Out of Time

Here's a blast from the past - The intro to Time Crisis 2:



I remember seeing this when I was in high school and honestly? I thought the set up was dumb. So some nutter wants to launch a nuclear satellite to take over the world or some bollocks? And these two dudes are going through exotic locals and blowing dudes away to stop him?
Yes that scenario was a steal from the James Bond movies but really, that franchise has been repeating itself for yonks. It makes me wonder why the makers of Time Crisis didn't try something different.

See, when I first saw that intro, I immediately thought: Wouldn't it be cool if it was one big misunderstanding? Think about it! The player gets to the end of the game and the rug is pulled out from under them: The satellite network was actually beneficial to the Earth, The villain turned out to be a noble benefactor, the damsel-in-distress wasn't in any kind of danger and the intelligence was misled. Thus the two agents, not to mention YOU the player, have come across as incompetents who just ruined everything for no better reason.

Mind you, games these days force a player has to consider their actions, challenge the player's perceptions and lead them on only to turn around and break convention.
Maybe I was thinking way ahead of my time....

Damaged Beyond Repair

I recently heard that Yahtzee's proposed TV show, game Damage, sadly, kinda died and won't be coming around as a full blown TV show.

I'm disappointed to say the least. Judging for the pilot, there was a lot of potential here. I heard some people compare said pilot to Top Gear and there is some truth there: Top Gear works becuase it has three hosts of three distinctive personalities and seeing them interact is part of the fun. Having that formula transfer into a gaming show would've worked a treat.

When i first saw the pilot I thought it was great as came across as being put together by people who knew exactly what they were talking about. They had humorous asides but there was a lot of red-hot info that wasn't clogged down by odd moments that were a) puzzling or b) lame attempts at humour. Having being disillusioned with Good game (at the time) for this reason, i was all set to support Game Damage.

But sadly it looks like it won't be happening. Ironically however, recently Good Game is getting better - even more watchable - with more emphasis on the gaming and less emphasis on the bullshit. Looks like Bajo and Hex get the last laugh....

Shining in the Dragon Force

Ask any gamer which out of the many games they've played is their favorite and they'll struggle to come up with a decent response. I'm no different but I must profess a soft spot for the Megadrive (Genesis) game Shining Force 2.

Sure it may look childish (at least from an adult perspective), but there is still a a lot going for this game: Large battles, a big cast of characters (even if half of them are hopeless), fun with class changes and a big world to explore. It's a shame that the SRPG genre is kinda dead at the moment but Shining Force 2 (and it's comrade in arms Ogre Battle 64) still holds seem appeal to me that keeps calling me back.

Mind you, the only bone of contention I have with Shining Force 2 is the music: Good Lord, does it get VERY irritating VERY quickly. No I'm bagging the Megadrive's music capabilities but compared to many of the SNES' efforts, the music of many Megadrive games have dated quite horribly (although I do find the Sonic games and Phantasy Star 4 being an exception). And Shining Force 2 is indeed a casualty in the transition of time.

Thus, I've found the game can be massively improved by muting the sound completely and putting on some Dragon Force instead. It's amazing how such fast paced metal (or, as my friend put it, Battle music) can really fit in the game itself. It brings more excitement to the game itself and really fits the massive battles that make up SF2's gameplay. Indeed hearing Valley of the Damned in the middle of fighting a battle is an experienced that has be done to be believed.

So to all of you with SF2 on your Virtual Console: Try it! Drop the sound and put on some DragonForce. And trust me: Once you do, you'll never be able to go back.
Not that you'd want to anyway ;)

Don't You Want Somebody to Love?

When I first heard that Lightning, the lead protagonist from Final Fantasy XIII, was intended to be a female equivalent of the legendary Cloud from Final Fantasy VII, my first thought was:

What does this mean she is going to have to contend with the attentions of two guys? And will one of which get killed off by the main baddie while the player is helpless to intervene?

Okay so maybe that previous sentence was me being silly (personally I had no idea how to word it for the purposes of this post) but my initial reaction got me thinking: Has there ever been a decent gaming romance where the female is the focal point?



Now I have spoken about romance in games many times. True I may be a hopeless romantic but because I feel romance is such an over-looked element in games. Most of the time it is something of a player motivation (You control Mario to rescue Princess Peach being one such example) but when done right a romance can work wonders. True there may not be many hopeless romantics here in gaming but personally if romance in video gaming is an alien concept, maybe there could well be some potential worth realising.

But going back to that thing called the focal point: Many games I‘ve found, the male half seems to have the greater say: It is them doing all the work and them trying hard to win the female half over – who seems quite willing to along with it all. Thus, Mario continually rescues Peach, Link keeps saving Zelda and Cloud has the option of going on a date with either Tifa, Aerith or Yuffie.
Strangely, you never see the female half do the chasing. Why is this so? Has years of being a male character rescuing their partner from an antagonistic figure been imprinted in our minds? Is having a female actively seeking a relationship a threat to the need to a hero and save the day?
Really, being a female in a video game romance is really getting handed a raw deal: You’re pretty much there to be some kind of romance to the main character and to provide some notion that at the end of the journey will be all the more worth it. You don’t have much of a say – no you’re only abiding to wishes of the player and the designer. And if you’re a female character actively working to getting the male’s attention, you’re setting yourself to be dismissed as a horny wench.
Personally, I like video game heroines to be more than sex objects but that’s not to say that a female character can’t be allowed to work as hard as the males to find herself a romantic partner.
Are we so used to active males working hard to win over passive princess figures? Anyone can challenge the nature of this theory – by way of example look at Ico and Shadow of the Colossus – so why not more of it?
But as video games are a male-dominated market, seeing a woman in some degree of control can be labelled as a threat - case in point: I heard that Enslaved: Odyssey to the West earned some backlash for placing the male lead in a servitude role.
Why can’t the woman actively pursue a relationship?! Is it true that we may laud the chasing male as a stud whilst dismiss the chasing female as a whore?



Now that I think of it, what makes a video game romance command attention? Is it determined on how much say the player has in its growth and development? Indeed, many people seem willing to accept Tidus and Yuna but others grow passionate when debating whether Tifa or Aerith is the better fit for Cloud. Perhaps having name, a face and an identity on both sides makes for a more compelling romance than, say, Morrigan being won over by (the Grey Warden).

And speaking of Bioware, I think the only example of a female character actively perusing a relationship (or at least I can think of) would have to be the female Shepard in Mass Effect 2. As stated before, she has the better selection of partners and is helped by a great performance from her VA Jennifer Hale. And whereas anyone would dismiss the active female as a whore, no one would say the same for Shepard – perhaps she’s a tough cookie. The type that can use a gun, kill the baddies and take command of chaotic situations - just as easily as trying to get into Garrus’ pants. It may be a single step but it’s one in the right direction – I just hope more developers catch onto this idea and expand on it.

That being said, would I play a game where I control a female lead who finds herself drawing the romantic attentions of two guys? Possibly – such a game may not get made but that idea has some potential to say the least.

Mass Effect 3 Wish List no.2

Well what do you know? The same day I post my thoughts on who in ME2 might reappear in ME3, some earlier indications are leaked from Bioware.
Suggestions abound that Liara, Ashley/Kaidan, Garrus, Wrex, Mordin, and Legion will be making a return (provided they all survived at the end of the ME2) and a new character by the name of James Sanders will also appear.

Not many surprises there but it does raise the question of whether the Dirty Dozen of ME2 will all return: I mean it is possible for them all to end up all to Sheperd and they are each well-realised and well written for. So it does seem a waste to abandon them all. Okay it may mean an even larger crew but damn, that idea can work (indeed, I would like to see large RPG cast done right especially when JRPG's have fumbled this so many times).
Mind you, it does seem a bit odd to introduce a new character at this late hour because there have already been plenty of characters who have come and had their say. Can a new guy make an impact? It's certainly a big ask...

Ultimately though, this is all mere speculation: Bioware are trying hard ATM not to reveal anything about their game and I respect them for it - getting worked up about pre-release details ultimately doesn't mean jack in relation to the final product. There's little point in commenting on this because Bioware really are coming across as being in complete control and doing their utmost to make a killer game.

...........I hope.......

Mass Effect 3 Wish List no.1

Now that Mass Effect 3 is rumbling ever so closer, speculation is now open to what’s going to happen in this final instalment. So I thought I’d might through in my two cents in the vain hope that someone from Bioware is listening.

So to get the ball rolling, here is my thoughts on who of the Normandy’s crew in ME2 might return.
I really liked the idea of the crew interaction in ME2. The loyalty sidequests was a superb idea, enabling each of the team to step forward and have their say. The loyalty quests were great for character development and really ended with the character in question significantly changed by the experience. And if the player didn’t do said loyalty mission? Well, the character may die, never to return and the player only has themselves to blame.

Indeed, the loyalty missions add a new slant to speculation considering only two of the original Normandy crew from ME1 returned for a second swing. So who out of this Dirty Dozen will return for ME3? Here’s what I think:

Jacob Taylor
I didn’t mind Jacob. I thought he was a bit of wimp at first but he sort of grew on me – Indeed, seeing his loyalty mission and confronting his father was indeed a turning point and thankfully, made him a bit tougher. Personally, on the strength of that, I think Jacob might do well being in a commanding role. And it would seem that the writers of Mass Effect think so too as I found that having him lead the crew of the Normandy to safety in the Collector Station meant everyone on the team surviving.
Now that I think of it, maybe that was the idea so it would be interesting to see if this idea is expanded upon.

Miranda Lawson
My attitude to Miranda is changeable at best: At first I liked her but eventually she grew to annoy me. Maybe it’s her snotty attitude, maybe it’s her voice (seriously do we Australians really sound like that?), maybe it’s the fact that more attention than I’d like is paid to her breasts and arse but I don’t know.
Throughout ME2, Miranda functions as the bridge between Shepard and Cerberus. However, by the end of the game, she seems intent on pursuing Shepard’s interests than that of the Illusive Man. Indeed, this change of loyalties certainly sets up some plot points worth expanding on.

Zaeed Massani
I loved this guy: After enduring so many youngish pretty-boy types in the Final Fantasy and Kingdom Hearts games, it is indeed a welcome change to see their antithesis – a cantankerous, hard-as-nails, old guy - in an RPG. As the oldest (human) in the team, he made a welcome addition (in my book) to the team with his grumpiness, cynicism and war stories.
Sadly, I don’t see him sticking around: he’s a bounty hunter so he’s motivated by money and the job he was paid for by the Illusive Man was accomplished. Which is a shame because he certainly added some colour to the team and I personally thought the line of “You just cost me twenty years of my life!” was too good a plot point to let go.

Kasumi Goto
I heard some people didn’t like Kasumi: Being a thief she didn’t really fulfil any role on the Normandy (she even admits so herself!) and, unlike her comrades, she didn’t come out of her loyalty mission learning anything.
But what would I care? Kasumi was great! I would definitely love to see her make a comeback. Indeed, if anything, I enjoyed her various observations about the crew on the Normandy – perhaps more so than that of Kelly Chambers. And that, in my mind, may be a strength worth working on. Maybe Shepard could use Kasumi to spot any dissension in the ranks perhaps? Now that I think of it, perhaps even Kasumi could see something different than Kelly: Kelly would see the good in the team members whilst Kasumi could see something different…..
Plus, as strange as it may seem, Kasumi’s interest in Jacob could be worth pursuing….

Mordin Solus
What can I say? Mordin was one of my favourites so yeah bring him back! I mean, was he worth going through the Collector’s Station a second time to make sure he didn’t die? Damn right he was.
I heard that a potential conflict between Mordin and Grunt (like that of Miranda/Jack and Tali/Legion) was going to be added in ME2 but was cut from the eventual release. An idea worth resurrecting perhaps….?
(EDIT: It's official - Mordin is returning for no.3. Yay!)

Garrus Vakarian
Well he’s been a mainstay of the series thus far - and he was one of the original six who came back to fight alongside Shepard thus making them brothers in arms. So it makes no sense for Garrus to be excluded from ME3 - Particularly if his many fangirls (one of which is my partner) have anything to say in it.
(EDIT: Turns out I needn't have worried: Garrus has been confirmed for a return in no.3. Fangirls rejoice!)

Jack
Okay, if there is one character that should be dropped from the team, I think Jack would be it. What exactly is her purpose on the Normandy? Does she even care about what Shepard is setting out to do? True Jack’s loyalty mission was compelling indeed but what happens at the end? She doesn’t come out any of the wiser and still resents Shepard’s presence – even when Shepard could well be Jack’s only friend in the entire universe. What, so the only way to be on friendly terms with Jack is get a romance going? That seems awfully restrictive.
And even when the mission ends, Jack is still as cranky as ever: I’d honestly think a misanthrope like Jack would be less than impressed that she played a part in saving the galaxy but sadly this was more a wasted opportunity. Indeed, one would think the Mass Effect writers ran out of ideas once Jack's loyalty mission was done.
Personally, I think a more plausible scenario would be Jack leaving the Normandy and continue being on the run as a criminal. She then heads to Omega where she decides to challenge Aria. Now there’s an idea…
(EDIT: Nope, looks like ol' cranky bitch is in. Damn!)

Grunt
I sure hope he returns: After all, Grunt openly admits Shepard to be his battlemaster: No doubt he’ll be sticking around Shepard for a while yet.
Plus ya gotta have a Krogan to represent the blunt, thuggish, kill-everything comrade that seems to appear in fictitious fighting teams these days )That and Wrex is kinda tied up on Tuchanka to join Shepard).
Not that I'm complaing of course....
(EDIT: Strangely Wrex is confirmed for a return in ME3 but no sign of Grunt as yet. Hrmmm....)


Tali'Zorah vas Normandy
Another mainstay who ends up linked to the Normandy (and, as her title attests, in more ways than one). I like the idea of someone being with Shepard through all three games so there’s no reason why she (or Garrus) should stop now - but should she be absent I can imagine Bioware will have more than a few angry fans at their doorstep. (EDIT: And it would seem Bioware thought the same as the Quarian will be back for a third round. Woohoo!)

Samara
I personally thought Liara in the original ME1 was a bit wet (thankfully she became heaps better in ME2). That being said, I liked Samara for being the opposite: A nasty Asari if you will. Indeed, she swore an oath to Shepard so it would be plausible that she’d return for ME2.
As for Morinth, I never used her: I always chose the nasty Asari over the slutty Asari every time (Sorry).

Thane Krios
Well, this guy certainly makes for an interesting addition to the team – particularly on the notion that his time is limited and he wants to make his remaining days count. This was a great idea on Bioware’s part but it does raise a question: Will he be alive long enough for ME3?
In addition this guy was a romantic interest for my female Shepard – I’d like to see how it all shapes out in the end….

Legion
It’s the voice of the Geth and it’s interested in Shepard. Not much more to say other than that’s reason enough to for this guy to stick around. (EDIT: And it looks like he will, having been confirmed for ME3).

Ultimately though, the presence of the loyalty missions in ME2 makes it clear that the people involved will forever linked to Shepard. That being said I don’t see a repeat of the ME2 opening where the team is dismantled and scattered across the galaxy – it was a clever idea with a new cast and a new method of gameplay but ultimately it doesn’t make sense with twelve combatants all loyal to Shepard.
So can Bioware rise up to this challenge? Only time will tell…..

Fighting Fantasy

Well, Final Fantasy Dissidia no.2 is finally upon us – and once again, everyone is more than willing to bring the knives out and into the fighting roster. Great to see Yuna and Laguna present but I grumble at the lack of Cid Highwind, Freya Crescent and anyone from FF6. It would’ve been nice if SqueeEnix had stuck to the spirit of the game and had more selections based on the long-standing Job System (like having a Ninja character or a Red Mage character) but they blotched that the first time around with the over-abundance of paladin characters.
Ideally this could present a perfect opportunity to introduce some DLC characters: That way fans can have their favourite characters to download and really build a dream fighting roster. True a large roster may be unwieldy but, should enough effort be put in to character development, it can work - One only needs to look at the Soul Calibur series – or even Marvel vs Capcom - for proof.
But ultimately, I won’t hold my breath waiting for such an opportunity to be realised. Damn…

And then there’s the ever contentious issue of Aerith Gainsborough – only present as DLC and even then as an assist character as opposed to a fully-fledged one. I can imagine some fans are annoyed by this but me, I’m not sure what this is meant to represent.
You see, on one hand, at least SqueeEnix are sticking to their guns and not caving into a decade+ for fan demands to see a resurrection of the Flower Girl. It’s a rare thing to do in a profit-driven industry such as gaming. HOWEVER! On the other hand, if the Dissidia series is meant to be some kind of tribute to the fans (never a good sign), you think SqueeEnix would’ve given in and made Aerith a playable character? By not doing so, it seems a big FUCK YOU to the fanbase who buy their games (which is never a good business move). I mean, if SqueeEnix are willing the milk the FF7 cash cow for every last drop then they could’ve at least made Aerith a playable character. Still one can only how much money SqueeEnix would’ve made if they did (particularly as they seem to so love selling out).

Personally, the thinking of Dissidia is a good one: A tribute to the series in the form of a fighting game. Yes that idea has potential but in the end, anyone can have an idea: A good idea can be screwed around with just as easily as it can be made to work.
And if SqueeEnix's recent efforts to the Final Fantasy franchise are anything to go by, they show glimpses of promise squashed by timidness to do something radical. Time to pack it in perhaps?

Golden Gaytime

Recently Bioware has been getting some attention through this debate over the ‘straight gamer’. Seems this one guy complained about Bioware being ignorant of the ‘straight gamer’ to which some Bioware employee slammed him for being prejudiced. The pro-gay community championed this rebuke but at the same time some of the gay community were angry that they were being misrepresented.
So for today, I contribute my two cents to this debate – it may not get read but what do I care? No one listens to me anyway.

Firstly, may I make it clear that I’m not homophobic. Far from it: As we all should be aware right now, homosexuality isn’t a choice. No, it’s all in the genetics. Being fully aware of this, I myself have gay friends and they’re fine by me. Just because life made them different is no reason to condemn them – particularly when common interests can be identified and worked upon. The gay people I know are no more human than you or I and they are good friends to me whilst I’m a good friend back.
Hopefully by making this clear, it should stop any misunderstandings before they start in the paragraphs ahead.

Secondly, as an aspiring author, I don’t mind gay characters – just as long as they are treated with respect. And with respect I mean: “This character is gay, Deal with it”. Really, one’s sexuality shouldn’t make one inch of difference: I don’t object to gay characters being in my RPG party just as long as they can kill the baddies and interact with the other people just as well as the next person. If any gay character can move beyond being treated with ‘safety gloves’ (so to speak) then they’re all the better for it.
What I don’t like is a gay character in a book/film/TV show/video game who is treated in a manner that the narrative can’t stop going on about it. Seriously, some writer emphasising their character’s homosexuality in seemingly endless fashion seems less inspirational and more exploitative. I reiterate: Why should it make a difference? Why emphasise that which has already been established many times over? To be honest, to be constantly reminded in such is an insult to my intelligence as the person being told the story to – Come on, I am an adult! You don’t need to treat me like I’m a few beers short of a six pack!



Thirdly, I do not see the appeal of seeing two gay people making out with each other. Sure saying so may make me seem strange in the eyes of ‘normal’ people but you know what? Fuck them.
Okay, okay, granted this appeal is based on the concept of desire – wanting what you can’t have – but I’m not into that. And if that is my choice and I’m comfortable with that, then there shouldn’t be a problem. I don’t see why this should dub me as ‘strange’ or even ‘homophobic’. Homosexuality isn’t a choice but I can still make a choice about what interests me and how I play my video games. That being said, I had het romances with both Leilana and Zevran from Dragon Age – anyone going to condemn me for that?
And before anyone starts, I am a straight male who has a loving partner who adores me for me – even to the point of being perfectly willing to cosplay as Aerith Gainsborough.

And finally, if there is one thing I can NOT stand, it’s people constantly forcing their opinions and/or beliefs down my throat. Now I’m not one to sound harsh (and ultimately go against the grain of this post) but I’m for being my own man. I make my own decisions and I do things my way. This is my choices I’m making and I’m happy with it. Thus I don’t take too kindly to some people trying to tell me otherwise – saying I should do this or say that, or directing my attention to something as if it should matter over my own principles. I march to my own tune thank you very much. If you don’t like it, it’s not my concern. I don’t see why doing things differently should set me up for condemnation - Hate to break this to you people but the world isn’t as black and white you’d like to believe.

Taking all this into account I really see the whole ‘straight gamer’ debate is being truly absurd. Because in the end it all boils down to how we play the game. I can’t emphasis this enough. This is why we play games, right? We do it for fun and if you are enjoying making difference in a world someone else made then more power to you.
I don’t believe Bioware are ignoring the ‘straight’ gamers by including the option of a gay relationship in the Dragon Age games. Because that’s what it is: An option! If you don’t want to do have that kind of relationship it then no one is forcing you to! If you want to have het relationship with a bunch of ones and zeroes then by all means: It’s your way of playing and no one can take it from you. If Bioware truly was ignoring the ‘straight’ gamers in Dragon Age then it would be compulsory to have a gay relationship with one of the characters in the game and we know this is not the case.
Similarly, I find the Bioware reply unnecessarily harsh – not to mention strange that many pro-gay people are latching onto it (maybe it’s just me but in the terms of getting a point across, I’ve preferred the subtly of a sniper bullet than the bluster of a battle tank). Just because someone doesn’t want to do a gay romance in a Bioware RPG doesn’t necessarily make them homophobic. It is their choice and their preferred way of playing the game.
Still why should how a romantic side-quest is accomplished make any difference?



Bioware introduced the Romantic sidequest back in Baldur’s Gate 2 and it’s been a mainstay of their RPGs ever since. Back then, it was new and aimed at giving your character some colour, depth and degree of interaction with one of the other party members. But ultimately it was optional. That’s right: The player was given a choice as to whether to do it or not. It didn’t make any major changes to the storyline – it just added to the player’s enjoyment to the game they were playing.
And that is the whole point of an RPG: giving the player many choices on how they play the game – it is the commitment of actions that affect the plot and seeing their character develop and grow much like a real person. If you, the player make choices as you see fit and influenced by your tastes then really there is no problem whatsoever.

Ultimately though, this whole ’straight gamer’ debate is pointless because it really doesn’t tell me anything as to whether Dragon Age 2 is a good game or just utter rubbish.
Oh well…..

Hate the Final not the Fantasy

On the TV show Good Game, they're currently calling for people to contribute to the latest Fanboys Vs Haters debate. There, a franchise is selected and the lovers/loathers have to defend their case to the death (or something).

With the latest franchise for debate being Final fantasy I thought I might share my two cents (curse the limit of 300 words!):

Whilst I’ve enjoyed the FF series in the past, I must however join the haters.
To me the FF series can be divided into two halves: the Nintendo era and the Sony era. The Nintendo era is the series at it’s most pure: When Square were tying out new things, taking risks and seeing what the medium of video gaming could actually accomplish. Whilst not all of the games on the NES and SNES were successful, it’s interesting to see well thought out characters, compelling stories, unforgettable music and making great video games – all of these aspects reaching their zenith with FFVI.

Conversely, the FF of the Sony Era is more about show: Characters you’d rather punch in the face, flashy graphics, dumb plots leaning more towards melodrama, character designs more intended to challenge cosplayers, and an opening designed to grab attention but not to maintain it throughout the whole game. And more importantly, little thought to what constitutes as a video game.
True I have enjoyed VII and even IX and X but as the series continues, the FF series is more like a golden goose: It’s makers trying to figure what worked before and trying to replicate it (Lightening is the female Cloud? Hrmmm…..). It is indeed a telling sign that every FF that’s followed VII has people willing to condemn and defend it in passionate fashion.

To me FF is in the same camp as Sonic the Hedgehog: A series whose glory days have come and gone. A series that a) belongs to an era long gone, b) no longer has the people that made it good and c) keeps pumping out titles to the point of becoming embarrassing. Maybe it’s time to put the Final Fantasy series to rest? If Bungie did so with Halo….

Broodmother! You had me!

At the moment, I'm currently making my way through the Awakenings expansion of Dragon Age Origins. And before anyone asks, yes I do have DA number 2 but I'm not in a rush to play it (hardly a good sign) - well at least not until I'm down with the first one.

Anyway, I must give credit to Bioware for coming up with the Broodmother - never has there been a video game character that has made me close to becoming physically ill when watching them