Style Savvy: Trendsetters (3DS)

OK, I'm obviously not the target audience for Style Savvy: Trendsetters, Nintendo's fashionista simulation for its current flagship handheld.

Aside from the title, that I'm not the target demographic is obvious -- not the least of which is my character constantly being referred to as "she", "her", and nothing but feminine pronouns and modifiers. It's also obvious in my lack of vocabulary for fashion stylings like "pop", or "feminine" stylings it would be easy for me to previously reduce to "styles females wear".

But Style Savvy is deeper than all that. It puts me in the role of a part-time assistant at a fashion boutique with a gift for collating ensembles for the shop's entrenched and want-to-be trendistas (copyright Adam Creighton). The game walks me through the terminology and logic of matching clothes to personalities, builds my client base as a value-add to my employing boutique, gradually opens up parts of the town for me to explore (café, supplier store, and so on), and has the requisite "my apartment" to decorate, re-arrange, change my own fashions, catch up on the day's events, and plan for the next).

And while the game helped me get in touch with my own inner tween girl (which only felt slightly less creepy than it probably sounds, if I'm being honest), I'm curious as to who target the audience for this game really is.

I think trend-savvy teen girls probably will find the game a bit young to hold their attention, and I think younger girls who will find the gameplay engaging are pre-conceit gamers for this title. And, arguably, building a style-collecting, must-match mentality of thousand-dollar-plus budgets is arguably not the best way on which to spend development fixation habits (I'd argue "the "Gotta Catch 'Em All" of Pokémon is fictionally abstracted enough (and actually has positive developmental effects), though some would argue that).

As far as the 3D implementation, I have by no means plumbed the depth of the game at this point, but I really don't see a need for 3D in this game. More than some games, this title requires a particular positioning of the head (relative horizontal and distance) that becomes distracting even with minor shifts in either axis. And since the game is stylus-only, it could just as easily be a tap-only mobile title.

But none of that is to take away from what I consider a solid, well-implemented, fairly deep genre title. Knowing what it is, I think folks can enjoy it independent of their demographic, and for me as a game developer, the title (because of it's non-matching target audience-to-conceit) actually made it easier for me to see the base mechanics underneath the genre, and how simply and well those are implemented.

It's a tough title to recommend, because it's so genre-specific, but knowing all that, I'd choose to play it.

Professor Layton and the Miracle Mask (3DS)

What's the positive version of "More of the same"?

Seriously -- This is important. Because I'm pretty sure I always want a Layton game in my handheld, and getting one for the 3DS is pretty great. Especially one that holds on the good, and adapts to the platform.

Professor Layton and the Miracle Mask carries forward all of the stuff the series is known for -- deceptively simple gameplay, elegant execution of the overall package, inclusion of fun characters, and tons of engaging puzzles.

The cut scenes are just pleasant, engaging little things, and until Ni No Kuni comes out (soooo soon!), this as close as I get to playing a Studio Ghibli game.

The shift of exploration to the top screen while keeping navigation on the bottom touch screen works well. I wasn't looking forward to it, but I don't notice it all, and think it makes exploration more engaging for the handheld.


I'm not a fan of the title's in-game polygonal cut scenes -- I prefer the animated ones. And I enjoy the voice acting, so when it's gone in some 2D character dialog transitions ... I miss it.

And the 3D? Well, aside from the polygonal cut scenes mentioned above (which don't stand up to the pre-rendered animated or static scenes even in 2D), things look pretty good in stereoscopic 3D. There a handful of graphical items where elements are in a layer that requires careful distance and angle positioning, but these are few and far between (and far less than other 3DS titles). And some of the puzzles actually benefit from the 3D (imagine!) -- Another feather in the cap over other 3DS titles.

Strong recommend for this title. Level 5 did a great, great job, and it's nice to have another Layton title taking up regular residence in my handheld.

Kingdom Hearts 3D [Dream Drop Distance] (3DS)

I've been playing Kingdom Hearts 3D [Dream Drop Distance] on Nintendo's 3DS handheld, and I'm really enjoying it.

Typical of many Square Enix games, the production values are high, pre-rendered 3D cutscenes look almost  "current gen console", the voice work is robust and pretty comprehensive, and the gameplay is really, really diverse.

Design-wise, the game does a good job of dropping you in, and offering you dismiss-able tutorials. Even better (design-wise), it follows up tutorials with you repeating mechanics shortly after you've learned them with a second character. It's not overt, and it's a slick way to re-inforce the mechanics.

Which is good, because there is a lot (a lot a lot) going on here. Shoving a full-on RPG into a handheld, with real-time combat, minigames, leveling, companion creature mixing and training, etc. -- Can be a bit much. I think if I were playing just this title, I'd do fine, but I'm finding as I bounce back and forth between a few dozen  3DS, PS Vita, Xbox 360, PS3, Wii U, and SNES games in the same two weeks, I get lost every time I come back Kingdom Hearts. (Not bragging about the titles / platforms I'm hitting; it's work.)

That said, the game is really good. Like "warm hug from an old PS2 friend who moved into the now" good. It's a little typical teen angsty, but in a fun, non-whiny way.

And Square Enix does a good job making the core Disney characters in the game feel weighty and important and cool -- And they're not even the owning company, so it's even more impressive.

And there are nice touches -- like language that positions tutorials as "mementos", the use of a slick conceit that makes the game accessible to both new and longtime players in the context of this game's (and the franchise's) fiction, etc.

So far, I could do without the 3D in this game. While the 3D functionality in the handheld is scalable from "off" to "full", if it's on at all, I have to be at the perfect angle to make it work. The game's mechanics require pushing both of the shoulder buttons (which pulls the handheld inside my set distance for enjoying the 3D), or the L or R shoulder button (pivoting the console and shifting / "bouncing" the image).

I was turning on the 3D during cut scenes and off during gameplay, but stopped doing that.

Personal-bias-wise, I don't like switching contexts in games (x is sometimes jump and sometimes interact and sometimes julienne fries), but I like it even less in the real world. Needing to interrupt gaming to adjust the 3D, or keep a stylus out and grab it in menus but not use it in gameplay detracts from the overall experience.

But it doesn't detract by much, and it no way takes away from giving a strong recommendation for playing Kingdom Hearts 3D [Dream Drop Distance].

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.)

Dark Souls (PS3)

Dark Souls is the spiritual successor to Demon Souls.

(I love that sentence.)

And it is a brutal, brutal game. I spent an hour getting my tail handed to me because I attacked a guy I was not ready to face, and kept respawning and could not undue the bad decision I had made, and I hadn't mastered the early-in-the-game battle mechanics needed to hold my own. And I didn't get my shield (which I was told to pick up). And almost nothing is explained.

This is not bad game design -- this is designed consequence.

I love how hard Demon Souls is. I love how much harder Dark Souls is. It's hard to explain, because it's not exactly masochism (not exactly). For me, it's wanting to improve in a game that feels so immersive because it does not hold my hand, and failure to pay attention and keep my wits about me is hours-upon-hours costly.

I have to play so many games that I don't want to play. I should be upset at how long this game it going to take me, but I'm not upset that I'm forced to spend time with such a caliber, sleeper offering.

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.