Quaking in my boots

Another announcement emerging from this year's E3 is that the Quake IP is being dusted off and being revamped as a new game. I suppose all 90's IP's are having that done to them so such news shouldn't come as a surprise. But such news would be a good enough excuse to talk about my own experiences with Quake.

I will be blunt: When I first came across the first Quake in the mid-nineties I wasn't thrilled. Far from it: I HATED it. At the time, I played Doom a lot and was impressed by Duke Nukem 3d's pushing the envelope of what a 3d shooter could do. That being said, Quake looked old and tired.
Growing with games, I learned a vital lesson from a early age: Amazing graphics can't make a game on it's own, for it needs engaging gameplay to back it up. And that was the problem I had with Quake: It just looked like Doom but with a new coat of paint. But this new coat of paint wasn't that remarkable what with drab colors and an overdose of green. Furthermore, it was baffling as to why people talked up the graphics when the character designs looked dull and hideous. Therefore I never could grasp why people were ecstatic about this game.
Eventually my hostility towards Quake softened in three fronts: 1) I discovered the mod Navy Seals Quake and found it much more enjoyable, 2) I played Quake 2 a lot and found it a much more tense, exciting and satisfying experience next to it's predecessor and 3) One can't disagree with the thrill of playing Quake deathmatches on a LAN. Still, why people revere Quake like they do is something that still eludes me.

So unlike Doom or Duke 3d, I have no real attachment to Quake. Will I pay any attention to this new game? Well, I would be interested to see if something new will be done - if anything.
But most likely I will see this game becoming yet another faceless shooter in an ocean of them and dragging the name of a once glorious IP down with it.

Why Are We Waiting?

One of the most bizarre things happened these week: Gaming's favorite punching bag EA has announced that they are going to release a new 'action game' in 2020.

What will it be? What features would it have? No one knows beyond it being an action game, it being somewhat inspired by Assassin's Creed and it will involve a 3-4 year wait.

Ea must be feeling pretty confident if they're making us wait that long.

Or did they forget about the wait that (eventually) brought us Duke Nukem Forever?

Megaton of fun

Recently I saw Duke Nukem 3d: Megaton edition on sale on Steam. needless to say I snapped it up quick.

I did play Duke 3D during my high school years but I never really completed it. I did attempt it recently via the XBLA edition but I found some bugs that prevented me from going all the way.
But I have the Megaton edition, along with the bonus of the expansions, so this will no longer be a problem

Mind you I do refer to this recent purchase as the MegaTRON edition well, because it makes me laugh

Fez the Music

And yet another game has been struck down from the Hall of Shame - this time, it is Fez!

The problem with assessing Fez is that one can't really escape the controversy drummed up by the game's creator Phil Fish. Personally, I'm sitting on the fence for this one: I've Seen Indie Game: The Movie and I can't deny the blood, sweat and tears Phil put into his game - but on the other hand, I can't deny that his use of Twitter has...not turned out too well.
Still I think now would be a good time to look at Fez and see if this game can stand up on it's own two feet. And much like Duke Nukem Forever, we should at least appreciate  that this game has seen the light of day after years spent in development hell.

Unlike Duke Nukem Forever, Fez is actually a good game.
I find there is a lot going for this game. I like the mechanic based around rotating the scenery. I like the environments and the moody music.I also enjoyed the retro styling and didn't find it intrusive at all - even to the point I actually found the graphics and sounds had more personality and variety than a lot of Triple-A games. I also really enjoyed the exploration element finding this the type of game one can divert from their original course and go in another direction - exactly the sign one is playing a compelling game.

I thought the ending was a bit weird though. That's the thing with these 'arty' games: They seem to have this need to lay on multiple depths and hidden meanings - as if in the hope that doing so would score big with the critics. But there is a fine line between the player being intrigued and the player being confused & subsequently frustrated.

Nevertheless, Fez is awesome and I hope it manages to have plenty of staying power in the years to come (although the difficulty in finding the anti-cubes may do just that).

Dropping a Bombshell

Well I've nothing better to talk about for today, so let's talk about the latest game announced by 3D Realms: Bombshell!

Original video located here. Accessed 16th May 2014

Wow! What a shit trailer!

Okay seriously, this looks like total arse. A rock chick in a bikini with a cyborg arm and a punk-rocker hairstyle? That looks like something I drew in high school.

And considering that this is from the same people who made Duke Nukem 3D, one can imagine they trying to make a female equivalent of Duke. Again this was an idea that I came up with during my high school years at the height of the original Duke 3d's popularity. Okay, I will admit that having a woman character doing things that Duke did was all at once satirical, juvenile and not enough to carry an entire game - but it would seem apparently not.

What concerns me though is that my juvenile ideas as a fourteen years old are being made into flesh. What's going on here? Has someone got some kind of mind-reading device?
(And if that is the case why are you people bothering with me? Go bother Tommy Wiseau)

Not for you

The other day I went into my local EB where they were having a sale., And it was there I saw Duke Nukem Forever available for $4.

Oh the thoughts such a find can inspire:
 - An Xbox 360 game being sold for single digit figures? Never thought I['d see the day...
 - Wasn't this going for much more when it was finally released?
 - Look what a decade + development period can do for you!
 - I can find better games for slightly more on GoG! (and they had much shorter development spans!)
 - Hail the the King indeed.....

Ee Ay Redemption

The news of the moment is an announcement from EA Executive Vice President Patrick Soderlund stating that being voted, by The Consumerist magazine, the Worst Company for the second year running is a prompt for a turn around. A turn around of the massive variety as Soderlund intents on being voted the BEST company.

It's a massive task considering the laundry list of mistakes EA have made, namly:
o    Swallowing up studios like Bioware and Westwood,
o    Mandatory usage of Origin
o    Removal of games on Steam
o    Mandatory always online-functionally
o    Methods of drawing more from the wallet of many a gamer,
o    Mandatory Digital Rights Management
o    Releasing many games that were barely playable,
o    Mishandling of DLC
o    Milking franchise’s for all it’s worth
o    Kowtowing to shareholders knowing little about games beyond making a profit
o    And treating customers poorly with absolutely zero concern to their needs. 

Still I'll give EA credit: At least they're acknowledging that there is a lot of contempt for them and they're taking steps to correct it - which is more than can be said for the other despised companies. It may be massive task to be sure, one involving hard effort and sacrifices, but the removal of the Online Pass is a start at least.

But what i find most fascinating is the reaction to this news. There are many gamers outraged by EA, not without good reason of course, and their response has been loud and varied. Many are killing themselves with laughter, others are insisting it will never happen and others still seem intent on making sure it will never happen. I guess when one takes away a gaming geek's punchline, the vengeance is ruthless (Duke Nukem Forever anyone?).

Mind you I honestly would like to see EA turn things around. Yes I have no love for EA having burnt by them before, Yes it would be a near impossible feat to accomplish and yes it could do with more action than talk. But to wipe the smiles off the faces of all the nay-sayers? Now THAT would be hilarious.

Second Prize

Following on from the previous post, has there ever been a game I purchased a second time around? Why yes there have - and not just one. I'm sure I'm the only one who's purchased multiple games more than once but in some cases, not without good reason.
So here's a list of the games I purchased a second time - and some cases my reasons for doing so may make for fascinating stories by themselves:

Age of Empires
Had the original but seeing it on Steam was too good to miss (expect to see those words a lot ahead). Funnily enough I am still hanging onto the original disc seeing as Steam tends not to be kind to the modding community

Freedom Force
Got it on ebay but it didn't come with an install code. But then I saw it on Steam....

Dragon Age
In my previous post, I mentioned I was considering buying Dragon Age for the PC just to get my meat-hooks onto the mods available. But what would come as a surprise to some people is that my current version of Dragon Age Origins isn't the first: I got my first version of Dragon Age Origins second hand and Awakenings on the cheap. And then I found about about the Special edition....
So I got the special edition, with all it's DLC but to this day I'm still not sure if I saved any money from not buying the DLC on XBLA
Still one can't argue having all the DLC on a handy disc.

Half Life
In 2009, I was in Melbourne and I saw this in a store. I grabbed it and thought I was very lucky to get such a find. And then in 2013, I discovered something called Steam...

Pharaoh
I got Pharoah as a birthday present in 2001. Sadly, in recent years, the original disc disappeared on me so I got a new version. I was fortunate to find one in a Melbourne EB store for $10 - and this one had the Cleopatra expansion too!

Rock Band
I had a Wii at the time so naturally I'd download songs to use for it. But then I got a 360 and discovered that songs could be saved to the console's hard drive and utilized the songs from all the Rock Band games. So I got all the Rock Band games for the 360 and downloaded all the songs I liked a second time. A terrible lack of foresight true but at least I'm keeping certain musicians from going hungry.

Secret of Monkey Island
I managed to get this game working using Scummvm - only to go on Steam and finding the special edition/version.

Sonic CD
I got the Sonic gems collection on PS2 to play this - but then it reappeared on XBLA in HD graphics and with the original soundtrack restored. 

Soul Calibur
Once again, it was nice in it's original format (Dreamcast) but to see it on XBLA in HD is even better (still bitter they dropped the Direct the Opening feature though....)
 
Stars Wars: Knights of the Old Republic
Funny story: I purchased this game on the PC before encountering the Xbox and figure dit may be a better played on the console (stay with me). I played the Xbox version a lot but found, much to ym dismay that it wouldn't work on the 360. Solution? Download it on Steam

Xcom
Again: Had it on disc but then saw it on Steam

The GoG parade
Duke Nukem 3d, Baldurs Gate, Deus Ex, Thief 2, Rayman 2, Planescape Torment, Sim City 2000, Clive Barker's Undying, Fallout, Heroes 2, System Shock 2. Why buy them all again? Well I like that I have them all in digital format and they are continuously updated for modern OS by the tireless folk at GoG. Duke Nukem 3d is of special note: I had it on XBLA but then I saw a special event where GoG was giving it away for free for a limited time...

Looking back over what I've just typed, I can see a pattern emerging: If I've purchased games a second time it's largely down to two reasons: 1) a lack of foresight and 2) the game in question comes on a preferred format or system. The former can be dismissed as pure human error but the latter is more interesting: There is certainly a lot on offer for a digital format in that it is always in easy reach, it takes up less physical space than a boxed game (besides my 500g game hard drive isn't going to fill up itself) and, in the case of GoG and Steam, it's not going to disappear any time soon. And in some cases, sometimes it's better for some games to be played through gripping a console controller than bashing a keyboard. And at the same time, modded games can sometimes yield a greater experience than the restrictions imposed by a console game.

Still, once again, there is the thought that if I'm continually striving for the best than I deserve to be ripped off.

Cooperation makes it happen

Today I want to talk about Co-op gaming.

Having lived through many years of gaming it’s been fascinating to see how co-op gaming has evolved. At first, co-op gaming was a popular idea: during the eighties to early nineties, co-op gaming was essential during the era of the arcade game. Having trouble trying to beat any particular game? Don’t worry, get a friend and the playing field is leveled! You’ve got someone to watch your back and to develop strategies with! This mentality then carried over into the consoles and computers people had at home. Indeed, it was certainly satisfying to struggle with one game – only to have a much easier time once you talked someone else into helping you out.
And better still, if you had two more friends you could form a team and go up against the computer – as the popularity of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles arcade (and it’s successors) proved.
In retrospect the arcade era was co-op gaming at it’s finest.

But alas it couldn’t last forever: Because, according to history, the likes of Quake and Doom dominated the mid-to-late nineties era of gaming. Suddenly everyone can play games against each other over LANs and everyone has their own computer screen.
And it’s funny how the attitude towards co-op gaming not only turned around but so drastically: based on my own experiences, everyone loved playing against each other over LANs – to the point where the mere suggestion of a co-op game would result in being laughed out of the room.
Why is this so? Maybe because, following on from the arcade era, everyone realized arcade games are essentially a money thief and thus obsolete. Or maybe the computer AI wasn’t efficient enough to cater for more than one person. But the most likely reason is that there was a certain satisfaction in blowing away a human opponent – This was, after all, the era that spawned the term deathmatch.
During this era of gaming, I personally both tried co-op and deathmatch gaming. I found the former to be due and the latter to be trampled upon by someone who knew what they were doing (Stadium level of Duke Nukem 3D anyone?).

However in recent years  it seems that co-op gaming is enjoying something of a resurgence. Mostly due to online gaming where many people can come together and work together to achieve a goal. Of course deathmatches are still the sole domain of LAN parties, but it certainly is satisfying to see that people realizing, again, that to beat a game it helps to have someone watching your back. Indeed, it makes for an interest contrast where co-op gaming builds friendships while deathmatches wrecks friendships.

This presents an interesting question: is there a future for co-op gaming? It can be argued that once you beat a game, with or without help, there’s not much left to it. Indeed, with what could well be the king of gaming co-op, World of Warcraft, that has lasted so long through it being well-designed and having a stream of regular updates added to it. It is doubtful that there will ever be an end to co-op gaming in WoW considering the amount of quests available and the time it takes to get to (at time of writing) level 90. But ultimately World of Warcaft is a MMPORG: Which is more or less a complete genre where co-op gaming is a dominating force - much like how deathmatches dominate LAN parties. In a way it seems MMPORG gaming seems much like an evolution from the co-op gaming that was the arcade era.

I’ve seen certain games trying to carry the standard for co-op gaming in a different manner (Resident Evil 5 being one such example) but is there much point? For, as established above, the attention of the gamer can only last so long and the lasting power of a co-op game seems reliant on how much new material can be delivered. Furthermore, a co-op game truly works when the players have to work together and each player can provide something unique that contributes to victory. And to find examples of this, one has to look back to the arcade/early-nineties era. The best example of co-op done right is the Chaos Engine – for the unfamiliar, it was about guiding a two man team against a horde of mutants and really emphasized the co-op nature with each selectable character having unique weapons and abilities and both players being rated on how much they contributed to the objective.

Also noteworthy is the arcade game Crackdown where two players operated separately in laying bombs in a monster-filled maze before time ran out – it works because the two players were working for the same goal and could operate without being joined at the hip (something that should any potential co-op games should consider in their design scheme).

So it would seem co-op games can work – it just requires a lot of thought and some clever design. And as nay gamer will tell you any clever design will win anyone over. Even those who aren’t normally associated with any particular gaming genre.

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.

You. Me. Outside. Now

Some gaming deathmatches I would like to see:

Kratos (God of War) vs Amaterasui (Okami)

Sephiroth (Final Fantasy 7) vs Kefka (Final Fantasy 6)

Samus Aran (Metroid) vs Femshep (Mass Effect)

Lara Croft (Tomb Raider) vs Nathan Drake (Uncharted)

Kratos (God of War) vs The Master (Actraiser)

Morrigan (Dragon Age Origins) vs Morrigan Aensland (Darkstalkers)

Shodan (System Shock 2) vs GlaDOS (Portal)

Wander (Shadow of the Colossus) vs. James Sutherland (Silent Hill 2)

Vaan (Final Fantasy XII) vs. Vyse (Skies of Arcadia)

Aerith (Final Fantasy 7) vs. Nei (Phantasy Star 2)

Tifa Lockhart (Final Fantasy 7) vs. Taki (Soul Calibur 3)

Duke Nukem vs. Sonic the Hedgehog

Shocked to the Heart! And You're to Blame!

Recently I’ve been having a shot at Bioshock. Last week, I finally completed it so what do I come away from it?
Well to begin with, much like Portal, much has been written about this game – And in Bioshock’s case, the deconstruction of free will in the video games and the usage of the objectivist philosophies of Ayn Rand. But that’s where the similarities end for whereas Portal inspired the meme’s that ultimately ruined the game and drove it into the ground, Bioshock has managed to avoid such a fate – okay so yes I may have heard the phrase ‘Would You Kindly…’ before but somehow, it didn’t diminish the impact of how those words were put into use.
And somehow the game is even better for it: Word of mouth is a powerful tool that can make or break any new IP – whilst exposure is nice it also runs the risk of destroying much of what the game is trying to get across and ruining a lot of the mystique of the original. And seeing as the makers of Bioshock have something to say and are getting it across in their game, so much hinges on a game being discovered on the player’s own terms – not those of some douche who thinks quoting a video game makes him look cool (personally I’m still waiting for the voice quotes from Impossible Mission to make a comeback via meme but what are the chances of that happening?).

As for the game itself well I’m quite impressed by the creativity and inventiveness that’s gone into it. I’ve often been fascinated by steampunk – in that how many elaborate devices can be produced via steam power and this is a shining example of that principle. Seeing as shooters thrive on current firearms and some bizarre novelty weapons, it is welcome change to see some obsolete firearms being put to use – also pleasing is the designs of the weaponry once they’ve been put through the upgrades.
And keeping with the steampunk theme, I liked how the splicers talked with British accents, the use of the gun turrets (even though it is puzzling how they could identify friendlies from foes) and how everything is available through vending machines. I even enjoyed the hacking mechanic which involved the pipes! Yes even when no one else seemed to!!!
Indeed, it should be noted that I'm not a big fan of shooters - personally I think they're a dime a dozen and the shooters I've enjoyed are the old ones where you could go desperado against an army of dudes (ie Doom and Duke 3D). So to see someone else do something different with the genre is indeed a treat.
I also enjoyed the idea of exploring the city of Rapture. The setting looked fantastic with the place being lived in and once glorious in its day - but now succumbing to ruin and abandonment. I liked the idea of venturing into the place as the residents have descended into madness. I also found Andrew Ryan to be a compelling villain who is still hanging on even when his idea of a utopia has all but crumbled away.

So yes, I liked Bioshock for it’s great writing, it’s inventiveness, the creativity involved and it’s willingness to go beyond the conventions both shooters and games in general. However to does leave one question:
Why the hell does the sequel exist? Must be a bit hard seeing as Rapture crumbled and the villains of the piece are kind of.....dead....and wet.....

Diabolical

It's official: Diablo 3 is on it's way, expecting to touch down sometime next year. Personally I'm a bit surprised that Blizzard were actually making a Diablo 3: One would expect that with the monumental success of World of Warcraft they would just pack it in and retire.

But I find interesting is that Diablo 3 has apparently been in development since 2001 - that's ten years. Seeing as the gaming industry moves at such a mind-blowing pace, ten years would be an eternity: Technological advancements happen, investors get worried with lack of action and the many of potential buyers have to satisfied lest they get frustrated and take their money elsewhere.
But strangely everyone seems rather cool with this: Blizzard run by the policy of taking their time with their products and doing the best job possible - and they can get away with this purely out of their previous successes. More astonishingly the fans of Blizzard, of which there are many, are very understanding and accepting of this and will hold onto the undying hopes (not to mention faith in Blizzard) without question.
Geez, how good do you have to be to enable this to happen!?

But the unflinching acceptance to the long development cycle of Diablo 3 makes an interesting counterpoint to the debacle that was Duke Nukem Forever. Both games were/are being released on the premise of when it's done - yet whilst the Diablo fans quietly accepted this, the Duke Nukem fans got angered. And whereas everyone kept indefatigable faith in Blizzard, everyone made countless jokes at DNF's MIA status. When the hopes for DNF eventually crumbled, the hopes for Blizzard remain high and untouched as ever. And when everyone was so keen to put the boot into the DNF before it was released, Blizzard are still able to escape such a fate unscathed.
And whereas the constant delays of DNF was a sin beyond forgivable, Blizzard, as well as Valve, are allowed to work at their own pace and we allow it to happen without any thoughts of anger or betrayal.

We're a hard mob to please us gamers aren't we?

Zero'd In

Nope, I was wrong: Yahtzee did a review of Duke Nuke Forever anyway. Still, I doubt he's got far less important things to do than pay attention to the rantings of a nutter in this barren corner of cyberspace.

Mind you, I can only imagine how many were hoping he'd tear into it with unbridled fury - and were no doubt disappointed when the assessment came out more genuinely disappointed.
But personally I got more out of the real DNF review than the fake one. Maybe it was the surprise of hearing Yahtzee sounding saddened with the outcome. Maybe it was him saying something different when everyone else is too busy putting the boot in.

But whatever the reason, what happens to the fake review now? Has it lost it's luster now the game is finally completed? Do people still think it funny? Will everyone vote for it in the event a New Best ZP poll emerges? Or will it still be held in high esteem by those bitter souls wishing for the days when DNF was never going to released?

Zero Hour

I would hate to be in Yahtzee's shoes right now: Since Duke Nukem Forever has turned out to be rather unspectacular, I can imagine everyone will be chomping at the bit to have him give an unfavorable assessment in Zero Punctuation.

It's well known that when DNF was announced as abandoned in 2009, Yahtzee did a satirical review of the fictitious game - a review that ended up being voted as the best one he'd ever done.
Personally, I thought that review was more weird than funny - and I think Mr. Croshaw has done better in the past - which makes me wonder why the fictitious review turned out to be such a hit. One would say that a game of a fictitious nature (at the time) meant that no one had an opinion of it to counter Yahtzee's. Another theory is that after so much delays and frustration, people were more than eager to see the (then) unfinished game get a right mauling. Indeed, it is indeed ironic that the Gearbox acquisition happens AFTER the fake review - those making me wonder if someone is going to an awful lot of trouble just to show Yahtzee up.
And I suspect it's all those "I told you so" types who are now pestering Yahtzee do a new review of the now-finished game. But as a long time fan I hope Mr. Croshaw doesn't give in to those braying mules. He has mentioned before he's not the type to do so here's hoping he sticks to his guns.

Besides, considering the many problems DNF has, writing a bad review would be too easy, right?

Red Dead Trigger

I've been playing a lot of Red Dead Redemption this past weekend and I'm finding it very much to my liking. Strangely, I've played other open world games but I won't call myself a fan. Yes I've enjoyed Okami, Legend of Zelda Link to the Past and Sid Meier's Pirates! but the Open world gaming carries with it a sense of intimidation that I've never quite overcome. Maybe I could go over it in a future post but for now, let's say that Red Dead Redemption is one game that slipped through the cracks. :)

Also, I've been playing Chrono Trigger - Yes it would seem that my prayers have been answered and Chrono Trigger has finally shown it's face on the Virtual console - It didn't come on the SNES and the PS1 in Australia but it's finally come (you think waiting fourteen years for Duke Nukem Forever was annoying? Mate, you don't know nothing about nothing!).

I don't know how it came about but I was indeed surprised to see Chrono Trigger finally available - and sitting comfortably on the VC best seller list. So well done to Nintendo and here's hoping they're paying attention still....

Did Not.....Flabbergast?

Well it's been less than a week since Duke Nukem Forever was finally unleashed on a suspecting world and already the knives are out. Common criticisms range from loading times, a structure made from an incoherent jumble of ideas, inane jokes, nothing new to offer the FPS genre and being outpaced by it's older brethren (Half Life and Halo being two such examples)
I've read quite a few negative reviews and it seems everyone is more than willing to put the boot in. Indeed, the only good positive review I've seen came from Good Game - and I was indeed waiting for Bajo and Andrew Hansen to suddenly turn around and say "Just Kidding: THIS is what's really like."

It may be too soon to deem the eventual product/conclusion of the DNF saga to be a complete failure but, for the purposes of this post, I'm going to do it anyway. You see, looking at the divisive opinions of DNF it seems that everyone is angry by the fourteen years of inaction and, as a result, can't escape that fact - thus leaving many critics more than willing to put the boot in. It's as if the development time was more important than the game itself - but me, conversely, I find the fan reaction more important than the game itself. I'm intrigued that people can feel so hurt and betrayed that they are ready to dismiss the game before it has a chance to prove itself. I'm fascinated with the idea that people can make jokes for so long about this game and can get angry with the idea of their joke being taken away from them. I'm enthralled that people can get so worked up about a game. I'm amazed that people can be delighted that it turned out rubbish and get so infuriated with the idea that it might actually be good (and before you say a prolonged development couldn't possibly yield a great game then I suggest you retreat back to the bosom of Team Fortress 2).
Indeed, I myself will admit I have yet to play DNF - becuase in all honesty I find the venomous fan reaction far more entertaining. And if the fans garner more attention than the game itself then something has gone very wrong.

That being said, with this saga coming to such an anti-climatic ending, who are the real winners here? Is it 3d Realms? No, they had a hit with Duke3D but the momentum afterward fell apart. Is it Gearbox? No, they just took, what seems to be, a mess and tried to make it go. Is it Duke himself? No, he seems now more like an anachronism. Is it the franchise? No, it seems it won't go any further following this debacle and it's unlikely an attempt to be a better job the second time around a sequel will emerge.
No, I think the real winners are the fans: Those who felt betrayed to a point where they were more than eager to dismiss the game as rubbish. Those who got their wish of an irredeemable disaster. Those who refuse to forgive and forget. Those who have been shouting "I told you so", are shouting "I told you so" and, I suspect, will continue to shout "I told you so" for the next fourteen years. And those who are no doubt waiting eagerly to hear Yahtzee tear into it with the next Zero Punctuation.

Personally, considering the troubled development DNF had, I wanted it to get a happy ending - but there's always the thought of how many people genuinely wanted it to fail.

DNF-Day

So today's the day that Duke Nukem Forever finally appears. The end of 14 years of delays, frustration, broken promises and unconfined fan rage. I suspect that people will have low expectations and be all-too ready to the boot in.

So who has it? Who's willing to place bets on the length of time before the vile starts appearing on the lips of gamers? Who would be willing to condemn this anachronism in an age of realistic/cover-based shooters?

Still you have to give Gearbox props for trying. From the blurb on the back of the game case:

Put on your shades and prepare to step into the boots of Duke Nukem, whose legend has reached epic proportions in the years since his last adventure. The alien hordes are invading and only Duke can save the world. Pig cops, alien shrink rays and enormous alien bosses can't stop our hero from accomplishing his goal: to save the world, save the babes and to be a bad-ass while doing it. The King arrives with an arsenal of over-the-top weapons, non-stop action, and unprecedented levels of interactivity. This game puts the pedal to the metal and tongue firmly in cheek. Shoot hoops, lift weights, read adult magazines, draw crude messages on whiteboards or ogle the many hot women that occupy Duke's life - that is if you can pull yourself away from destroying alien invaders. With hours and hours of over-the-top single player action, and a range of bodacious multiplayer modes, rest assured knowing the fun will last. Duke Nukem was and will forever be a gaming icon, and this is his legend.

The text suggests the wait was worth it but only the players themselves will be the judge of that.

Forever is Yesterday's Tomorrow Today!

For a laugh, I posted the following poll on Facebook:

So how do you REALLY feel about Duke Nukem Forever finally showing it's face?

o - Hope it sucks so it'll serve Gearbox right for not letting this farce die!
o - Hope it sucks so we can all move on with our lives!
o - Hope it sucks so it'll serve Gearbox right for taking our joke away from us!
o - Hope it sucks so we gamers can have the last laugh that is truly ours!
o - Hope it's actually good so this story gets a happy ending

Ironically, all the votes went into the fifth option....

Reboot this: Loaded

Remakes and Reboots are certainly popular amongst game developers: It would seem that just as long as there is an instantly recognizable name attached to the product, it would sell enough to make a decent amount of dosh.

Some gamers may grow frustrated with such moves, wishing the developers would instead make their own IP but such a move is not without it's risks: It is indeed a very long and costly process that developers should aim to making something worthwhile. Having some flop is indeed the last thing developers want so there is always the comfort zone of working on an already established name.

A valid argument for the continued presence of the Reboots but I propose a middle ground: I would like to see a reboot built on risks. I want to see a reboot of a failed idea. I want a bad game taken and transformed into a good game that no one thought possible.
Any idea can work just as long as it's handled by people who know what they're doing. By way of example, the 80's film Xanadu was a notorious flop when first released but now it's been regenerated as a hit Broadway musical. And keeping with the movie theme, I thought Hancock had a good idea behind it, shame the execution was rather lousy.

So, in what could evolve into a series, I present a post on what games I would like to see re-energised. May I present the PS1 game, LOADED!



Loaded was a launch title for the Playstation. A top down shooter, it told the tale of six crims busting their way out of a futuristic prison as bloodily as posisble.
it didn't do much to show off the processing power for Sony's new beast but it certainly had a lot going for it: The game had a macabre sense of humour about it, the character designs where great (courtesy of Vertigo comics), the music was superb and boasted involvement with Pop Will Eat Itself and there was no shortage of action. Indeed, Loaded must be the bloodiest game ever made with no shortage of gore and blood. It seemed juvenile and lacking in substance but it had a charm to it that still works for me to this day: After all, it's a great way to vent some anger.
Loaded divided critics: some thought it dumb whilst others enjoyed the fun factor. Nevertheless it was a big seller: enough did get a sequel, Re-Loaded. But this wasn't well received as it's predecessor. A third title, Fully Loaded, was planned but didn't materialise. And thus the saga of Loaded ended there and then (although apparently both Loaded and it's sequel are on their way to the PSN).

So why remake this game? Some possible reasons:
- Fun. Many games these days are stern and serious. You don't see a game that doesn't take itself seriously. I welcome any game that walks a macabre path which other games avoid.
- Action. Gamers have been crying out for a return to when a shooter involved turning off your brain and shooting dudes. All eyes are currently looking to Duke Nukem Forever as some great white hope but will anyone challenge him?
- Characters. Loaded boasts some wonderfully kooky characters and some excellent character designs. The kind that are crying out for a well-written script and some manic voice acting.

Any takers?