To be brutality honest...

Much of the past week has been devoted to revisiting a classic in the form of Doom. So what's the occasion? Well, thanks to a certain game reviewer, I have been made aware of a mod called Brutal Doom. I've had a crack at it and have been significantly blown away by how dramatically Doom has been changed by this mod. Even more impressive is that it was the work of one guy.

But really I cannot emphasize how different Doom has become with this mod: Mouse aiming; Better weapons; the necessity of reloading; A jump function (A JUMP FUNCTION!!!); Marine NPCs; Finishing moves and so much more that talking about it seems awfully redundant.
Indeed it is fascinating on how this mod gives this a game twenty one years old a new lease of life.

Now whilst I have, over the past few months, been indulging in the miracles that the modding community can provide, this is however not the first time I've tried a FPS mod. That honor would go to Navy Seals Quake. Has anyone heard of this? I played this in high school - within a year of Quake's original release no less - and was impressed by the changes made. This involved the demons replaced with human enemies, a reload function and more emphasis on tactical action rather than brainless shooter action.

And much like Brutal Doom, I found Navy Seals Quake so much an improvement over the original game that it wasn't funny. You see, I was unimpressed with the original Quake - I saw it as Doom but with a new coat of paint what with the Demonic enemies, Hell motifs and puzzling level design. Thus I couldn't understand why many people at the time were turning cartwheels over it. Thus, coming across Navy Seals Quake I, and many of my friends at the time, found it far more appealing. Indeed, it should be noted that Navy Seals Quake eschewed the then mindless action trends of FPS and adopted a more realistic approach to the genre - well before Half Life took that concept and ran with it.

My general approach to mods is that they offer new content (but even that is a challenge trying to find some quality in amongst the mud) and they offer to correct 'mistakes' (if you can call it that) that hinder the original game. Indeed, having played Brutal Doom I'm now wondering how the hell I managed to get by on the original - which goes to show that sometimes a new coat of paint isn't enough and sometimes repairs made also be required to renew interest in an old game.
If anything I would rather play Brutal Doom than the latest incarnation of the Call of Duty series any day.

Steam Inaction

Here's a theory I came across: As Steam has so many games that are readily available and for real cheap, the Steam user would actually spend more time collecting games than actually playing them.
Put simply: The Steam user will always have 36% of the games in their library unplayed.

So how does my Steam library look next to this theory? Well, at time of writing, I have 40 games. Half of which are unplayed. While that is far from the proposed 36% it does raise the question of why some games are unplayed. Well takes a look at some the games I have in my Steam library and try find an explanation or two as to why they've gone untouched:

Analogue: a Hate Story
I was curious about this game largely to it's reputation in having a strong narrative. However after I made the purchase, I found out it was a game made by a lesbian for the LBGT community - which kinda made me situated outside the intended audience. Oh well...

Counter-Strike (with Condition Zero)
Purchased purely on the grounds that this seems to be one of those games that every PC owner has to have. At least I take comfort in knowing I got it on sale...

Enclave
Purchased largely out of me having the discount coupon.

Half Life (with Blue Shift and Opposing Force)
Purchased purely on the grounds that this seems to be one of those games that every PC owner has to have.

Hamilton's Great Adventure
Again, purchased largely out of me having the discount coupon (hey can you say no to a 90% discount?!).

Larva Mortus
Again, purchased largely out of me having the discount coupon

Left 4 Dead 2
In a case of being in the right place at the right time, I have those purely out of being offered as a freebie  one time

Papers Please
Heard it was awesome but have yet to get around to playing it...

Psychonauts
Again, purchased largely out of me having the discount coupon

Quake (with Ground Zero and The Reckoning)
Again, purchased purely on the grounds that this seems to be one of those games that every PC owner has to have. Mind you, i did play this a lot back in the day most likely I'll have a tough time taking it seriously now....

Sid Meier's Civilisation 4
Because when you buy the PC verison, for some reaosn you get the Mac version as well for some reason

Sid Meier's Civilisation 5
Unplayed largely due to it's reputation for being forever doomed to remain in it's predecessors' shadow

Looking back at what I've written, it seems a pattern has emerged: A large number of the games mentioned above have been purchased out of obligation. So is this is where gaming is headed? A sense of obligation? Where owning big library is more important than making use of it's contents? Where by making sure you use one product (however so) to a point where all else is of little consequence (World of Warcraft anyone?)?

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.

Hungry like the wolf

This weekend I’ve been playing Wolfenstein 3d. Yep, the original and still the best. True the shooter genre may have had major changes in the wake of Half Life and Deus Ex but honestly? There still exists and want to just switch one’s mind off, garb the biggest gun you can think of and mow down anything dumb enough to stand in your way. And that’s a need Wolf3d fulfills nicely. It may be twenty one years old but it’s appeal still stands strong.

Okay sure it’s odd to walk about the most incoherently designed stronghold(s) imaginable, sure there are enough soldiers to invade an entire country and there’s a stupidly large amount of gold stashed in the bases, but I don’t care. I’m willing to tolerate the dated graphics and the whole cheesy dialogue (“Spion!”,”Mein leben!”). If anything, there is a certain charm to the graphics as it’s hilarious to see the body count of an intense bout of shooting:

If anything, get past the realism and the hyper-serious nature of shooters and all is left is the desire just to shoot so many dudes with a chain gun. I could say they don’t make ’em like they used to but you know what? They don’t 

Silent Bill

I find the idea of silent game characters a rather strange choice in gaming. Why build a world where everyone can talk and interact with other bar one? Why give character a face and a name but refuse to make the final jump in giving them a voice? I just find it odd that worlds get built with so much detail but one detail is missing with the player's entry point into said world not saying single damn thing.
In fact to have a Player Character silent when everyone else isn't does portray them in a rather puzzling manner. Do they have poor social skills? Do they have trouble interacting with the people around them? Are they shut-ins who spent many years of their life cut off from the rest of the world that they missed out on some vital communication skills?
If anything, the lack of voice in a Player Character doesn't really suggest anything about them: What they think, how they view the world around them and how they perceptive being repeatedly handed tasks to complete for the populace. The last point is of particular note: We know the scenario: The Player Character is given tasks by the populace in order to advance further in the game - but the PC accepts this without a second thought. But really how does he/she really feel about this? Would they get irate that no one can do things for themselves? Would he/she get annoyed that he/she's continually getting sidetracked from their main quest? I think Lenny Bruce said it best when he declared that: 'Take away the right to say "fuck" and you take away the right to say "fuck the government."'

Yet many gamers think otherwise - and as result, the likes of Link, Samus Aran and Gordon Freeman are continually thought highly of in gaming circles. The reason being is that because the character is silent, the gamer is free as they please to build their own opinion about them. I guess that argument has weight with one's personality being built up through one's actions rather than the words spoken - and previous attempts to make a personality (ie Legend of Zelda cartoon and Metroid Other M), have been pathetic to say the least. That may be the case but I refuse to accept the idea that the silent character is meant to be the eyes of the gamer in the game world. They aren't me: Why? Because they have an appearance and a name that I don't really have a say in. The characters I've played in both Baldurs Gate and World of Warcraft are mine because I made them and guided them through their
respective game worlds - whereas Link is....... well.... everyone's Link.

So yeah, for me playing a character who already has a name and face but no voice doesn't mean they are me in the game itself. If anything, the games that want to involve the player themselves are those that a) address them directly, b) make the player feel like they're making some kind of difference and c) remove any visual representation of the PC.
That being said I think the games that have done this best are Starcraft and Bioshock. Starcraft did so by having a well-written script with characters address the player directly - helped considerably by some solid voice acting - and really created the impression the player was making a difference. Bioshock also took a brave step by refusing to make any visual reference to the PC (apart from hands and a bit of arm) and through placing the player in situations that challenged linear gameplay.

So, if anything, building a character a face, a name but no voice strikes me as a little odd - like a runner that jumps numerous hurdles but then chooses to not clear the last one. If this is a character that's meant to represent me, the player, then why do I have a set name and appearance?