some video game reviews. short ones.
i got a ps3 some time last year, and a nice big 42" tv to go with it. i bought the ps3 because i read in a gaming mag at the fish waffle place that Fallout 3 was coming out. Fallout 2 is the #3 greatest game of all time, so I was fairly excited by this news. After some reasoning, I decided that the ps3 was the better of the two eligible consoles for me (i will not do PC gaming again. fuck the upgrade dance. okay, maybe if they make another starcraft. but it better be really starcrafty, not all lame and goofy like warcraft 3 was).
Here are the games i got, reviewed in basically the order I played them:
Rachet And Clank: The One For The PS3: Yep, this is a Rachet and Clank game. I've played all the PS2 R+C games and I dig em. However, this one was just way too short. The graphics were stunning and the gameplay was the same (in a good way). The weapons were either familiar or funny, or both. The problem was with side quests. The last R+C had two arenas and several races. This one had one arena and no races (or maybe, one optional race that I never figured out how to play). It was over too soon.
Drake's Fortune: Awful graphics. Lazy ass programmers didn't sync their refresh buffers to the refresh rate of the TV, and you can easily see the result: tearing of the picture. Gameplay was fun and I got into it and felt it was appropriately long, engaging enough. But not a favorite, and I wouldn't recommend anyone to buy it.
Resistance: Wow! This one showed me what a shooter on the console could be. Really good graphics, great controls and gameplay. Doofy story, but who cares? A serious adrenaline waster. Replay the game to access different weapons. Recommended.
Resistance 2 : (Listed out of order, to contrast with Resistance.) Disappointing. The graphics were the best I've seen on the ps3 (until maybe dead space). The controls were all changed, for no good reason. The weapon system was also different, in a way that I appreciated: you didn't get to carry 20 different weapons, only two. I liked the thinking this added to the game. The weapons themselves were also entertaining. The problem with this game was length and replayability. Whereas Resistance seemed like an amazingly long game in this day and age, r2 was shockingly short. And replayability was 0: no new weapons the second time through. You could play it on a tougher difficulty level, but... why?
Metal Gear Solid 4: Once I had the ps3, i had to get mgs4. It delivered exactly what you want from MGS: incredibly long and boring cutscenes. Out of the whole series, I only played mgs2. This one outdoes #2 by a long shot: the cutscenes are twice as long, four times as boring, 8 times as irrelevant, and filled with long stretches of silence as the characters stare at each other. Ha ha! The gameplay is all MGS, only better, with all kinds of weapon choices, customizations, and tactics. The MGS humor is all there (e.g. a hilarious call from Otacon to change discs, har har har), replayability is high (you can play through again keeping all your old weapons, skipping the cutscenes). graphics are quite good, enemy AI is stupid and predictable, just what you want in a MGS game. enemy character design is entertaining. I never got used to the controls, but I never got used to the controls in MGS2 either. i think that actually adds to the gameplay: when I'm attacked, I flail about and take damage. Probably quite realistic.
Best of all: even though this was only the second MGS game I've played (out of many created), the writing, plot, and performances made me feel (seriously) like I'd played all of them. The skillful storytelling had me thinking, "oh yeah, i remember that" about plot elements from games i'd never played. The marketing makes it clear that this is Snake's last game, and I felt the weight of sadness press down on me the closer I came to the end of this game. I'll miss Snake.
Fallout 3: This is what I bought the whole system for. It was worth it. This is not fallout 2. It is not as good as fallout 2. It is not as fun as fallout 2, it is not as addictive as fallout 2, it is not as funny as fallout 2, it is not as entertaining as fallout 2. the NPCs are stupid, annoying, repetitive, poorly written, buggy, and cliched. But f3 has one thing f2 could not have: expansiveness. When I stepped out of the Vault and looked around: holy crap! There was a wasteland. The main character of f3 is not an NPC, and has no lines: it's the wasteland. And it's realized brilliantly and beautifully. Towns, sewers, caves, and tunnels: they all look the same. But step out into the wasteland and look around, the world of fallout is vividly realized. the wasteland is alive.
(incidentally, yesterday, at one point, I saw the big radar telescope in PA and my brain recognized it as one of the satcom arrays in the NW of the fallout map. ha!)
I don't think i could recommend f3 to anyone who isn't a fan of f2 or a fan of the genre. the combat system is good, imho, but replayability is small, and i leveled up way too fast -- reaching max only 2/3 through the game. i stopped exploring the wasteland to finish the game. why? because i didn't care to see another lame realization of Bartertown with stupidly scripted miniquests and whiney 1-note "characters".
Bioshock: They said it was the greatest game of 2008, and I agree it mighta been. Layers upon layers of plot trickery, great voice acting, spooky atmosphere, wonderful graphics and wonderful things for the graphics to show us. At the same time, there came a point where i really just got tired of the same old same old -- yes, i know how to kill these dumb splicers, do i really have to kill 10 more to advance the plot a little? kinda tiresome. i died a lot near the end(s). this is the first game i've played on the ps3 (and maybe also on the ps2) that had any ideas. though in some places the idea was presented with pretty sophomoric effort, the idea itself is intriguing -- and gives birth to an entire world.
replayability was good enough. the game is very linear, there's only one choice to be made. i played through quickly the second time, since i'd gotten good at the weapons, making the other choice. it didn't make much of a difference in the outcome of the game. the gameplay is slightly different as a result, but overall, not much difference. still, worth replaying. highly recommended.
Dead Space: still playing through this one. it's got a lame, string-you-along plot that contains just about every space monster cliche you've ever seen, borrowing heavily from aliens, event horizon, and even bioshock (most everyone is dead and gone, you find audiotapes to present the plot). okay, so the plot is lame. so is the "acting" and the voiceovers. but the gameplay is fantastic: it's new. it's a 3rd person shooter, and at first i hated the controls, but i got used to them. Those headshots you've been developing all these years as a FPS gamer? Useless. You find that out real quickly. And if you don't figure it out yourself, you find an audio tape that spells it out for you.
A lot of your other FPS skills are useless, too. Maybe hardcore FPSers will have no trouble transitioning, or have seen other games like this, but I haven't. Here's the bit from the reviews that got me to buy the game: 0-G combat. Yep, 0-G combat. It didn't turn out to be what I thought it would be, but it is still majorly cool.
The graphics are on par with the best I've seen on the ps3, and the enemy and set design is great. Lots of gore and bodies being torn apart, to the point where I don't like to watch it, and realized i wasn't as desensitized to that as i thought i was. over the top, imho. enemies are scary, panic is often induced by their attacks. highly recommended.