Last week I made a post pointing out how Darksiders doesn’t really represent the Four Horsemen of Apocalypse and how they favor War and Death but pass over Famine and Pestilence (seriously Fury and Strife? Are Vigil games even trying?)
Yet bitching is one thing but doing something about it is another. So if Famine and Pestilence may not make for interesting game characters then there’s no reason to at least make an attempt. So I will do that: I will try and write up both Famine and Pestilence as game characters. If Vigil games did indeed balk out then that seems more a challenge to me. If War and Death can work in a God-of-war-esque scenario can Famine and Pestilence? Let’s find out…
Famine
I can imagine Famine taking the form of a heavy – much like his brother horseman War. But if War takes the form of a muscle-bound, bloodthirsty warrior wholly dedicated to laying waste to anything in his path then Famine takes a different approach taking a defensive stance. I can imagine Famine taking the form of a bloated sack of crap – a huge humanoid form that take multiple blows and still emerge unscathed.
Because of being of tremendous defensive capabilities, Famine’s fighting skills would be reduced. But he has numerous powers that make up for it. As Famine represents…well famine, it makes sense that his powers should focus on making him stronger whilst making those around him weaker. I can imagine Famine being capable of :
- The sprouting of grapevines (a crop destroying plant) for a multiple enemy attack
- Drain the life of an enemy at the touch (enemy freeze doubling as a healing spell)
- (close range attack)
- Summoning a plague of locusts at the wave of his hand (long range attack)
Pestilence
If War and Famine both take the forms of heavies than it makes sense for Pestilence to join his brother Death in being a thin type capable of doing fast, acrobatic movements. But as befitting his name, Pestilence should take the form of a deformed freak, with warped features, green/unhealthy-looking skin and take the appearance of something rotting and decaying.
Largely due to being a fast guy, Pestilence should be the weakest fighter of the Four Horsemen but he should also have the largest number of special abilities – most of which should be akin to a mad scientist looking for something to conduct experiments most foul upon:
- Slime attacks capable of slowing an enemy in their tracks
- An attack that rips out organs and other body parts
- Going with the scientist motif, attacks based upon throwing a beaker of liquid or pulling out a bag with something in it.
- Casting out a pox to attack multiple enemies at once.
- Making the enemies around him rot away
- Using the power of plagues to regenerate hits
- Alternatively, Pestilence could do an attack based upon infecting a foe and striking their name from a list.
Having written this, it has become clear to me that this is but a mere starting point. And Vigil games most likely would’ve written up far more information-heavy documents in designing War and Death. Maybe that’s why Famine and Pestilence got passed over for Strife and Fury – the latter two offered a lot more ideas. Still, there’s no excuse to not try.
Mind you, in doing research for this post, I found out something interesting: The Four Horsemen of Apocalypse originated from the Bible where the first Horsemen was not Pestilence but Conquest. The change only came about through mistranslations. In gaming terms Conquest may sound appealing as a character but next to War he sounds kinda redundant. Oh well….
Friday, August 31, 2012
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
A moment of clarity...
Today I went into my local JB Hifi where I saw a poster for something Nuketown 2025.
I then noticed it was for Call of Duty: Black Ops but not before mistaking it for the title and release date for a Duke Nukem Forever sequel.
I then noticed it was for Call of Duty: Black Ops but not before mistaking it for the title and release date for a Duke Nukem Forever sequel.
Monday, August 27, 2012
The things you find in Northrend
I look at this image and for some reason I feel like playing the soundtrack to Shadow of the Colossus...
Saturday, August 25, 2012
Planet of Sound (no.9)
Name: Robin Banks
Birthdate: 25th August 1985
Instruments: Guitar / Bass / Keyboards
Affiliations: Dire Tribe / Demon Flower
Bio: Robin is the daughter of a single mother: Her father, disappeared when Robin was at a young age and has never been seen since. As such, her childhood has been fraught with feeling different to the others around her and building up resentment. During high school, she built up a reputation for being difficult to work with amongst students and teachers alike, even to the point of being dubbed ‘The Ice Queen’. Eventually dropping out of school, Robin entered a rebellious phase where she became a goth, bought clothing to match her nickname, and listened to The Cure, Joy Division and Nick Cave. Inspired by this music, Robin got her act together and applied for a proper musical education - studying the ins and out of musical theory.
Eventually, Robin coming out the other side a talented multi-instrumentalist, proficient in guitar, bass and keyboard. In time, she caught the attention of Spike and invited to join Demon Flower. Since then, Robin and Spike became good friends.And as the star of Demon Flower began to rise, Spike began to rely upon Robin’s musical expertise and suggestions.
At first Robin was the replacement bass player for Jasmine but when Jasmine and Rock left, Robin became part of a brains trust that Spike often deferred to for song writing and band decisions. And when Jasmine eventually returned, Robin deferred bass duties for the guitar and keyboard.
As part of the Planet of Sound collective, Robin is still the same Ice Queen and, along with Evan, part of the brains trust that works with Spike. She is also known for defusing arguments on tour. Robin as all too aware that Spike considers her too valuable to let go but is too loyal to walk out on him – after all, who’d be stupid enough to walk away from the rock star lifestyle?
Robin is also known for bass duties in the Dire Tribe during her downtime.
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Come to the Darkside
So Darksiders got a sequel? I didn't realise it was such a big deal.
Okay, okay. I never played Darksiders but the impression I got from it, based upon what I saw, was it was a God of War clone with the player character being one of the Four Horsemen of Apocalypse.
Whilst the God of War-esque nature of Darksiders doesn't interest me, the notion of controlling one of the Four Horsemen of Apocalypse, to me, has some potential. But therein lies a problem: For you can divide the Four Horsemen into two groups where one is made up of the Horsemen which are considered interesting (War and Death) whilst the other is made up of those no one seems to give a toss about (Famine and Pestilence).
I do like the idea of building up a series of games where each game has you control a different Horsemen but in doing so, you'll eventually get to the Horsemen no one wants to play as - and it would seem that the makers of Darksiders, Vigil Games, will agree as they've gone straight to Death for the second game. Talk about about shooting your big guns off first.
What, is playing as Pestilence and/or Famine a dumb idea? Can't Vigil Games think up anything interesting to do with them? Aren't they even trying - I mean they certainly lavish a lot of attention to the design of War and Death so it can't be that hard....
Oh wait - in this game's universe the Four Horsemen are War, Death, Strife and Fury.
So they're not really the Four Horsemen of Apocalypse.
I guess Vigil games really weren't trying then.
Okay, okay. I never played Darksiders but the impression I got from it, based upon what I saw, was it was a God of War clone with the player character being one of the Four Horsemen of Apocalypse.
Whilst the God of War-esque nature of Darksiders doesn't interest me, the notion of controlling one of the Four Horsemen of Apocalypse, to me, has some potential. But therein lies a problem: For you can divide the Four Horsemen into two groups where one is made up of the Horsemen which are considered interesting (War and Death) whilst the other is made up of those no one seems to give a toss about (Famine and Pestilence).
I do like the idea of building up a series of games where each game has you control a different Horsemen but in doing so, you'll eventually get to the Horsemen no one wants to play as - and it would seem that the makers of Darksiders, Vigil Games, will agree as they've gone straight to Death for the second game. Talk about about shooting your big guns off first.
What, is playing as Pestilence and/or Famine a dumb idea? Can't Vigil Games think up anything interesting to do with them? Aren't they even trying - I mean they certainly lavish a lot of attention to the design of War and Death so it can't be that hard....
Oh wait - in this game's universe the Four Horsemen are War, Death, Strife and Fury.
So they're not really the Four Horsemen of Apocalypse.
I guess Vigil games really weren't trying then.
Monday, August 20, 2012
Friday, August 17, 2012
Pandering
Well, well ,well what is this that has come into my sights? Why, its the trailer for the new World of Warcraft expansion Mists of Pandaria!
Seems that as this expansion draws closer, everyone's intent on making Kung fu Panda jokes - not me however (but I will admit that not having Jack Black to do a celebrity commercial would indeed be a wasted opportunity).
But really, this cinematic is our first glimpse at the Pandarens and their chance to show us all what they can do and what they can offer to the war-torn world that is Azeroth. And judging from the narration it would seem that they are a neutral faction, interested in balance and seeing the conflict between the Horde and the Alliance rather inane. Note the moment when the Pandaren monk breaks up the fight between the Human and the Orc - to which the human responds by giving the Orc his spear.
Mind you I do like the idea about the Pandarens that is suggested in this trailer: They are interested in balance, they have decent enough reason to go into battle and they don't seem too pleased with members of the both the Horde and the Alliance turning up on their doorstep. But if the purpose of the Pandarens is to challenge the very long-running conflict between the Horde and Alliance then somehow that seems more a fool's errand. As mentioned before, one reason WoW has lasted so long, and may continue to do so, is that both factions are in an eternal stalemate with no ground being gained or lost.
If anything, as evidenced by the Orc and Human in the trailer, they've both been at this for so long that that's all they know - thus anyone who wants to break up a fight somehow comes across as being the bigger threat.
But even if this approach does have potential, it doesn't really explain why, upon hitting level 10, Pandaren players have to choose which faction to join. Damn...
Seems that as this expansion draws closer, everyone's intent on making Kung fu Panda jokes - not me however (but I will admit that not having Jack Black to do a celebrity commercial would indeed be a wasted opportunity).
But really, this cinematic is our first glimpse at the Pandarens and their chance to show us all what they can do and what they can offer to the war-torn world that is Azeroth. And judging from the narration it would seem that they are a neutral faction, interested in balance and seeing the conflict between the Horde and the Alliance rather inane. Note the moment when the Pandaren monk breaks up the fight between the Human and the Orc - to which the human responds by giving the Orc his spear.
Mind you I do like the idea about the Pandarens that is suggested in this trailer: They are interested in balance, they have decent enough reason to go into battle and they don't seem too pleased with members of the both the Horde and the Alliance turning up on their doorstep. But if the purpose of the Pandarens is to challenge the very long-running conflict between the Horde and Alliance then somehow that seems more a fool's errand. As mentioned before, one reason WoW has lasted so long, and may continue to do so, is that both factions are in an eternal stalemate with no ground being gained or lost.
If anything, as evidenced by the Orc and Human in the trailer, they've both been at this for so long that that's all they know - thus anyone who wants to break up a fight somehow comes across as being the bigger threat.
But even if this approach does have potential, it doesn't really explain why, upon hitting level 10, Pandaren players have to choose which faction to join. Damn...
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Truly legendary
Last weekend, I had the pleasure of striking another game from my Hall of
Shame: Get on your horse Legend of Zelda, you're out of here! (would that horse
be Epona?)
When I say Legend of Zelda I am, of course, referring to the original on the NES. Now, unlike most people, this is not the first Zelda game I've sat down and played all the way through - that honor belongs to Link to the Past.
Therefore Legend of Zelda is going to be a tricky game to assess: First, as Link to the Past was the first Zelda I've played, it will ultimately influence my opinion through providing a benchmark. Second, Legend of Zelda is up against twenty six years of technological advancement and Third, Legend of Zelda is essentially a wellspring where many it's ideas have since been replicated by other games many times over.
So what do I think of the original Legend of Zelda? Well the first thought is that I have played other Legend of Zelda games and this strikes me as perhaps the most difficult. I say that because I do remember there were numerous moments when the enemies gave me headaches, namely the DarkNuts, Wizzrobes and the LikeLikes – the latter in particular was of particular annoyance: Believe you me, the annoyance of having your shield eaten only to go back, raise enough rupees to buy another one and having THAT one eaten as well can only be speculated upon. Granted I have had trouble with the other Legend of Zelda games but none on a level comparable to my troubles with the original – at least Link to the Past had fairies that could resurrect you when you died! In fact at one point, I felt like it was battle of wits to see who would break first: me or the game itself. But then again, this game is a product from an earlier era where difficulty was a gaming mainstay.
But what I found interesting with the Legend of Zelda difficulty is that it presents the same problem I had with the Super Mario games in that the lead-up to the end of game big-bad proved more challenging and more difficult than the final showdown itself. Indeed, after get lost, beaten and frustrated with the last dungeon, I ended up confronting Ganon and….whupped him on my first go.
And then there’s the legacy behind Legend of Zelda: This was, more or less, the first sandbox game where the player had the freedom to go anywhere and could accomplish any of the tasks necessary for ultimate victory in any order. Even more significant, the idea of extensive exploration and getting the necessary gear gave way to an eventual leveling of the playing field – but as in my defeat of Ganon showed, an eventual pushover.
Now I’m not the biggest fan of the sandbox genre (save one or two exceptions) so coming across the progenitor is interesting to say the least. Sure there isn’t a variety of things to do beyond go here/kill this guy/get this item, but it seems that a lot of the sandbox stems from the player finding clues and working things out for themselves. But to me, that creates conflict in that the Hyrule presented in NES graphics is kinda…well…… dull. The place looks barren and minimal in colour – as well as being populated by lot’s of monsters and few in actual human residents. Granted there is only so much the NES could do with its limited technology, but I still maintain the setting of Legend of Zelda would’ve made a great setting for a post-apocalypse setup with a ruined landscape, a host of monsters and only three characters (but I suppose Shadow of the Colossus as already been made).
But I digress. It is interesting to see the origins of Legend of Zelda and see how some the ideas in it were strong enough that they were reiterated in the subsequent sequels. Yes Link to the Past took those ideas and improved on them in every single way but you have to start somewhere.
So in the end, despite the gripes I had with the difficulty, I did enjoy playing Legend of Zelda. It was good fun and it’s good to finally put that game to rest.
Now about Ocarina of Time….
When I say Legend of Zelda I am, of course, referring to the original on the NES. Now, unlike most people, this is not the first Zelda game I've sat down and played all the way through - that honor belongs to Link to the Past.
Therefore Legend of Zelda is going to be a tricky game to assess: First, as Link to the Past was the first Zelda I've played, it will ultimately influence my opinion through providing a benchmark. Second, Legend of Zelda is up against twenty six years of technological advancement and Third, Legend of Zelda is essentially a wellspring where many it's ideas have since been replicated by other games many times over.
So what do I think of the original Legend of Zelda? Well the first thought is that I have played other Legend of Zelda games and this strikes me as perhaps the most difficult. I say that because I do remember there were numerous moments when the enemies gave me headaches, namely the DarkNuts, Wizzrobes and the LikeLikes – the latter in particular was of particular annoyance: Believe you me, the annoyance of having your shield eaten only to go back, raise enough rupees to buy another one and having THAT one eaten as well can only be speculated upon. Granted I have had trouble with the other Legend of Zelda games but none on a level comparable to my troubles with the original – at least Link to the Past had fairies that could resurrect you when you died! In fact at one point, I felt like it was battle of wits to see who would break first: me or the game itself. But then again, this game is a product from an earlier era where difficulty was a gaming mainstay.
But what I found interesting with the Legend of Zelda difficulty is that it presents the same problem I had with the Super Mario games in that the lead-up to the end of game big-bad proved more challenging and more difficult than the final showdown itself. Indeed, after get lost, beaten and frustrated with the last dungeon, I ended up confronting Ganon and….whupped him on my first go.
And then there’s the legacy behind Legend of Zelda: This was, more or less, the first sandbox game where the player had the freedom to go anywhere and could accomplish any of the tasks necessary for ultimate victory in any order. Even more significant, the idea of extensive exploration and getting the necessary gear gave way to an eventual leveling of the playing field – but as in my defeat of Ganon showed, an eventual pushover.
Now I’m not the biggest fan of the sandbox genre (save one or two exceptions) so coming across the progenitor is interesting to say the least. Sure there isn’t a variety of things to do beyond go here/kill this guy/get this item, but it seems that a lot of the sandbox stems from the player finding clues and working things out for themselves. But to me, that creates conflict in that the Hyrule presented in NES graphics is kinda…well…… dull. The place looks barren and minimal in colour – as well as being populated by lot’s of monsters and few in actual human residents. Granted there is only so much the NES could do with its limited technology, but I still maintain the setting of Legend of Zelda would’ve made a great setting for a post-apocalypse setup with a ruined landscape, a host of monsters and only three characters (but I suppose Shadow of the Colossus as already been made).
But I digress. It is interesting to see the origins of Legend of Zelda and see how some the ideas in it were strong enough that they were reiterated in the subsequent sequels. Yes Link to the Past took those ideas and improved on them in every single way but you have to start somewhere.
So in the end, despite the gripes I had with the difficulty, I did enjoy playing Legend of Zelda. It was good fun and it’s good to finally put that game to rest.
Now about Ocarina of Time….
Monday, August 13, 2012
Generation Next
The big news buzzing around at the moment is the proposed arrival of the eighth generation of consoles. The Wii-U is on its way and the news of a successor to the Xbox 360 has recently surfaced. However it’s not all good news as Sony recently recorded an End-of-Financial-Year loss for the first time since entering the gaming race.
But I'm not interested in the next generation. It may happen but it's not like I'm ever going to notice. I mean what's the point? I have plenty of games that have yet to played - many of which accumulated through looking at the previous generations of gaming - so if something needs to grab my attention it would need to be something special.
I would certainly get the new Xbox if they have reverse-compatibility and retain the stuff I obtained for my XBLA account but that isn’t the type of thing that gaming manufacturers like to hear: For anyone who is playing old stuff is one who isn’t playing the new stuff – and why would you buy a console that can do so much to use the stuff you’ve already got? Granted the backwards-compatibility may have been a factor that made the PS2 a major seller but now, in this late hour, there seems to be a logic in Sony refusing backwards compatibility in the PS3. It may not be a very good logic from the standpoint of the consumer but it’s still a logic nonetheless.
Funny thing with console generations is that I usually arrive at them at the tail end of their run. In 2006 I finally got out and purchased a gaming console to call my own: The PS2. Of course the 360 had just arrived but I got a lot of use out of my PS2. But it was only matter of time before my attention was drawn to the current generation. And out of this generation, it was the Wii that got my attention first – but only for that wonderful thing called the Virtual Console. And that was back in 2009. So what persuaded me to get a 360? Seeing Mass Effect 2 being played out at a friend’s place – and I did get a 360 back in late 2010.
All of which came very late in the respective console’s life – but it should be noted that I got more games for the Virtual Console than I have for the Wii and 360. However, again, this is not the type of thing game manufacturers would want to hear.
But really where can we go from here? There isn’t much further we can go: I’ve seen gaming discussions that suggest the same: There isn’t really anywhere further we can go, motion control isn’t really that good an idea, and the days of console gaming look to be numbered. Indeed, there is a sense that PC gaming may destroy the competition through the virtue of being able to easily upgrade with the progression of time. Thus, having a system all set up and without any room for expansion now looks kind of quaint.
But then again what would I know?
I’m just a guy with a huge list of games left unfinished.
But I'm not interested in the next generation. It may happen but it's not like I'm ever going to notice. I mean what's the point? I have plenty of games that have yet to played - many of which accumulated through looking at the previous generations of gaming - so if something needs to grab my attention it would need to be something special.
I would certainly get the new Xbox if they have reverse-compatibility and retain the stuff I obtained for my XBLA account but that isn’t the type of thing that gaming manufacturers like to hear: For anyone who is playing old stuff is one who isn’t playing the new stuff – and why would you buy a console that can do so much to use the stuff you’ve already got? Granted the backwards-compatibility may have been a factor that made the PS2 a major seller but now, in this late hour, there seems to be a logic in Sony refusing backwards compatibility in the PS3. It may not be a very good logic from the standpoint of the consumer but it’s still a logic nonetheless.
Funny thing with console generations is that I usually arrive at them at the tail end of their run. In 2006 I finally got out and purchased a gaming console to call my own: The PS2. Of course the 360 had just arrived but I got a lot of use out of my PS2. But it was only matter of time before my attention was drawn to the current generation. And out of this generation, it was the Wii that got my attention first – but only for that wonderful thing called the Virtual Console. And that was back in 2009. So what persuaded me to get a 360? Seeing Mass Effect 2 being played out at a friend’s place – and I did get a 360 back in late 2010.
All of which came very late in the respective console’s life – but it should be noted that I got more games for the Virtual Console than I have for the Wii and 360. However, again, this is not the type of thing game manufacturers would want to hear.
But really where can we go from here? There isn’t much further we can go: I’ve seen gaming discussions that suggest the same: There isn’t really anywhere further we can go, motion control isn’t really that good an idea, and the days of console gaming look to be numbered. Indeed, there is a sense that PC gaming may destroy the competition through the virtue of being able to easily upgrade with the progression of time. Thus, having a system all set up and without any room for expansion now looks kind of quaint.
But then again what would I know?
I’m just a guy with a huge list of games left unfinished.
Friday, August 10, 2012
An undertaking of mammoth porpotions
Rithendal obtains the greatest mount in all of WoW (why have a drake when you can have a mammoth?!)
Shame he had to give it up:
Shame he had to give it up:
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
Prince Megahit
I was expecting that last post to inspire a tsunami of disgust and contempt - but none such came. Somehow, it seems strangely disappointing.
Anyway, here's something I came across recently: Footage of the Commodore 64 version of the original Prince of Persia:
I heard about a C64 conversion of Prince of Persia about twenty years ago: back then the C64 was slowly on the way out but I knew of Prince of Persia and was kinda excited about it. Of course, the conversion was started but never showed up - and it is only now, as in the past twelve months, that the someone has finally completed the game and unleashed on an unsuspecting world.
Looking at the video itself - I'm....astonished. I was a loyal C64 user for many years but seeing this I never knew the C64 could produce something like this. Sure there were some great games on the C64 that involved the system being pushed to the limit (the Last Ninja series comes to mind) but this is staggering. I said last week in my assessment of Double Dragon that the C64 was capable of so much better and here is all the proof I'll ever need.
It goes to show that sometimes great games can come out of an then aging system being squeezed for every last ounce of oomph (see: God of War and Chrono Trigger for other examples)
Anyway, here's something I came across recently: Footage of the Commodore 64 version of the original Prince of Persia:
I heard about a C64 conversion of Prince of Persia about twenty years ago: back then the C64 was slowly on the way out but I knew of Prince of Persia and was kinda excited about it. Of course, the conversion was started but never showed up - and it is only now, as in the past twelve months, that the someone has finally completed the game and unleashed on an unsuspecting world.
Looking at the video itself - I'm....astonished. I was a loyal C64 user for many years but seeing this I never knew the C64 could produce something like this. Sure there were some great games on the C64 that involved the system being pushed to the limit (the Last Ninja series comes to mind) but this is staggering. I said last week in my assessment of Double Dragon that the C64 was capable of so much better and here is all the proof I'll ever need.
It goes to show that sometimes great games can come out of an then aging system being squeezed for every last ounce of oomph (see: God of War and Chrono Trigger for other examples)
Monday, August 6, 2012
An open letter to those who want an FF7 remake
An open letter to those who want an FF7 remake:
We need to talk.
I have seen your constant demand for a Final Fantasy 7 remake. I have seen you being inspired ever since SqueeEnix put out that PS3 tech demo. I have seen you being passionate, like no other, about a game made fifteen years ago. I have seen you go the effort of trying to convince SqueeEnix it can be done. I've seen you put forth technical arguments challenging the claims made by SqueeEnix. And I have seen you refute the arguments of any nay-sayers.
And I give you credit: I've been interested in computer and video gaming since the late eighties and I have never seen people get so passionate about a game before or since (well maybe the fiasco over the Mass Effect 3 ending but still). I admire that you love something so much that you're willing to stand by it with the passion of a religious zealot. And I'm impressed that you still admire a game made fifteen years and two generations ago when countless other games have been ditched and forgotten by the passage of time.
But I simply have to ask the following question: Why do you want a remake of Final Fantasy 7?
No really: Why DO you WANT a remake of your favorite game?
A lot of arguments I have for the FF7 remake seem to be largely based on technological and economic knowledge and the argument of "JUST SHUT UP AND DO IT!!". These are all claims that suggest that it can be done therefore it should be done but why? You must really want a FF7 remake so badly that you'll go to the effort of challenging any nay-sayer but is the effort really worth all this trouble?
The economic argument suggests that people will buy it because it will be a huge seller, justify any enormous production cost and save SqueeEnix from any potential financial calamity. But this is more or less speculative. And like any company, SqueeEnix decides the movements they make for themselves - meaning you, the consumer, have no say in whatever they do (sad but true).
Besides, would you really buy anything with the Final Fantasy 7 logo? Saying so seems to suggest that people would buy a game where Sephiroth runs through a field on a sunny day throwing flowers everywhere but we know this is not the case.
I have seen a lot of challenges to the technical effort involved stating that, despite what's being claimed, it can be done and it is feasible - regardless of factors such as updating a technology fifteen years old, the necessity of motion capture, the implementation of voice acting and building 3d environment from scratch.
That may be the case but really the originally FF7 did what it set out to do on the tools it had available. I mean, you may dismiss the original character models for looking like they do, but consider this: They somehow do work in the game’s favor. The goofy looking character models make the goofier moments in the game easier to swallow. I mean come on: Do we really want to see an Advent Children-esque Cloud wearing a dress?
No really: do you WANT to see an Advent Children-esque Cloud in a Dress?
Last time I checked Final Fantasy 7 is still available on the PSN so it isn't like it's NOT getting played. And it's not like a FF7 remake will give the PS3 the hit it needs - if anything it will place Sony in the rather uncomfortable position on relying on past hits rather than forging new ground. A position that is currently occupied by Nintendo and subsequently earned them a lot of scorn.
And who on earth would WANT to be in that position?
Again: Why do you want a remake of Final Fantasy 7? The offical stance from SqueeEnix is that they are far more interested in trying to make something that reaches, or even surpasses, Final Fantasy 7's achievements. However such a statement can be easily taken as a fool's errand. So, tell me: Are SqueeEnix not allowed to at least try? I know every Final Fantasy that has followed 7 has split a opinion like no other so it seem that people would rather that they give up. True FF7 was a combination of the right talent in the right areas that came at the right time that it will most likely never happen again but do you want a remake over any new material so badly? And, as is often the case with game remakes, do you want to see a game you enjoyed as a child tarnished and ruined beyond comprehension?
So it seems doubtful that SqueeEnix will ever match, let alone eclipse, the glorious heights achieved by Final Fantasy 7. It would be like, by way of comparison, Weezer releasing an album on par with the Blue Album and Pinkerton and it's widespread knowledge that such a thing is never going to happen.
And again: Why do you want a remake of Final Fantasy 7? I've heard so much demand for one but no real reasoning for it. It was a great game yes but the be-all-end-all of Final Fantasy/JRPGS/Playstation/games in general? Surely not.
I can understand if this intense demand was utilized in order to preserve games from the ravages of time *coughPanzerDragoonSagacough* but Final Fantasy 7 isn't really going away anytime soon. And if SquareEnix aren't interested in touching their Golden Goose again, then they should be left be.
So in conclusion may I state a reiteration from an earlier post:
We need to talk.
I have seen your constant demand for a Final Fantasy 7 remake. I have seen you being inspired ever since SqueeEnix put out that PS3 tech demo. I have seen you being passionate, like no other, about a game made fifteen years ago. I have seen you go the effort of trying to convince SqueeEnix it can be done. I've seen you put forth technical arguments challenging the claims made by SqueeEnix. And I have seen you refute the arguments of any nay-sayers.
And I give you credit: I've been interested in computer and video gaming since the late eighties and I have never seen people get so passionate about a game before or since (well maybe the fiasco over the Mass Effect 3 ending but still). I admire that you love something so much that you're willing to stand by it with the passion of a religious zealot. And I'm impressed that you still admire a game made fifteen years and two generations ago when countless other games have been ditched and forgotten by the passage of time.
But I simply have to ask the following question: Why do you want a remake of Final Fantasy 7?
No really: Why DO you WANT a remake of your favorite game?
A lot of arguments I have for the FF7 remake seem to be largely based on technological and economic knowledge and the argument of "JUST SHUT UP AND DO IT!!". These are all claims that suggest that it can be done therefore it should be done but why? You must really want a FF7 remake so badly that you'll go to the effort of challenging any nay-sayer but is the effort really worth all this trouble?
The economic argument suggests that people will buy it because it will be a huge seller, justify any enormous production cost and save SqueeEnix from any potential financial calamity. But this is more or less speculative. And like any company, SqueeEnix decides the movements they make for themselves - meaning you, the consumer, have no say in whatever they do (sad but true).
Besides, would you really buy anything with the Final Fantasy 7 logo? Saying so seems to suggest that people would buy a game where Sephiroth runs through a field on a sunny day throwing flowers everywhere but we know this is not the case.
I have seen a lot of challenges to the technical effort involved stating that, despite what's being claimed, it can be done and it is feasible - regardless of factors such as updating a technology fifteen years old, the necessity of motion capture, the implementation of voice acting and building 3d environment from scratch.
That may be the case but really the originally FF7 did what it set out to do on the tools it had available. I mean, you may dismiss the original character models for looking like they do, but consider this: They somehow do work in the game’s favor. The goofy looking character models make the goofier moments in the game easier to swallow. I mean come on: Do we really want to see an Advent Children-esque Cloud wearing a dress?
No really: do you WANT to see an Advent Children-esque Cloud in a Dress?
Last time I checked Final Fantasy 7 is still available on the PSN so it isn't like it's NOT getting played. And it's not like a FF7 remake will give the PS3 the hit it needs - if anything it will place Sony in the rather uncomfortable position on relying on past hits rather than forging new ground. A position that is currently occupied by Nintendo and subsequently earned them a lot of scorn.
And who on earth would WANT to be in that position?
Again: Why do you want a remake of Final Fantasy 7? The offical stance from SqueeEnix is that they are far more interested in trying to make something that reaches, or even surpasses, Final Fantasy 7's achievements. However such a statement can be easily taken as a fool's errand. So, tell me: Are SqueeEnix not allowed to at least try? I know every Final Fantasy that has followed 7 has split a opinion like no other so it seem that people would rather that they give up. True FF7 was a combination of the right talent in the right areas that came at the right time that it will most likely never happen again but do you want a remake over any new material so badly? And, as is often the case with game remakes, do you want to see a game you enjoyed as a child tarnished and ruined beyond comprehension?
So it seems doubtful that SqueeEnix will ever match, let alone eclipse, the glorious heights achieved by Final Fantasy 7. It would be like, by way of comparison, Weezer releasing an album on par with the Blue Album and Pinkerton and it's widespread knowledge that such a thing is never going to happen.
And again: Why do you want a remake of Final Fantasy 7? I've heard so much demand for one but no real reasoning for it. It was a great game yes but the be-all-end-all of Final Fantasy/JRPGS/Playstation/games in general? Surely not.
I can understand if this intense demand was utilized in order to preserve games from the ravages of time *coughPanzerDragoonSagacough* but Final Fantasy 7 isn't really going away anytime soon. And if SquareEnix aren't interested in touching their Golden Goose again, then they should be left be.
So in conclusion may I state a reiteration from an earlier post:
Really, the more I look at this notion of remaking Final Fantasy 7 the more it become clear that people are after the same experience they had when they were ten years old. That being said, let me tell you something kids: When I was ten years old, I played Pool of Radiance on the Commodore 64. I played it, loved it, and was my gateway drug to the worlds of both RPGs and Dungeons & Dragons. Years later it got a remake - but it was one many people would rather forget.
Friday, August 3, 2012
Corporate Retreat
Whilst going through some of my old files, I came across a submission I put in for the for the Good Game game Office Wars. Yeah I put one in: Figuring I had little to loose, I rose up to the task of conceiving a history of the company in the game, Wagglemax, and working on some of the characters within the game itself.
I made my submission but Good Game never got back to me. Nevertheless, I thought I might give my ideas a home here. Indeed, looking back these characters seem compelling enough and it would be shame not to put them to use (of course anyone can have an idea - but putting said into action is another thing entirely).
So here we go: My submisison for the Good Game game Office Wars:
--------------------
I made my submission but Good Game never got back to me. Nevertheless, I thought I might give my ideas a home here. Indeed, looking back these characters seem compelling enough and it would be shame not to put them to use (of course anyone can have an idea - but putting said into action is another thing entirely).
So here we go: My submisison for the Good Game game Office Wars:
--------------------
Wagglemax
History:
Wagglemax is a company that ahs been around
for twenty years. It’s origins came from a young business executive called
James Morgan who wanted to make a mark in the business world in the manufacture
of technical gadgets. It was James who founded the company and whom has been
with the company ever since.
Times have been difficult recently in
Wagglemax: at first they had a string of successes with products of ingenuity
and they became one of the most successful technological gadget companies on
the market – even to the point of making their rivals nervous. However, company
got too sure of itself and made a number of ventures that promised so much but
failed to deliver. This set off a string of failures that in retrospect looked
good on paper but left a lot of untapped potential. Wagglemax’s status slipped
drastically – even to the point where it lost vital ground against new and
upcoming companies.
Currently, Wagglemax is in a rather
alarming position: It needs a something big to get back up and running or face
the horror of being closed down. However, as with many times before, the wrong
people have the larger say whilst the right people are being ignored.
CEO
Name: James Morgan
First
Impressions: A large man who radiates a tyrannical
presence. James is often found sitting at his desk, laughing manically with mad
eyes and a demented grin. He is always thinking up new schemes to forward
Wagglemax but none of them really succeed.
Background: Merciless, cruel and apathetic: as a CEO James is all this and
more. In a cutthroat business of running and maintaining a company, he has
built Wagglemax from the ground up – but only through muscling his way to the
top through low cunning, ruthless strength and absolute terror. But his journey
to the top has irrevocably altered his way of thinking. He has the smarts and
the intelligence to make the company go even further but it’s at odds with him
leaving such potential unrecognised and paranoia (not to mention the perception
that all of his employees are worthless maggots).
Having been with Wagglemax from the very
beginning, James was once a young and enthusiastic business man who wanted to
make a mark of his own. However once he got Wagglemax up and running, it
quickly became clear how corporations work.
To his horror, James received first hand
experience on the ruthless nature that corporations work: by eliminating the
competition through whatever means necessary. Thus he slowly had his idealism
sucked out of him, leaving him as he currently is: a jaded tyrant.
CEO
Personal Assistant
Name: Charles Lloyd
First
Impressions: A snivelling little worm and general
arse-kisser, Charles is determined to stay in his boss’ good books. Meek in
demeanour he is however keen to find any moment when the other employees slip
up for he can use it do his (no matter how over-dramatised) advantage.
Background: The personal assistant of James, Charles knows the importance of
his position and doesn’t let anyone forget it. Such is his devotion to his
employer that Charles will use any blackmail, threats and other underhanded
methods to make sure the employees of Wagglemax stay in line. He is not afraid
to assert his authority nor is he afraid to get his hands dirty.
However, he is only acting under James’
guidance. Without him, Charles would be next to useless. Thus, it is Charles’ admiration
for his employer that has kept him going for all this time. It has also brought
him into conflict with Glenn on several occasions.
Coming from a lowly background out in the
countryside, Charles left his home for the city in search of work. However it
wasn’t easy: he was unemployed for a long time trying out for many jobs. The
lack of success took its toll however, leaving him frequently depressed and beaten
down by defeat. But he refused to give up and was eventually rewarded with his
current position at Wagglemax. Delighted that things are finally going his way,
Charles has every intention to hang onto this new role with an iron grip and
refuses to give up anything for anyone (expect James, the man who gave him the
job)
Cleaner
Name: Simon Welsh
First
Impressions: A weary but still likable old chap,
Simon appears to the only sane person in Wagglemax. He gets on well with
everyone, can blend in easily and drifts in and out of each chaotic situation
in an unflappable manner.
Background: At first glance, Simon is a simple cleaner but such first
impressions conceal his true intentions: he is actually an agent for James.
Because of his unassuming manner and ability to go anywhere without being
suspected, James has an additional task for Simon: to scout around the office
of Wagglemax and to report any dissension in the ranks. Simon may get along
well with everyone and may appear to be the most liked person in Wagglemax, but
in reality he cares little of loyalty save for watching out for his own skin.
Simon’s background is something of an
enigma. After acquiring a decent education, Simon spent many years working in
corporations such as Wagglemax. In fact, he made excellent progress over the
years – even to the point of becoming a key employee of one rival company to
Wagglemax. Needless to say, falling from a higher-up to a cleaner is a
spectacular one indeed, so he has joined Wagglemax with the intention of
getting back at James. Strangely enough, James is aware of this.
Office
Junior
Name: Glenn Wheeler
First
Impressions: Young and vital, Glenn possess the
manner of a wheeler-dealer. Fast talking, charismatic and full of ideas (all of
which are better than James’) he does however tend to wimp out in
confrontational situations.
Background: A young idealist, Glenn is fresh out of University where he was consistently
bright pupil. Dedicated completely to his studies, Glenn had little time for
anything else. Thus, his marks were always impressive but his people skills
kept needing drastic work.
He has just started out in Wagglemax and
obtained the entry position of Office Junior. Coming from a prestigious background,
Glenn is annoyed that he has been regulated to a position not worthy of his
talents and his great ideas (as he believes) are being constantly ignored.
Yet the longer Glenn stays at Wagglemax, it
becomes increasingly clear that James relies on brute force to move the company
forward. Thinking the company would be better off suited to more subtle methods
of progression, Glenn immediately vows to usurp his boss and takes his place.
Thus, Glenn is quite open about his intentions. Even James is aware of this but
it is only Glenn’s usefulness that keeps him on the payroll.
Strangely though, whilst he may have the
wits and charisma that James will probably never have, Glenn is a coward: He
can talk his opponents up easily but he lacks the guts to take action to fulfil
his intentions. Which is a shame because he doesn’t realise that the plans he
comes up with are far more effective than James will ever come up with.
HR
Manager
Name: Samantha Davis
First
Impressions: Smart and all too aware of it, Sam is
the quietest employee in Wagglemax. She is regularly found sitting in front of
her computer, unaware of the mayhem that’s continually happening around her.
She thinks lowly of her employees and doesn’t hesitate in applying the most
venomous of put downs.
Background: Being the HR Manager, Samantha is James’ right-hand man (woman?)
and his most trusted advisor. She holds position no.3 on the office hierarchy and
fulfils the role of a mentor to the new arrivals. And being a HR person, Sam
knows the strengths and weaknesses of each and every employer in Wagglemax and
how they can be pushed to their full potential. She is also a schemer who can
come up with ingenious plans for the company’s progress. However, her status
has also made her a vile opportunist. Sam knows everything about everyone and utilises
this information to her advantage. But no matter how much of a blackmailer she
is, Sam is the most loyal to James. And she is indeed aware that she is
despised by her co-workers – but without her, Wagglemax would have no hope of
success.
Being employed in a ruthless world of
corporate greed for several years now, Sam has gradually come to accept that
she is a woman in a world dominated mostly by men. Thus, she is determined to
prove her worthiness and understands that her brain is her best weapon.
However, this continually marks Sam out as being notoriously frigid. Matters
aren’t helped when she is exceptionally disdainful of the notion of using sex
appeal to climb up the corporate ladder.
Your
Boss
Name: Nikki Hall
First
Impressions: Loud, obnoxious and determined to get
her own way, Nikki has no hesitation in achieving what she sets out to do. Blind
to reason, to the point of tunnel vision, she has no trouble in getting what
she wants out of her employees – even if she has to force them into it kicking,
screaming and protesting all the way.
Background:, Nikki holds the distinction of being James’ chief business
tactician. Amazingly, her loud and brash persona conceals a shrewd mind.
Appearances truly are deceiving as Nikki is actually a mastermind of numerous
successful ventures and cunning business moves. She is able to think up clever
plans quickly and easily – All of which are executed with a cold and brutal
efficiency. But, Nikki does not share the same crushing principals that her
boss holds. She would rather resort to a more intellectual way of solving
problems. Thus, being brash and loud tend to astonish people when her plans
work out – all of which are the type that always work out in ways no one else
anticipated and the type that affects the opponent long before they start to
realise it.
Despite occasionally seeing herself more
intelligent than James, Nikki is still very loyal to her CEO and a capable
overseer of operations in Wagglemax. Should James fall, she will gladly
continue with the business to the very end. And such is her loyalty, Nikki
hates Glenn for his ambitions.
Nikki’s background is tumultuous to say the
least: She came from a rich family who constantly drove her forward, demanding
success and the best out of her. And for a hile wit worked in that Nikki exhibited
strong skills in both sports and business. She could’ve chosen whatever career
she wanted. Strangely enough however, she lacked the drive to go all the way. Most
likely it was the burden constantly put on her parents but whatever the reason,
Nikki lost her way and relished the freedom adulthood presented. For a while
she showed behaviour of an adult thinking they were still in their teens and
her career path floundered. As a result, she fell in with the only company that
would accept her: Wagglemax.
Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Bottom of the Barrel (no.2): Double Dragon
I have to admit I have little to talk about today - so what the hey, I may as well do another Bottom of the Barrel and rip into another game which I deem one of the worst ever made.
So we will dip into another game I played as a kid on the Commodore 64. Now I could go on and on about more recent games but a) as an adult I have my own money so I've been very careful in my game purchasing and b) there does lie the disturbing thought that if gaming tragedies like the one I'm about to tell you about are forgotten, the tragedy may repeat itself.
Anywho let's talk Double Dragon: One of the biggest gaming hits of the eighties. It was a big deal in the arcades and certainly offered a lot to the player: Two-player action, a then unheard of selection of fighting moves, huge sprites, and a somewhat compelling plot where the girlfriend of player character Billy Lee is kidnapped by a bunch of street punks so he, along with brother Jimmy, set out to rescue her. In it's day, Double Dragon was a big hit, an inspiration to many games to follow in the beat-em-up genre and was converted to every home system imaginable.
So how did the Commodore 64 version turn out?
......you really want to know?"
.........so where do I begin?
Well, much like I said in my Chase HQ assessment, I knew for fact that the Commodore 64 could better than this. Much better. But THIS! This is is so bad it defies belief! The sprites are so small! The combat is so dull ("doof-doof-doof-ugh!")! The animation is so appalling! And Billy looks nothing like his arcade counterpart! This game has had a reputation of being one of the worst Commodore 64 games ever made and rightly so.
But really that is as much I can say about this game - Just watch the video above and bear witness to the abomination that this game is
I guess it goes to show that sometimes the game you played as a child is better left in the past...
So we will dip into another game I played as a kid on the Commodore 64. Now I could go on and on about more recent games but a) as an adult I have my own money so I've been very careful in my game purchasing and b) there does lie the disturbing thought that if gaming tragedies like the one I'm about to tell you about are forgotten, the tragedy may repeat itself.
Anywho let's talk Double Dragon: One of the biggest gaming hits of the eighties. It was a big deal in the arcades and certainly offered a lot to the player: Two-player action, a then unheard of selection of fighting moves, huge sprites, and a somewhat compelling plot where the girlfriend of player character Billy Lee is kidnapped by a bunch of street punks so he, along with brother Jimmy, set out to rescue her. In it's day, Double Dragon was a big hit, an inspiration to many games to follow in the beat-em-up genre and was converted to every home system imaginable.
So how did the Commodore 64 version turn out?
......you really want to know?"
.........so where do I begin?
Well, much like I said in my Chase HQ assessment, I knew for fact that the Commodore 64 could better than this. Much better. But THIS! This is is so bad it defies belief! The sprites are so small! The combat is so dull ("doof-doof-doof-ugh!")! The animation is so appalling! And Billy looks nothing like his arcade counterpart! This game has had a reputation of being one of the worst Commodore 64 games ever made and rightly so.
But really that is as much I can say about this game - Just watch the video above and bear witness to the abomination that this game is
I guess it goes to show that sometimes the game you played as a child is better left in the past...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)