which is unfortunate). Good voice acting makes a game; bad kills it. This is stellar stuff.

And I like that there are subtle things like me being able to move Batman around during an in-engine cutscene, downed enemies are still breathing (they're unconscious, not dead), and the brief (at least one so far) first-person implementation (hey, you get it for free with the tech; might as well play with it; which most licensed fair refuses to do).

It's got a few shortcomings, but nothing that kills the game for me.

First off is I'm not crazy about the muscle-bound nature of ol' Bats -- feels a bit over-done, put - a -space -marine - in - a - batsuit. Also, the skinning of the game is a bit of a weird mix of shiny and muddy, but that's stereotypical of the Unreal Engine (right or wrong). Also, I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I game on a projector, and at that size Rocksteady's particular implementation of the third-person camera causes a bit of a problem with slight queasiness that most other games don't cause.

But overall, the game is solid, I'm enjoying it, kudos to Rocksteady for getting it right, and I'll be tooling through it for a while.

Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe (Xbox 360)

I'm a bit of a Mortal Kombat fan. I'm a comic book fan. I sooo wanted to be a fan of Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe.

Unfortunately, so many things worked against the title for me, that I'm not a fan.

Granted, since I'm a fanboy, I had expectations. And they were dashed.

The fighting is frustrating, it devolves to button mashing that's not even fun (like Soul Calibur is fun), feels unpolished (art to animations to transitions to performance), the dialog and expositions are stilted and heavy-handed, and it just didn't do it for me.

Now, that said, it is fan-fare -- So I dig seeing my guys and gals in tights in a new setting. And while the characterization and dialog is challenging for the most part, a lot of love was obviously spent just on the Joker -- and he comes across well. There is one cut-scene moment Joker reaction when the main baddy is announced that is money, and makes the whole game worth it. Actor Richard Epcar doesn't take the place of Mark Hamill's joker for me, but he sells it.

The other thing to note is I played the whole thing on the Xbox 360 using standard controllers, and the 360 D-pads are crap -- especially for fighting games.

Conan (Xbox 360)

OK, Conan is an oldish 360 game, and I finished it months ago, but I've been meaning to write about it ever since. Reason for the delay is the final boss battle (more on that later).

This a the kind of game that makes me irritated at game reviews/reviewers.

This is a solid licensed title that is ambitious and has so much going right for it, that -- especially given the stigma for a licensed title -- it's great.

Nihilistic Software should be commended shoving so much stuff into the game -- from the basic hack-n-slash to the much deeper combat and combo system, to entertaining and stretch Xbox Achievements (50 grapple kills, 100 dismemberments, etc.), to technical implementations like environmental cloth and destructibility.

Its tale is knit together by game writing great Susan O’Connor, and has a stellar score from Michael Reagan (Twisted Metal: Black, God of War / II, the underrated music from Brute Force, etc.).

Besides, the fact that you can pick this game up for ~$10 bucks anywhere should make it a no-brainer for Conan franchise fans.

Since few games are perfect, here are a few of the rough edges Conan does fall into: camera, platforming, polish, gratuitousness, and quick-times.

Camera.

Seriously, I have had very few good fixed cameras in third-person titles. When the camera is not good, don't make it fixed. Conan uses a fixed not-good third person camera.

Platforming.

I like platforming -- in platformers. I don't like platforming in third-person actioner titles. I'm fine with the puzzle mechanic, and lightweight platforming-esque maneuvers that complete said puzzles. But jumping from ledge to ledge with the above fixed-camera implementation? Anger-inducing.

Polish.

Like I said, kudos to Nihilistic for putting so much into the game. It does feel like in places the polish falls down, with unexpected clipping, some texture issues, etc. that almost made the game feel unfinished to me in places. That may be a horribly unfair assessment, and the reality is all games (unfortunately) have some level of bugginess and rough edges.

Other than that, a few of the environments feel a little bland -- and they feel that way because other areas (think a hall populated with rich props, interesting textures, cloth banners, etc.) are not bland at all.

Gratuitousness.

Some people are probably going to call prude on me for this one.

I'm not talking the violence (which most games let you dial down) -- I'm talking the topless girls you rescue throughout the game. It'd be nice from a philosophical level to be able to "turn off nudity" like you can "turn of gibs" in so many games (and hey, in essence it's the same mesh and animation sets across most or all of the girls, so it should be easy). There are some tween kids I'd say could play a game like Conan despite the violence, but I wouldn't endorse the title for that same demographic, because of its obnoxious titillation.

Quick-time Events.

Developers who use quick-time events, I am convinced, hate gamers. That's my bias, but other than Resident Evil 5 and Marvel Ultimate Alliance coming close to making not totally sucky QT events, I hate these things. What's worse than a cut-scene? A cut scene where you can't passively watch, and can't really control. The industry calls these "quick-time events".

And Conan? While most of the QTs are irritating, the final boss battle implementation is horrific. I finished the game months ago, and it's taken me this long to write the review, because the QTs in that fight pissed me off sooo bad -- and not in a Ninja Gaiden "this is hard and is kicking my butt and I am going to beat it" kind of way, but in a "you are f***ing kidding me? Another cheap interruption?" kind of way.

See, where Conan is strong is its implementation of combos (X+X+X+Y, for example). But to make the final boss quick-time events "harder", devs decided to shrink the time you have to hit the button that you're supposed to mash. Problem is, if you're in a combo, it has to finish out before it registers the QT button, and usually stomps on it. This is maddeningly infuriating, and made me almost hate the game, even though it was just that last, bad implementation that soured me.

Devs: Quick-times are bad. Stop using them. Thank you in advance.

Anyway, pick up the title if you can. At sub-ten-bucks, it's a fun, brainless brawler at the least, and a deep combo license treatment for franchise fans in the extreme.

Gears of War 2

I'm digging that this year's sequels (Fallout 3, Call of Duty: World at War, etc.) are so top-notch.
I'm really enjoying Gears 2, but taking freaking forever to get through it, since I decided to play through the thing only on a co-op only with one friend who is not as irresponsible as me (look, the gutters are already plugged, they're not going to get more plugged... Sh##, they're more plugged).

Anyway, I like the upped visual fidelity, the great design, and the fact that this time, they didn't throw away the professional writer's story (and this one's an occasional impressive kick in the gut).

A lot of the technical stuff I like in the game isn't from Epic, per se, (though it wouldn't happen without the game engine vehicle and the top-notch art talent). It's actually NVIDIA PhysX -- their licensed physical simulation tech that gives gamers everything from tear able soft bodies to destructibility to particles and fluids, probably implemented through an APEX-like integration. Go, NVIDIA ...

Microsoft so wants this game to be #1 for the year. And impressive initial sales aside, this'll be a version of "throw-more-money-and-get-elected", as launch weekend promotions for the title (gift cards, collectibles, incentives, etc.) were insane -- and far away and above anything I've seen this year for other contending titles. I still think Fallout 3 will take GoTY, which is a bit problematic, since there are so many good games of different genres out there.

Gears 2 isn't perfect yet (but what is?). Co-op sessions have really ticked us off as me or my partner get stuck in a bounding box, can't move and have to reset to a checkpoint. And we ran into a weird disconnected camera situation while driving a tank, made worse by the tank clipping through the hard surface terrain in a noticeable (and ugly) way.

But those aren't enough to detract from how much I'm enjoying the game. I am curious to see how long it lives in my Xbox, though -- there's a lot of good stuff out there now.

Halo 2

Monday nights are weekly Halo 2 fests online with known friends (Wednesdays alternate between Halo 3 and Call of Duty 4). Camaraderie as we're all now scattered to the wind, my tie to my Austin buddies, and avoids the inanity of the online anonymous dumberatti.

Last night was a riot, with the best games being swordball on Lockout (24 medals, baby!), and CTF on Relic, which had us so evenly matched, the game lasted freaking forever (yeah, we had 4 to their 3, but our 4th was gone most of the game, and was basically cannon fodder; for them and us).

Good times ...

Dragonball Z: Burst Limit

I'm about an hour and a half and three chapters in to Dragonball Z: Burst Limit.

This is a solid licensed fighter, but limiting it to that would be a disservice.

For fans of the creative intellectual property, DBZ: Burst Limit finally gets it right (at least in relation to the recent spate of games).

But for fanboys -- you may wet yourself (I'm dry, but just barely).

DBZ:BL (like that?) is a decently deep fighter, contains IP (and genre) signature tropes that I totally dig (for example, sub or dub purists? You can play with English voice dubbing, or in Japanese, with English subtitles.

On the feeling empowered / pushing myself "as the character" front, I really felt like Kaioken x3 was the shizzle (relax, x4 was a cutscene, so it didn't do the same for me); I can't wait to hit super, let alone take on Freiza (and Cell? Please? Majin Buu?).

And while I genuinely suck at button mashers, I genuinely feel like the controls for DBZ:BL are more intuitive, and I find myself doing things "right" more often than with, say, Soul Calibur (much as I love that franchise, I get pwned more often than not).

Don't get me wrong, this DBZ game isn't perfect -- the camera at times seems a little floaty, I can't figure out why they made some of the stage and cut-scene transitions, the rating system is overly complex, and I have a love/hate relationship with the unlock notifications.

But those are trivial detractors from a great overall package.

C'mon Atari -- you're not the love from my youth, but I'm still rooting for you. Knock out some more like this one.

Ninja Gaiden II (360 demo)

I so dig Ninja Gaiden, so I was stoked when the demo for Ninja Gaiden II finally came stateside (last? WTF?).

The demo gives that sense of amazing ninja bad-assery, which is great, but ...

This may be the worst third-person camera ever. I'm hoping it's just an artifact of the demo, though.

Call of Duty 4

I spend a lot of time on Call of Duty 4 on the Xbox 360. I'd say for FPSes, CoD4 is my current favorite single and multiplayer game (yea, verily even unseating Halo 3).

There are some good missions with unexpected consequences; I'm impressed with the developer's gutsiness.

More later. Possibly.

Acme Arsenal

I tooled through the Acme Arsenal demo today on the Xbox 360, because (1) I was watching a bunch of classic Looney Toons cartoons I downloaded through Xbox Live Marketplace, and (2) It was made with my company's tech.

It's a decent little platformer, though I wish it let you invert the X and Y axis. Note to game devs doing demos: If I'm going to evaluate your game, don't give me a reason to not play your demo.

If I can't invert controls, I normally don't bother with a demo -- Reason (2) was the only thing that kept me playing.

Assassin's Creed

I've been playing Assassin's Creed since it came out this week.

I'm busy with a move and a new job in the video game industry, so I don't have time to do a review right now.

So, let me just say it's all kinds of awesome.

If you love Crackdown, think of it as a super sexy stealth Crusades-era(ish)(esque) Crackdown. Think of it as a next-gen Crusades-era(ish)(esque) Buffy (the great first game from The Collective), with a better game save system and fewer cheap deaths (oh, non-poisonous, non-bottomless deadly water, how I hated thee).

It's a great game. Great story. Solid gameplay. Fun. Fun.

Is it perfection?

No, but game ratings are broken, so I'll steal from the movie ratings and say this is a five-star game.

Now go play it before Mass Effect comes out this week.

Clive Barker's Jericho (Xbox 360)

I played the Xbox Live single-player demo for Clive Barker's Jericho from Codemasters / Alchemic Productions / Imajica Productions, Inc. (not to be confused with the TV series).

Not bad.

It's a "supernatural shooter", and I think it will probably do a passable job.

I mean, I like Clive Barker. At least I liked the Nightbreed movie, The Thief of Always book, and the game, Clive Barker's Undying (perhaps the best sound landscape in a game).

And it's Clive Barker, so there's a deep mythos built under Clive Barker's Jericho.

The game doesn't look bad at all -- let's call it "gross pretty". Gameplay is a bit run-of-the-mill, with one "standard" weapon (with primary and alternate firing), and special / supernatural abilities.

It's a squad-based game, so each of the six squad members have different weapons and supernatural abilities, and you can switch between them on the fly (the demo lets you switch between just two).

The switch is supposed to matter, but after playing BioShock, having to switch between different people (where in BioShock all of my weapon and power options were in the same body) felt a little wonky.

Of course, it's going to depend on the gameply and level design. If the game is built in a such a way that switching between various squad mates matters, or if you can use different people to solve problems differently, this should work out. But if switching doesn't matter, the mechanic will likely feel contrived, and I will be irritated.

There are also button-matching "mini-games" (called "life moments" or something), where you need to match the on-screen buttons to survive gruesome attacks. Fail, and you suffer a gruesome death.

I'm mixed on these sequences (think an analog of the Frost Giant fight in Marvel Ultimate Alliance) -- I tend to not like them, because they remind me I'm playing a game, and take me out of the moment. But I do like the frantic urgency they invoke.

We'll see how it all comes together when Clive Barker's Jericho releases next week).

(You can also download the PC Demo.)

Halo 3

I finished Halo 3 a week ago, and am just now getting around to posting my thoughts on it.

Brass tacks?

If you love Halo and Halo 2, you'll love Halo 3.

;-)

Actually, if you really enjoy twitch shooters, you'll likewise enjoy Halo 3. If you enjoy tactical shooters, I still think you'll get a bang out of Halo 3 (sorry).

I was little rough on the game in my first impressions, and softened a bit in my second.

The fact is I consider this third iteration of the game a fantastic title. There's the single player, the multiplayer, and the extras.

The single player campaign mode is a fun romp, and even more so with 4 player online co-op. I'm bummed that it's a max of two players on the same box, but that's a concession Bungie decided to make.

Graphically, Halo 3 is a good-looking game on the gameplay side of things. We're talking gorgeous at times. It may feel like it comes up a bit short if you do like I did and play it back-to-back with BioShock, but that's not a fair comparison (and not because of the game engines).

BioShock and Halo 3 are doing different things. The former is a tight environment, has a contained number of NPCs, etc. The latter makes use of long-draw distances, arguably larger trajectory calculations for weapons use, vehicles, etc.

Halo 3 looks really good, and I particularly like what they've done with some of the outdoor environments. Snow, trees, and other environmental additives look great, and indoor environments (especially the metallic ones), look slick and appropriately reflective.

Less so for the cutscenes, which are wildly inconsistent. If the scene has Master Chief or the Arbiter, they're pretty slick; but in some of the cutscenes the people look like the original Half-Life (which was great nine years ago; today, not so much) -- they're stilted, and they move unrealistically. I find that surprising in a now-gen game.

The gameplay itself is great. I like the new mechanics for multiple grenade types and the addition of special equipment is pretty slick, but using the bumpers to do everything is really screwing me up -- I constantly drop a piece of special equipment when I mean to reload (thanks to the remapping of Halo 2's X Button to the right bumper). Of, course, I'm probably making this worse by switching back and forth between Halo 2 and Halo 3 (Monday nights are H2, Wednesday's are H3), so I'm not going to belabor it. I also like the addition of Quake-like "Man Cannons".

For the most part, levels are well designed, with the exception of Level 8. That one wicked sucks.

And there are some usability shortcomings in Halo 3 that I find surprising.

For example, while playing four-player co-op through a level, one of our members had to quit -- which killed the game and made the remaining three of us have to restart from the beginning of the level. That's pretty poor.

Likewise, I had a buddy playing local co-op with me, but we were doing Xbox Live co-op mode in case friends wanted to join. When he quit and left, I couldn't continue the game, because it kept asking me to reconnect the second controller, even when I quit Halo 3 and restarted. Turns out the problem was H3 was still looking for the player for the Xbox Live Guest Account we'd logged into so my buddy could play. I had to quit out to the Xbox 360 Dashboard, logout of all profiles, log myself back in, then restart Halo 3. Yeah, that's inane.

Not sure how those two kinds of things got sign-off while Bungie was finishing the game.

And story-wise, the game is OK, but it's not spectacular. I know other reviews have lauded the story, and I'm trying to figure out if they're doing that relative to stereotypically sub-par writing in games, or if I'm missing something.

I mean, by Bungie's own admission (earlier; they changed their story later), Halo was never meant to be a trilogy. I think that's what makes Halo such a great story, and Halo 3 (for me) less so -- it really struggles to carry out the "finalization" of the story arc.

Add to that some kludgy moments that are meant to be profound, some WTF dialogue or scene transitions, and some interruptive devices that always elicit expletives or derogatory comments from my campaign co-op brethren, and the story (for me) is one of the weak points in the game.

And there are marketing impacts that undercut the game's story, too.

First, (for me) the "Believe" video advertising campaign is top-notch and moving. It set a high bar for emotional impact the game didn't match.

In addition, Something happened to the Marvel comic book tie-in that was supposed to bridge Halo 2 and Halo 3, and was supposed to complete before the game was released (so far, only issue #1 has seen retail). Unfortunately, Bungie or Microsoft violated an entertainment product rule: Don't make something outside the product required in order to understand the product. It's a rule because when violated it creates a sense in the consumer the product is incomplete or "broken" in some way.

Which creates something Microsoft doesn't want -- a product that is less accessible to people outside of the "Halo Nation".

Oddly, none of this lessens the overall fun of the campaign mode.

Multiplayer needs another, probably separate write-up, but it's wicked fun (so far, I've got no personal time logged, as I've been playing on other people's boxes and tags). I like things like the new swords mechanic (bouncing off a swords dual that creates the need for a quick B Button smash), and I like the limiting of the life of a sword, so a guy can't repeatedly pwn me from halfway across the universe.

And Forge freaking rocks.

And, true to Halo 2, Bungie is already tweaking playlists. And while this sounds ungrateful, their recent tweak reducing the "Shotty Snipers" variant (shotguns and snipers) feels a day late and a dollar short. Having played the beta and trolled the forums, this was a largely hated gamegtype then, and Bungie didn't respond to the feedback until it increases proportionally to the release install base. See, this is my getting spoiled and selfish as a Bungie consumer. Shame on me.

On the product packaging side, I bought the Legendary Edition, which I regret. If you need a recap of the versions, go here, but the net of it is the The Legendary Edition has an extra DVD disc and comes in a miniature Spartan replica helmet.

I like the insight from the Bungie folks on the remastered cinematics from the older Halo games, but I will be angry if those videos I paid for ever show up for download on Xbox Live or from Bungie or Microsoft. The Legendary Edition also does not contain the hardbound art and fiction book of the Special Edition, and while the helmet is much larger than I expected, I'm in essence paying an $80 premium for a plastic prop (proudly displaying made in China, so I'm not licking it). To me, that's not worth it. It's a cool (unlickable) prop, though.

Overall, the game rocks, and me flagging these shortcomings is just my way to balance what are in my mind overly high reviews of the game.

That said, I will probably replay the single player portion of this game more often and log more online multiplayer hours than any game this year and next.

Rent: Yeah, but why?
Buy: You better believe it. Standard Edition if you just want the game; Special Edition if you want the art book and extra DVD; Legendary Edition if you want an unlickable mini Spartan replica helmet.