When L4D was released, I was blown away. The games only major complaint, was the lack of content…..I guess I shuld have got worried when Valve dragged their heels about releasing the SDK. If that was not warning sign enough the “Survival Pack” was basically 2 vs levels we had hacked 6 months before, and one one impossible Survival lighthouse map.

I guess this was the biggest warning sign, very poor effort at a DLC release. That said I was sure Valve would make good at E3, and wow us with 4 new maps for the excellent L4D, but no…they release L4D 2….with the plastic wrap still on the ground from the first release!

WTF guys? Do you really expect us to shell out for a new game, after getting a game that was 70% finished to begin with. I buy all my PC games, as I know my custom helps make games better and keep prices down. This is nothing short of betrayal by what I used to consider a PC institution. Shame on you. Thumbs up to the developers who I know went: “Are you sure this is a good idea?” - Well the Boycot L4D group has 10k members….and that will only rise….

Left 4 Dead 2 Boycott, join up here.

Like most players I did not invest much time in the single player game. Although the L4D bots are excellent, they are still bots and can never come close to human companions. For this reason most player were drawn online to the fantastic campaign mode.

If I can make one major criticism of L4D, it would be the lack of content from the outset. I thought that 4 “movies” was not enough content to launch with, and that delaying the game to add more movies would have been a better idea, and lead to a better product hitting the shelves. That said I was surprised how the AI Director really did make each play through a completely different experience, however it is not strong enough on its own to make up for a lack of content and the fact that after 6 months

Online campaign mode is excellent. With a good team you will quickly overcome the game on expert, and earn your achievements without too much difficulty. Valve (Turtle Rock) have managed to meld excellent multi-player FPS action, with scripted crescendo events that would usually be seen in Half Life 2. The union of of classic multi-player with scripted events allows the developers to get the best of both worlds. They can deliver a strong narrative, while still making a game with excellent co-op play.

Where Left 4 Dead has come into its own is the versus mode of play. While I battled my way through the campaign mode I spared little thought for versus, but having played it for a few months…I can never see myself going back to campaign mode again!!! Vs puts two teams of 4 players against each other. Both teams get to play as Survivors and Infected, which each round being scored based on how well you did (or how poorly you did!!!)

The jewel of the versus mode for me has to be playing as the infected. The level of co-ordination involved to bring down a team of good survivors is astonishing. Smokers can be used to pull a well disciplined team apart, right after a boomer has blinded the entire team with some well place vomit!!! To add to that the excellent Hunter class allows spectacular acrobatic leaps from rooftops right down on top of your unsuspecting victims!! What I really love about this mode of play is that the sometimes predictable AI director takes a back stage, as human infected players can set ambushes that the infected AI could never hope to match (The top of the ladder in Mercy Hospital Finale being one that springs to mind).

The only disturbing trend I have seen in VS mode is the “race” to the safe room you sometimes see. Basically the survivors charge as fast as they can, seriously limiting the amount of time the infected players have to spawn. The end result is the level is over with a handful of rounds fired!!! ITs an exploit I thing the developers need to address, because 12 year old spotty teenagers are getting a great kick out of doing it over and over…..

I would have to give this game a 9.5 out of 10, its a gem. More content please.

The review given by my friend was mostly negative. Most of the elements we enjoyed from the first game seem to have been stripped from this new sleek version of DOW?! The onus now seems to be on controlling smaller groups of men, in an attempt to push the DOW franchise more towards Company of Heroes (Which in our opinion is now a glowing symbol for Real Time Strategy). Now this move alone is not cause for concern, and indeed with the new Tales of Valor their are hints about controlling just one Tiger tank in some of the missions.

There is nothing wrong with trying to drive a genre forward, but I’m afraid all of the above can be viewed from a more cynical point of view. Stripping out base building will annoy people who like base building….like me. I enjoy being able to build defenses and indeed using base building as a game winning tactic (least we forget the Eldar teleport and cloak, build a webway and “appear” in your enemies base). I know I am not alone in my base building fetish. In COH it was great fun to build a structured front line of barbed wire, sandbags….tank traps etc…etc….

Now all this is leading me to this….they are dumbing down PC gaming. It’s blatantly obvious the console market is now bigger than the PC market, so PC gaming and indeed PC game developers are facing “The Console Effect”:

“Can you build a base with an XBOX controller”
- Yes but its very difficult, if not so annoying that its useless
“OK cut it and put more onus on the units”

“Can you select and assign teams for co-ordinated strategic strikes”
- Yes but its very difficult to do
“OK cut down the number of units, and lets introduce Boss fights!!!”

What in the name of christ jebus were you thinking!!!!! Boss fights!!!!! FFS!!!!!!
Why not just put Mario and Sonic in power armour and let us run them around the place picking up gold coins!

My friend made the point that the introduction of a commander who could gain XP, is a concept that was first introduced in Warcraft 3 (6 years ago). He then made a point that the first shooter to crack the console was Halo…..10-15 years after wolfenstein/doom/unreal had created the genre.

It must be really annoying for PC developers who have to dumb down their content and indeed detract from the overall experience to service a larger part of the market who cannot use “wasd”. It’s a very sad time…..”The Console Effect” is a creation the of Sony, Nintendo and MS…..and as we have seen with MS its not about innovation or improvement….its about making things look shiny and stupid, and requiring massive hardware to then run said content!!!!!

Story
Fairly standard stuff here. Set in default generic African war torn country. Two factions are fighting for power. Supplying both sides with guns and ammo is the ominous “Jackel”. you goal from the outset is simple, kill the “the Jackel”, the bastard supplying both sides with weapons. As the story plays out it becomes clear your mission will not be ending quite as planned.

Gameplay
First the bad…always the bad. There are too many checkpoints in this game. When starting a mission from point A to point B, you may encounter as many as 3-4 checkpoints en-route. These checkpoints are manned by up to 4-5 men, including fixed machine guns and “the jeep of death”. Now I would not mind if you could drive around them, or simply plow straight through…but the developers kindly gave the AI the ability to race after you in jeeps. Dont get me wrong, the idea/action is great…..but when it happens 4 times in 10 minutes, it becomes very repetitive and a major hastle as you expend precious ammo en-route to your target. I hear the checkpoints were added because play-testers complainind the game could be too boring due to its size, wrong solution. The ability to attack and destroy a checkpoint (permanently) would have been a good feature, as endless firefights on your way to a mission becomes annoying.

Weapons Shops: Everyman needs an AK. To acquire new weapons in FC2 you can simply pick them up. Doing this however has one major problem. The enemy weapons break and jam all the time, only when you use them….I never noticed an enemy having weapon malfunctions when gunning me down so the answer is the weapon shop, where you pay for new weapons in raw diamonds. The problem is the the unlocking system. In order to get new more powerful weapons you need to do a mission for the arms dealer. The missions are all the SAME! You travel to an area and attack the same convoy of 1 truck and 2 jeeps. It plays out the same, all the time. I really can’t see why the devs would not have introduced a variation to the missions. Maybe the truck convoy as one, kill a competitor as another, blow up a shipment coming in by air/boat etc…..variation.

The end….this is the end….my only friend The Jackel. The end is very linear. More of a gripe than a problem, would have liked to have a bit more choice.

Another compliant from a fellow gamer (playing on an archaic PS3 with a really rudimentary joy pad for control) noted that the payoff for exploring alone is not enough. The odd diamond case scattered about is a joke. Who puts one diamond in a case and goes to the trouble of putting it at the top of a mountain!!! Missions to recover cases of diamonds could have featured. The barkeep in Mikes could have told you a story about a plan that went down or a convoy that got hit, you go off find the convoy and a clue to the guys who took it. Finding random diamonds did not reward exploring, like in S.T.A.L.K.E.R the quests should encourage exploration of all areas, not token diamond treats!

The Good - Excellent gunplay. Firefights are dynamic and sprawling. You can approach an enemy village and tacky it by simply setting it on fire, or by peppering it with grenades from a hillside. You can snipe….or run and gun. There were complaints about the AI, I did not see many issues with the AI, certainly worked better than Crysis.

The Fire: Great touch. Tactical use of fire introduced a new dynamic into the FPS genre. Fire burns and spreads. People run away from fire…..people run into sniper scope……people die.

The Story: While being very simple, it does create a sense of a desperate country on the verge of breakdown. A country awash with guns in Africa is a bit of cliche, but there is enough meat in the story to keep you engaged (no need for aliens…thank god)

GFX
What can be said, great. The game looks great. Shadows and textures are excellent. Day night cycle is great. 10 out of 10 on the eye candy front.

Sound
The sound is really good. The noise of the open savanna is like watching a national geographic. Zebra can be heard “Zebraing” out of them. White enemies speak in a “diplomatic immunity” S.African accent. All good on the sond front, with the score changing when danger is afoot. 9/10

Longevity/Replay Value
Well I have only played it once, but will definitely play through it again. I did find it quite easy once I got better weapons, however the dynamic narrative does make every playthrough different. Although the missions wil remain the same, its the order in which they are done, and the characters invloved that make it appear different. I would give it a 7/10 for replay value, it’s certainly not one to sit on the shelf for years untouched.

Conclusion
Very enjoyable game to play that has annoying niggly bits. This is not a truly open world, and if your after dynamic faction conflict this is not the game for you. The factions do not fight outside of scripted battles. In fact they do not move, at all. The world is truly beatiful and an amazing achievement in itself. All in all it has to be an 8/10. Its gun play saves it from the design decisions that really annoyed me.

How long was World War 2! Seriously, if you were to play every WW2 FPS out there it would probably take you twice as long as the bloody war. In saying that though the Brothers in Arms series has been alittle different in its approach to the WW2 FPS. This is mainly due to its hint of RTS.

Unlike convensional FPS games in BIA you also control squads of troops. With each squad rocking their own specific weapons and abilities. This simple game mechanic has always made the series stand out from the wave of games in the genre. And once again its what keeps the series fresh and fun.

Gameplay = 9

As i’ve explained, BIA is alittle different from your standard FPS. You play as Sgt.Matt Baker, Baker’s been the lead character since BIA:Hill 30 or in timeline terms since Normandy.The 101st has reached Holland and you rejoin Bakers squad just at the cusp of Market Garden. While playing as Baker you will have control over between 1 and 3 squads. They range from Assault teams (Used to flank and attack suppressed enemies), MG Teams (Used to suppress enemies), Bazooka Teams (Used for taking out tanks and MG emplacements) and Standard Fire Teams (which double as both suppression and assault teams).

Of course Baker can also bag a few Nazi’s himself but you will quickly find that in BIA numbers make a major difference. Trying to rush an MG emplacement single handed is a sure fire way to get ripped in two. You really have to take advantage of your men to progress. Suppressing, flanking or finding higher ground is just a few of the examples of tricks you’ll need to use to get the drop on your enemy.

There is some change ups in the gameplay though. During some missions you may be seperated from your troops. These instances probably pose some of the biggest challenges in the game. You also get to man a tank for several missions. While fun the tank missions just seem like filler in an already short game.

The gameplay has held up quiet well since the first title. Also the minor tweaks, such as improved aiming and additional teams really add some spice to BIA:HH.

GFX = 8

The only way to describe the graphics in BIA:HH is ‘adequate’. At times the game can look outstanding and at others dated and alittle ugly. This may be down to the long delay with the release. But when your working with probably the best engine on the market at the moment, Unreal 3, there’s really no excuse for having average GFX.

The overall design is gritty and rustic which is fine but unlike something like Gears of War the style wasn’t captured with the same level of graphic quality. The game looks more basic or dull then realistic. In saying that though dispite this cinematics look great, aswell as character animations and explosions. So although the GFX are alittle dated they still do the job well enough.

Sound = 9

No complaints here. Weapons and enviromental sounds come across as authentic. Also the voice work is exceptional, with stellar performances from both Baker and Hartsock.

Longevity/Replay Value = 6

Unfortunitly this is where BIA:HH really suffers. With a measly campaign lasting only 6-7hrs, there really isn’t awhole lot of gameplay here. Although the story is well written there is alot of intrusive cinematics that cut into that 6hrs, so gameplay wise it might boil down to 5hrs. Also on the downside is the story, it progress’s the previous games well but new players coming in late will probably be completely lost.

On the multiplayer front the game will hold your attention for awhile but given both previous multiplayer games died a quick death don’t expect to have many players to play with in the near future.

Conclusion

Brothers in Arms: Hell’s Highway is a good game. It has its problems sure, but as a fan of the series i’m happy enough with this iteration. If your new to BIA i’d definitly advise you to play the first two games before playing HH. Their now available on several systems including a double pack on the Wii.

Verdict = 8

Brief preview of Fallout 3 on the Xbox 360 (First 10 Levels)

The christmas rush is here again. Developers around the globe are working round the clock to have
games on store shelves for the holidays.And as always with this time of year we’re spoiled for choice
with dozens of games battling for our cash.One such game is the new offering for Bethesda, makers of ESIV: Oblivion and now Fallout 3.

First off i’d like to clarify, i have never played the original Fallout games. But judging from screenshots that really doesn’t matter as this new title seems to be nothing like its predecessor’s.
Of course we have a similar setting but apart from that gameplay, view and pretty much everything else has been changed for this new outing.

Outline/Gameplay

The game kicks off in typical RPG fashion as you design your character and lay the ground work to mold him into a certain class. I have to say i was really impressed with how Bethesda freshened this experiance up. When you start the game you literally start at your character’s beginings. After ploping out of your mother you are greeted by your father (Liam Neeson). And through him you make choices on sex and apperance. You then get to experiance a gaming first as you take your first baby steps around and discover your skills using a pop-up book. There’s more progression iinside the vault as you move up through childhood, teen years and finally become an adult.

Its then that the game really kicks off as you leave the safety of the vault and enter Capital Wasteland. Once outside you really get the Oblivion feel about the game. Lots of open world to explore and NPC’s to meet. You really have to take alook around your surroundings to find what to do. The story isn’t sppon fed to you. Its all around you, on the radio, in books and notes or just picked up by earwigging on NPC conversations.

Now on to the fun part, the combat. This is where Fallout really sets itself apart from Oblivion. Combat is handled in two ways. As a basic FPS, relieing on your own skills to take down opponents. Alternatively you can use V.A.T.S, this feature basically lets you target specific parts of your enemy with the hit percentage based of distance and your skill with the equipped weapon. Its comes in really handy when the surrounded as you can target multiple opponents to attack. It also works as a kind of overview/command tool, giving you the chance to think about your strategy before attacking.

There is a downside to V.A.T.S though, it relies on AP (Action Points). This means you are limtied to a certain number of shots. The amount per shot depends on the weapon equipped. Once you expend your AP you need to wait from them to replenish. I think this was a smart idea by Bethesda, if you had infinite AP the game would be more like an RPG from FP than an FPS/RPG.

GFX

Graphically Fallout looks gritty and dull, but in a good way. Th art design matches the setting very well and although it wouldn’t rival Crysis it suits the game. Of course the version tested was on the 360 so add some AA on the PC and it will look even better.

What really stood out so far is the graphic ways to kill your enemies. There’s lots of bloody murder with arms, legs, torso’s and heads flying especially when using V.A.T.S. There’s also the Bloody Mess skill which basically devastates your opponent to bits, this has been one of my favourites so far.

As with any RPG there’s not much to say about the GFX apart from they lend themselves well to emersing you into the gameworld.

Conclusion

So far i’m really enjoying the game. Although it is very reminescent of Oblivion it brings enough to the table to keep me involved. I think the best way to describe it is as a lovechild of Oblivion and Stalker. After 8hrs i’ve barely cracked the surface of the main story and i feel there’s a hell of alot more to experiance. Expect a full review soon.

I was delighted when GSC announced a prequel. My initial thought were: Just redo S.T.A.L.K.E.R Shadow of Chernobyl, with new content and the bugs fixed (PERFECT). It was with this preconception that I awaited the release of Clearsky (big mistake!!!).

When it hit the shelves Clearsky was a game with HUGE problems. From what I have seen so far, it has far more bugs than SOC had out of the box. My first encounter with some bandits resulted in one of them walking off a tower (along an invisible floor) in midair, and throwing grenades down at me. When I finally gunned his ass down, the body disappeared and re-appeared back in the tower. What’s that I hear? It’s the sense of immersion in the game world flying out the window!

BUGS!!!! Has anyone seen the “Walk into the floor bug”. In the Duty base, and also in the STALKER base I have seen friendly and neutral stalkers walk into the ground, as if there is an invisible staircase. Have not managed to catch it on FRAPS but I never really have it on with CLEARSKY as im afriad I will cause it to crash even more than it already does!

CONFUSION!!! Confusion is how I would sum up the missions in Clearsky. You are frequently told to recapture a point. You charge to the point and kill all the enemy, only for NOTHING to happen. The point is not captured, and you are told to “Hold the point until help arrives”. Well this never happens. After a certain amount of time the mission either gets canceled or completes? Would it not be simple enough to start a timer at a control point once all enemies are dead. If no new enemies enter the area the point is then captured?

BLOWOUT!!! Stupid game design choice. Force the player to drop everything and run like a hare towards a shed, that protects them for a radioactive emission? Led walls methinks….

ARTIFACTS, I would have to disagree with Jim Rossignol’s review over on PCG. I actually think artifacts in SOC where far too plentiful…with no real work involved in finding or acquiring them. The detector at least makes you work for what are the most powerful and expensive items in the game! I therefore agree with this design decision, Jim did GSC not fill you with enough Vodka?

So all in all, what do I think? This is not an improvement on the first game. It has the same complaints as the first, and the developers must be questioned for not learning from the previous game. I don’t think we are asking too much too see a game that has been play tested to the point where it is possible to finish the game without a patch! SHAME ON YOU! I must commend the developers again for their ambition, I just think a game like Far Cry 2 will nail the open world shooter/rpg genre….when it should have been GSC’s crown with Clearsky.

I was a huge fan of the Thief series. The first game created the genre “First Person Sneaker”. The main character was excellent, and the story was compelling with amazing depth. When Looking Glass Studios went the way of the dodo, I was genuinely upset that this excellent franchise would never see the light of day again.

But thanks to a mere rumour it looks lie Garrett may be climbing through windows again in the dead of night, with a blackjack in his hand and a grin on his face. Eidos-Montréal has begun to recruit for what they are calling a “AAA” project, with the biggest hint being that the title of the new game begins with “T”. Fans of Thief seem to have taken the above as proof of life for another Thief game, and frankly so do I

It makes perfect sense to revive what was and still is an excellent set of games. My only complaint was the creation of a 3rd person view for Deadly Shadows. It was horribly evident it was to appease the button mashing console masses, and introduced a dynamic that took away the heart pounding feeling the first person view gave. You could now pivot the camera to see around corners. This for me is an unfair advantage for a thief to have!

With today’s technology a new Thief game COULD be excellent. I would urge the developers not to change too much (if its not broke don’t fix it). Obviously taking advantage of dynamic light and new particle effects would only further immerse you in Garrett’s world.

I hope this game comes back…praise the builders if it does…

The game more or less runs on the loot given by monsters, crafters need some of it, adventurers need it for completing quests, and the entrepreneurs on the server can make a tidy living selling the stuff on the Auction house (The Ebay of WoW).

Some loot is extremely good and is used by the lucky finder, be it armour or weapons. Now we take a look at the blacksmith for example who makes this stuff. They cannot churn out good weapons and armour to keep up with the loot that is dropped by slain monsters, so essentially they are crafting only to bring up their skill. Hence grinding.

So for the first 50 lvls of your character’s crafting life you won’t make a living, you might sell a few items to the low levellers that are following you but no way is it good enough. Also the amount of materials and their scarcity is another thing. Just to find the Iron ore for example to make a certain sword is a few hours gaming in itself. Then when you compile all the materials you get one point towards you blacksmithing skill. How disappointing.

I have been told by other gamers (after much ranting on the general chat channels) that at the higher levels, blacksmithing is remarkable and it’s a sought after profession. This is something to aim for. But during your career as a crafter you should have some foothold in society and some outlet for your skills – not just crafting junk to get 1 point every few hours. This is why I think Blizzard should overhaul their crafting system. I can only speak for the blacksmithing profession which is one of the core skills because it can lead to weapons and armour. Also, I find most characters on the game are the “gatherer” professions. Skinners, Miners etc. These provide the Auction house with an array of materials that crafters can purchase or go out and gather themselves (Blacksmith / Miner - for example)

So right away there is a large discrepancy between gatherers and crafters. Crafters being in the minority, in my opinion, thanks to the game being heavy with good loot. I’m not saying get rid of the good loot. But new plans for weapons and armour could be introduced allowing the crafter to inject new designs of weaponry in the world and make their living seem less of a hardship.

In Star Wars Galaxies, the once loved MMORPG has since fallen from grace and now dies writhing in ashes, had a remarkable crafting system. From setting up mining devices to gather ore and materials the crafter could log off safe in the knowledge that there would be a pile of juicy ingredients ready for the next day of crafting. The crafters in SWG made items that the other characters actually NEEDED. Speeder bikes, houses, weapons, armour you name it. There was loot from monsters but that loot was used to make more intricate items which again a crafter was needed for. So crafting was a whole other profession and it was after all an actual character class.
In WoW though, in my opinion, crafters are an after thought. The game is all about going on quests finding lucky loot, and being a better adventurer because of it, then doing it all again to find better loot. Crafters are and always were second class citizens in WoW. Please correct me if I’m wrong! Maybe I’m missing the whole point.

Look at Runescape, a visually appalling but free on-your-browser-mmorpg. The crafting system in that game is massive. You can be anything from a Potter to Smithy, Chef to Farmer. And as a crafter you can make all those implements that the above professions need for their production. Example : Potters make pie dishes so Chef’s can bake pies in them.

The Crafting in WoW needs to be more prevalent, brought to the foreground of the game. If Blizzard intertwined the quest/loot heavy game that works so well for them with a crafting system that attracts the more strategic players you would have an unstoppable game.

Obviously they have a WoW juggernaut of sorts already and don’t need a crafting based game. But even after I quit SWG and runescape I still like to wander back in and craft up something!!

I’ll leave you with a fond memory from SWG. My character gave up the adventuring for crafting. I chose Architect as my profession and began building dwellings and civic structures for the many towns in the servers, it ended up I built my own town and invited guild members and newcomers alike to move in. This was amazing to me, I made use of the game without questing, but crafting.

Luckily for us the admins intervened, and the cheating GF swine’s did not succeed. I might point out that GF (Gamma Force) did win the server. However it was not through force of strength or conviction….it’s because they are called “Gamma Force” and obviously has super gamma mega powers…..Gamma Force…I mean really?…..spotty teenage gits

The introduction of “Gold” in Travian in my opinion has the potential to spoil the balance of the game. From what I can tell, the end game may fast become a question of who is willing to spend more money to win!!!! Basically the system of gold works as follows. You purchase Gold with money from the Travian game developers.

You can then spend your gold to do the following:

• Extend you Travian Plus account
• Gain a 25% bonus to resource production
• Gain a 25% bonus to Attack or Defense
• Trade with the NPC merchant
• Complete construction orders and Research quickly

Now from what I can see this introduces a new dynamic to the end game. This dynamic being the “spend a feckin fortune” factor that could see you getting huge bonus’ to everything. This does not sit well in my head as players are not really being rewarded for their actions…they are being rewarded for the frequency of their pay-pal transactions. It’s not a nice thing to see a good idea rush headlong into becoming something silly. I just hope the communities who have already embraced the Plus account do not turn to paying through the nose to get a tactical edge by spending “Gold” to beat the band!