I want to see a deathmatch between GLaDOS and Eddie Vedder.
It would be interesting to see, at the end of it, who would be still alive.
Showing posts with label Portal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Portal. Show all posts
Monday, June 22, 2020
Monday, December 3, 2018
This was a triumph
Here's something that caught me completely by surprise. Someone redid Portal as a C64 game!:
Original video located here. Accessed 9th November 2018
I tend to view demakes with a conflicting eye: On one hand it's impressive that someone went to so much trouble but on the other hand I am left wondering what the point of it all was.
But who am I kidding? This is nothing short of impressive. It's astonishing that someone managed to get something of this quality out of an ancient hardware. Okay sure the ratio of time spent in the rooms to the time spent listening to GlaDOS' dialogue is off but I still take my aht off to the man who came up with this.
Friday, July 25, 2014
An Ode to Ico
Something I put together in anticipation for Good Game's greatest game special:
Favorite game? Ico. On the PS2
No joke: you’ve heard exactly what I’ve said
Not for me Portal, Halo and Wow too
No, give me a lad with horns on his head
Who meets a princess in a big fortress
Who can open doors and make black shapes dead
Both doomed to die: A fate to readdress
So an escape Ico and Yorda plan
Hand in hand through the castle they progress
Contending with: puzzles, solved as they can
And bashing, with a wood stick, black shadows
And, worse of all, Yorda’s attention span
Under bloom lightening the game flows
Showing Legend of Zelda how it’s done
Along with a loneliness this game knows
Oh Ico, you poor selling ball of fun
Father of Shadow of the Colossus
Now on the PS3 for everyone
Ico: Who does so much more with so less
Who proudly passes the ‘game as art’ test
And a real tear jerker I must confess
Yes, my favorite game’s Ico. It’s the best!
Mood, emotion: There’s nothing quite like it.
Even though it’s one big long escort quest
Favorite game? Ico. On the PS2
No joke: you’ve heard exactly what I’ve said
Not for me Portal, Halo and Wow too
No, give me a lad with horns on his head
Who meets a princess in a big fortress
Who can open doors and make black shapes dead
Both doomed to die: A fate to readdress
So an escape Ico and Yorda plan
Hand in hand through the castle they progress
Contending with: puzzles, solved as they can
And bashing, with a wood stick, black shadows
And, worse of all, Yorda’s attention span
Under bloom lightening the game flows
Showing Legend of Zelda how it’s done
Along with a loneliness this game knows
Oh Ico, you poor selling ball of fun
Father of Shadow of the Colossus
Now on the PS3 for everyone
Ico: Who does so much more with so less
Who proudly passes the ‘game as art’ test
And a real tear jerker I must confess
Yes, my favorite game’s Ico. It’s the best!
Mood, emotion: There’s nothing quite like it.
Even though it’s one big long escort quest
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Nothing to complain about here!
Another post, another game struck down from my Hall of Shame.
Yep, I beat another game during my Christmas break, this one being Planescape Torment:
This is not an easy game for me to assess because so much has been written about it already - so much so it is hard for me to find something new to say. An RPG that's strange and smart in equal measures? A deliberate breaking of RPG conventions? Probably the finest voice talent ever assembled in a game? Writing to die for? Criminally underrated? Now available on GoG for ten bucks so there's no excuse not to have played it?
Well there is something that can be said that hasn't been said before: My own personal experience with this game.
Firstly, yes the combat is stupid but that's not the point: This is a game where the player must discover things through dialogue and interaction. In addition I wouldn't dismiss Planescape Torment as an interactive storybook: Calling it that would insists the player's participation is minimal but here the player has a strong influence in how things shape out.
But it is ultimately the journey through the game itself: Staggering in the life (lives?) of the Nameless One, hilarious in the dialogue and characters encountered, and...no wait I'm getting sidetracked. Personal experience!
Okay start again: I played a game where I saw one's man life play out. I saw a universe where a thought can be given solid form. I saw a story unfold that kept me in it's siren call and refused to let me walk away. I saw truths revealed with sense of poignancy and revelation. I saw moves to go against the grain of RPGs and never once did I question it. I saw genius that has never been seen in any other game.
So is Planescape Torment any good? Damn right it is.
In fact I may have to reconsider my list of best games ever just for the sake of including Planescape Torment. I mean this game made me pay attention to so many lines of dialogue and presented a big-bad that could be overcome without raising a fist. That may sound completely stupid but here it works: and then that surely would be enough to make Planescape Torment one of if not the greatest game ever made. And I've since gone back and played through the climax several times - something that very few games can claim.
Indeed it is a crying shame that this game never got as big as it should've. Sure Portal may have made many laugh but I'll have "What can change the nature of a man?" over "The cake is a lie" any day.
Nothing more I can add except that playing this was a long time coming and a journey I was glad to have made. There is nothing like it before or since.
Go to GoG, buy it and play it. NOW.
Yep, I beat another game during my Christmas break, this one being Planescape Torment:
This is not an easy game for me to assess because so much has been written about it already - so much so it is hard for me to find something new to say. An RPG that's strange and smart in equal measures? A deliberate breaking of RPG conventions? Probably the finest voice talent ever assembled in a game? Writing to die for? Criminally underrated? Now available on GoG for ten bucks so there's no excuse not to have played it?
Well there is something that can be said that hasn't been said before: My own personal experience with this game.
Firstly, yes the combat is stupid but that's not the point: This is a game where the player must discover things through dialogue and interaction. In addition I wouldn't dismiss Planescape Torment as an interactive storybook: Calling it that would insists the player's participation is minimal but here the player has a strong influence in how things shape out.
But it is ultimately the journey through the game itself: Staggering in the life (lives?) of the Nameless One, hilarious in the dialogue and characters encountered, and...no wait I'm getting sidetracked. Personal experience!
Okay start again: I played a game where I saw one's man life play out. I saw a universe where a thought can be given solid form. I saw a story unfold that kept me in it's siren call and refused to let me walk away. I saw truths revealed with sense of poignancy and revelation. I saw moves to go against the grain of RPGs and never once did I question it. I saw genius that has never been seen in any other game.
So is Planescape Torment any good? Damn right it is.
In fact I may have to reconsider my list of best games ever just for the sake of including Planescape Torment. I mean this game made me pay attention to so many lines of dialogue and presented a big-bad that could be overcome without raising a fist. That may sound completely stupid but here it works: and then that surely would be enough to make Planescape Torment one of if not the greatest game ever made. And I've since gone back and played through the climax several times - something that very few games can claim.
Indeed it is a crying shame that this game never got as big as it should've. Sure Portal may have made many laugh but I'll have "What can change the nature of a man?" over "The cake is a lie" any day.
Nothing more I can add except that playing this was a long time coming and a journey I was glad to have made. There is nothing like it before or since.
Go to GoG, buy it and play it. NOW.
Friday, November 8, 2013
Stan the Man
This week I’ve been playing a lot of The Stanley Parable.
Like everyone else I came to this game through the some rather abstract descriptions of the game itself (that and everyone gushing about it). It seemed that everyone was recommending it but giving little to no explanation why. Well that’s enough to pique my curiosity so I picked up the game via Steam.
And I really enjoyed it.
Of course I’m going to keep up the trend via not going to give anything on this blog because doing so will most likely get me shouted down as ‘benefits of finding things out for yourself’ is the current trend on the Internet (I guess we can all blame Game of Thrones for that). But what I will say is that I think I enjoyed The Stanley Parable more than I enjoyed Portal.
I guess most of it can be attributed to my enjoyment of Portal being tainted with the ‘Cake is a Lie’ and ‘Still Alive’ jokes being run into the ground. This is not the case here: The rigidly little that has been revealed about The Stanley Parable beforehand has left me completely in the dark here and it’s worked wonders here. Thus there isn’t much more I can add here apart from giving credit to the narrator Kevan Brighting who really makes the game and delivers a VA performance to end all VA performances. In fact given a choice I would rather listen to the Narrator than GlaDOS (SHODAN was better anyway)
So in the end what The Stanley Parable proves is that there is indeed some value in allowing people to discover things for themselves. In fact I'm not sure how this game got greenlit by Steam but I'm certianly it did. I just hope nobody looks at The Stanley Parable the same way they did with the Companion Cube and sees a whole lot of marketing potential.....
Like everyone else I came to this game through the some rather abstract descriptions of the game itself (that and everyone gushing about it). It seemed that everyone was recommending it but giving little to no explanation why. Well that’s enough to pique my curiosity so I picked up the game via Steam.
And I really enjoyed it.
Of course I’m going to keep up the trend via not going to give anything on this blog because doing so will most likely get me shouted down as ‘benefits of finding things out for yourself’ is the current trend on the Internet (I guess we can all blame Game of Thrones for that). But what I will say is that I think I enjoyed The Stanley Parable more than I enjoyed Portal.
I guess most of it can be attributed to my enjoyment of Portal being tainted with the ‘Cake is a Lie’ and ‘Still Alive’ jokes being run into the ground. This is not the case here: The rigidly little that has been revealed about The Stanley Parable beforehand has left me completely in the dark here and it’s worked wonders here. Thus there isn’t much more I can add here apart from giving credit to the narrator Kevan Brighting who really makes the game and delivers a VA performance to end all VA performances. In fact given a choice I would rather listen to the Narrator than GlaDOS (SHODAN was better anyway)
So in the end what The Stanley Parable proves is that there is indeed some value in allowing people to discover things for themselves. In fact I'm not sure how this game got greenlit by Steam but I'm certianly it did. I just hope nobody looks at The Stanley Parable the same way they did with the Companion Cube and sees a whole lot of marketing potential.....
Friday, April 19, 2013
The Duellists
Here's something I've been pondering on: One way of building an effective gaming villain seems to be the ability to taunt the player. It would seem that to attack the player on such a psychological level would enrage the player and inspire them onward to knock nine bells out of the villain - after all if a villains doesn't make the player want to punch their face in, then the villain isn't doing their job properly. As a result, taunting the player has built some truly unforgettable villains in the form of GLaDos and SHODAN.
But here's the thing: Taunting the player effectively places me in a position of powerlessness - I can't deliver any witty comebacks to the smart-arse who won't shut up. True that may be precisely the point but whilst I, as the player, may yell at the screen, I can't help but feel that something is missing with my comebacks having little effect. After all, if a villain can make me the player angry then it's only fair I should make the villain angry, right? Thus, somehow, being represented by a silent, faceless player character makes said PC come across as being a middle man in the unfortunate position of being caught in-between a battle of wits.
Anyone whose seen the movie Red Dragon would know the relationship between Will Graham and Hannibal Lector: Hannibal hates Will and is trying to attack him in various forms - but when Will refuses to give in to the good doctor, the angrier Hannibal gets.
It's a compelling scenario and one that could really do with being transplanted into a gaming scenario. Think about it! An evil villain determined to break a character, both in mind and body, whilst the player character isn't taking that shit lying down and has an array of comebacks - both verbal and physical. And of course with both characters growing angrier with each other, this will lead to, potentially, the mother of all final showdowns.
But this scenario seems unlikely as having the player character represented by a fully-realised character does take away the personable nature of the villains mental assaults - as it's the character being taunted not the player.
Of course, Portal had Chelle but some people awfully willing to forget that....
But here's the thing: Taunting the player effectively places me in a position of powerlessness - I can't deliver any witty comebacks to the smart-arse who won't shut up. True that may be precisely the point but whilst I, as the player, may yell at the screen, I can't help but feel that something is missing with my comebacks having little effect. After all, if a villain can make me the player angry then it's only fair I should make the villain angry, right? Thus, somehow, being represented by a silent, faceless player character makes said PC come across as being a middle man in the unfortunate position of being caught in-between a battle of wits.
Anyone whose seen the movie Red Dragon would know the relationship between Will Graham and Hannibal Lector: Hannibal hates Will and is trying to attack him in various forms - but when Will refuses to give in to the good doctor, the angrier Hannibal gets.
It's a compelling scenario and one that could really do with being transplanted into a gaming scenario. Think about it! An evil villain determined to break a character, both in mind and body, whilst the player character isn't taking that shit lying down and has an array of comebacks - both verbal and physical. And of course with both characters growing angrier with each other, this will lead to, potentially, the mother of all final showdowns.
But this scenario seems unlikely as having the player character represented by a fully-realised character does take away the personable nature of the villains mental assaults - as it's the character being taunted not the player.
Of course, Portal had Chelle but some people awfully willing to forget that....
Friday, January 25, 2013
Want to know a Secret?
Guess what? Another game has been cast down from my Hall of Shame! Yep, Secret of Monkey Island has taken sail!
Seeing as I’ve been playing a lot of point and click adventure games over the past few weeks, playing Secret of Monkey Island was almost inevitable. And how can I avoid it? It’s consistently regarded as one of the kings of the genre and more or less inescapable. Thus it places me in a rather curious position: I’d heard of the Secret of Monkey Island games back in the early nineties but it is only now that I’ve finally gotten around to playing them. Thus I play as a complete newbie and don’t have twenty years of nostalgia to blind me.
So what did I think of it?
Well, my experience playing Secret of Monkey Island can be summed up in the word: fresh. Now I understand humor isn’t easy to pull off in games as the jokes can get old rather quickly but that doesn’t seem to be the case here. Twenty three years on and this game is still funny with some laugh-out louds moments. In fact I’m really astonished: It’s not just the great writing but how well it’s lasted through the years since. The absurdity of the games is always razor sharp and never once becomes stale. I particularly enjoyed the climax and, being a newbie, I can see some connections that may have emerged within the Pirates of the Caribbean movies (of course both that and Secret of Monkey Island were inspired by the ride at Disneyland). In fact I’m kinda surprised that considering the humor in this game that they’ve all managed to escape been run into the ground through internet memes (looking at you Portal!).
Indeed, it’s fun to come across something that many of my gaming comrades discovered years before. And having played Secret of Monkey Island, I can see the adoration is justified.
Not much else to say except that I certainly look forward to checking more of this series….
Seeing as I’ve been playing a lot of point and click adventure games over the past few weeks, playing Secret of Monkey Island was almost inevitable. And how can I avoid it? It’s consistently regarded as one of the kings of the genre and more or less inescapable. Thus it places me in a rather curious position: I’d heard of the Secret of Monkey Island games back in the early nineties but it is only now that I’ve finally gotten around to playing them. Thus I play as a complete newbie and don’t have twenty years of nostalgia to blind me.
So what did I think of it?
Well, my experience playing Secret of Monkey Island can be summed up in the word: fresh. Now I understand humor isn’t easy to pull off in games as the jokes can get old rather quickly but that doesn’t seem to be the case here. Twenty three years on and this game is still funny with some laugh-out louds moments. In fact I’m really astonished: It’s not just the great writing but how well it’s lasted through the years since. The absurdity of the games is always razor sharp and never once becomes stale. I particularly enjoyed the climax and, being a newbie, I can see some connections that may have emerged within the Pirates of the Caribbean movies (of course both that and Secret of Monkey Island were inspired by the ride at Disneyland). In fact I’m kinda surprised that considering the humor in this game that they’ve all managed to escape been run into the ground through internet memes (looking at you Portal!).
Indeed, it’s fun to come across something that many of my gaming comrades discovered years before. And having played Secret of Monkey Island, I can see the adoration is justified.
Not much else to say except that I certainly look forward to checking more of this series….
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Trail of a Badman
Whew - bashing out 300 posts (and on a regular basis may I add) is certainly something to be proud of. But is it any reason to stop? Of course not! I still have plenty more to say and as long as I continue to do so, this blog may continue to thrive.
But what you may not know is that the list of 300 posts was not my original choice for the 300 post milestone. What happened is that my original idea didn't turn out as well as I hoped and it had to be scrapped - and the list of my 50 best games was a late-hour arrival. Now personally I find that the posts I put a lot of thought and effort into, turn out to be my best ones so in a way my fifty best games post seems rather anticlimactic.
But I digress. So what was the original post I had in mind? Well, the follow on from my best heroines and heroes posts, I felt it was fitting to continue with the theme with some of my favorite villains.
However once I took up the task, I soon faced a problem: I was having a really hard time trying to come up with eleven of them.
You see, the main difference between video games and books/films/TV series, is the principle of interactivity. And somehow that lessens the impact of a villainous presence.
Allow me to elaborate: I can think of many villains in books/films/TV series that have made an impression on me: Darken Rahl, Emperor Palpatine, Nurse Ratchet, Joffrey Baratheon, David Xanatos, Mr Blonde, Lijah (FETHING!) Cuu, Gaston, T-1000, Makato Shishio, Dilandau, General Melchett, Discord and the Queen of the Changelings. These are characters who are made out to be nasty - true they may also be of a complex personality, have a decent motivation and may even be sympathetic. But in the end they are the villains and their ultimate role is to enough bad stuff to make you, the viewer, want them to get their just desserts from the protagonist. Indeed, I personally feel the mark of a good villain is the type that makes you want to reach into the pages/screen and wring the asshole's neck.
But therein lies the key difference with video games - the interactivity. You, the player are there to kill the bad guy. You aren't relying on someone else to do it. You are doing the same thing that countless heroes in books/films/TV series have done before you. And somehow, such knowledge lessens the impact a villain should have. The viewer finally can make a difference to the drama before them and go one on one with the once seemingly untouchable villain.
Therefore, whilst it's easy for me to think up many fictional villains, it's not so easy when it comes to video games. Very few video game villains I can think of have generated such an impact that equals, or even surpasses, the rogues gallery listed above.
In addition, in an attempt to find some inspiration, I read several gaming villains lists and I found they all said the same thing - Namely, GLaDOS and Sephiroth. But somehow I don't buy that because a) what, did all the other gaming villains pack up and leave? and b) it seemed to me that these two do something (Sephiroth killed Aerith! GLaDOS made me laugh!) and people are willing to spend many hours write down many an essay to back up their decision. But anyone could do that to any villain so why should these two get the red carpet treatment?
Grumbling aside, the idea of compiling a list of my favorite video game villains is still there and may be one that I may return to one day. I have my own ideas on what makes a great villain and upon seeing so many lists on what makes a great villain, somehow one gets the feeling an alternative view could be necessary....
But what you may not know is that the list of 300 posts was not my original choice for the 300 post milestone. What happened is that my original idea didn't turn out as well as I hoped and it had to be scrapped - and the list of my 50 best games was a late-hour arrival. Now personally I find that the posts I put a lot of thought and effort into, turn out to be my best ones so in a way my fifty best games post seems rather anticlimactic.
But I digress. So what was the original post I had in mind? Well, the follow on from my best heroines and heroes posts, I felt it was fitting to continue with the theme with some of my favorite villains.
However once I took up the task, I soon faced a problem: I was having a really hard time trying to come up with eleven of them.
You see, the main difference between video games and books/films/TV series, is the principle of interactivity. And somehow that lessens the impact of a villainous presence.
Allow me to elaborate: I can think of many villains in books/films/TV series that have made an impression on me: Darken Rahl, Emperor Palpatine, Nurse Ratchet, Joffrey Baratheon, David Xanatos, Mr Blonde, Lijah (FETHING!) Cuu, Gaston, T-1000, Makato Shishio, Dilandau, General Melchett, Discord and the Queen of the Changelings. These are characters who are made out to be nasty - true they may also be of a complex personality, have a decent motivation and may even be sympathetic. But in the end they are the villains and their ultimate role is to enough bad stuff to make you, the viewer, want them to get their just desserts from the protagonist. Indeed, I personally feel the mark of a good villain is the type that makes you want to reach into the pages/screen and wring the asshole's neck.
But therein lies the key difference with video games - the interactivity. You, the player are there to kill the bad guy. You aren't relying on someone else to do it. You are doing the same thing that countless heroes in books/films/TV series have done before you. And somehow, such knowledge lessens the impact a villain should have. The viewer finally can make a difference to the drama before them and go one on one with the once seemingly untouchable villain.
Therefore, whilst it's easy for me to think up many fictional villains, it's not so easy when it comes to video games. Very few video game villains I can think of have generated such an impact that equals, or even surpasses, the rogues gallery listed above.
In addition, in an attempt to find some inspiration, I read several gaming villains lists and I found they all said the same thing - Namely, GLaDOS and Sephiroth. But somehow I don't buy that because a) what, did all the other gaming villains pack up and leave? and b) it seemed to me that these two do something (Sephiroth killed Aerith! GLaDOS made me laugh!) and people are willing to spend many hours write down many an essay to back up their decision. But anyone could do that to any villain so why should these two get the red carpet treatment?
Grumbling aside, the idea of compiling a list of my favorite video game villains is still there and may be one that I may return to one day. I have my own ideas on what makes a great villain and upon seeing so many lists on what makes a great villain, somehow one gets the feeling an alternative view could be necessary....
Monday, April 30, 2012
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
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
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Princess Peach vs Yorda
It's been established many times over in this blog that I'm a big fan of the game Ico and I'll be first in line to defend it to the death. And so, for lack of a better segue, this is what I intend to do for today's post.
One common complaint I've heard about Ico is the ineffectual nature of Yorda - so I would like to address this aspect through inviting comparison to another gaming damsel in distress. That's right, I'm talking about Princess Peach.
Now much has already been written questioning Peach's mental state and how greatly she contributes to the Mario games so rather than go over well-trodden ground, I'm going to compare Peach and Yorda together in several areas. Hopefully I may be able to provoke a rethink to all the Yorda haters - and maybe Anne Hathaway will turn up on my doorstep demanding sex from me.
The Damsel in Distress
Yorda: Like Ico, Yorda is a prisoner in the fortress - this is immediately apparent through the first time we see her being in the predicament of being confined to a cage suspended up a tower.
Peach: Right from the very first game, Peach has provided something of a goal to the player in rescuing her from the clutches of Bowser. But since then, the same scenario has been repeated a gazillion times and yet she oddly doesn't seemed that fazed at all. This seems to present the rather unsettling suggestion that Peach may not be all right in the head....
The Setting
Yorda: Throughout the game, it is established that the fortress is the only world Yorda has known and the outside world would be a horrible place to be. But when the fortress is a monstrous creation towering above Ico and Yorda and seems to be one step ahead of their escape plan, getting away from it sounds like a damn good idea.
Peach: Is Princess Peach really a head of state? We never see her parents, the king and queen of the the Mushroom Kingdom, she doesn't seem to take on board any responsibilities as a ruler and the only interest she shows towards her subjects is getting them to do work for her! It seems she is far more content to have loads of money and little no responsibilities (insert obligatory Paris Hilton joke). So it begs the question: is this really a princess worth saving?
Appearance.
Yorda: Right from the word go, it is made clear that Yorda looks completely different form Ico - The deathly-pale skin was a dead giveaway and she's a world apart. Yet the ethereal quality is compelling enough.
Peach: Maybe it's me but this character design does little for me. I've seen faces that have kick-started many a damsel-in-distress saving quests but this isn't one of them. And those wide, vacant-looking eyes speak volumes. One would think Mario, a man of Italian nationality, would know a better-looking woman when he saw one.
Relationship to the player character
Yorda: Whilst Yorda does rely heavily on Ico, she is however bonded to the fortress and can open the sealed doors to other places that Ico would be otherwise been unable to access. Thus the relationship between Ico and Yorda is less an escort mission and more co-reliant.
Peach: Exactly what is the relationship between Peach and Mario? He goes through so many levels of danger and is constantly putting himself at risk but for what? The promise of cake?! Their relationship isn't really properly defined in the game and for all we know, Mario could be doing all this for having nothing better to do. In addition, considering Peach's afore-mentioned unfazed reaction to her abductions, brings forth the possibility that maybe Mario's efforts are going unnoticed and to waste. Seriously, is the promise of cake really that big a deal? (insert obligatory Portal joke)
Helpfulness to the player character
Yorda: This scene:
Peach: Apparently she does play a more helpful role in the Mario RPG with her being part of Mario's party and taking on a healer role. But I haven't got that far in that game yet so I can't comment. But if she truly is capable of self-defense then why doesn't she do it more often?!
But alas, nothing since has come of this change of pace and apparently the Mario RPGs are considered non-canon. So close and yet so far....
Facing a legitimate threat
Yorda: Yorda's role is ultimately to serve as a vessel to the Queen/Witch. The evil bitch intends to do this as her won body is nearing it's end and possessing her own daughter is as good excuse as any.
Peach: Whilst Bowser does present a threat, and indeed an imposing presence, it is however suggested that all he wants is some lovin'. One would wonder why don't Peach and Bowser hang out together (Stockholm Syndrome anyone?) but no, she still summons Mario to come to the rescue to save her from..... something that isn't really that big a deal.
Role in gaming
Yorda: Yorda is the product of a reinvention of the whole damsel-in-distress scenario that has been with gaming for nearly forever (a reinvention that, may I add, predates Braid).
Peach: Peach pretty much started this whole damsel-in-distress scenario - nowadays it's all played for laughs but honestly? The joke has pretty much been run to the ground....
Well I've said my case. But at the end of the day this my opinion and here on the internet differing opinions run rampant. I know there are some people who will put in the boot into Ico but you know what? I'm really not that bothered by it. I know I like Ico and that's all I need. And besides: Just because someone has a different to me doesn't mean it's the end of the world (very good advice that is).
Still, I shall expect the flames arriving in three....two....
One common complaint I've heard about Ico is the ineffectual nature of Yorda - so I would like to address this aspect through inviting comparison to another gaming damsel in distress. That's right, I'm talking about Princess Peach.
Now much has already been written questioning Peach's mental state and how greatly she contributes to the Mario games so rather than go over well-trodden ground, I'm going to compare Peach and Yorda together in several areas. Hopefully I may be able to provoke a rethink to all the Yorda haters - and maybe Anne Hathaway will turn up on my doorstep demanding sex from me.
The Damsel in Distress
Yorda: Like Ico, Yorda is a prisoner in the fortress - this is immediately apparent through the first time we see her being in the predicament of being confined to a cage suspended up a tower.
Peach: Right from the very first game, Peach has provided something of a goal to the player in rescuing her from the clutches of Bowser. But since then, the same scenario has been repeated a gazillion times and yet she oddly doesn't seemed that fazed at all. This seems to present the rather unsettling suggestion that Peach may not be all right in the head....
The Setting
Yorda: Throughout the game, it is established that the fortress is the only world Yorda has known and the outside world would be a horrible place to be. But when the fortress is a monstrous creation towering above Ico and Yorda and seems to be one step ahead of their escape plan, getting away from it sounds like a damn good idea.
Peach: Is Princess Peach really a head of state? We never see her parents, the king and queen of the the Mushroom Kingdom, she doesn't seem to take on board any responsibilities as a ruler and the only interest she shows towards her subjects is getting them to do work for her! It seems she is far more content to have loads of money and little no responsibilities (insert obligatory Paris Hilton joke). So it begs the question: is this really a princess worth saving?
Appearance.
Yorda: Right from the word go, it is made clear that Yorda looks completely different form Ico - The deathly-pale skin was a dead giveaway and she's a world apart. Yet the ethereal quality is compelling enough.
Peach: Maybe it's me but this character design does little for me. I've seen faces that have kick-started many a damsel-in-distress saving quests but this isn't one of them. And those wide, vacant-looking eyes speak volumes. One would think Mario, a man of Italian nationality, would know a better-looking woman when he saw one.
Relationship to the player character
Yorda: Whilst Yorda does rely heavily on Ico, she is however bonded to the fortress and can open the sealed doors to other places that Ico would be otherwise been unable to access. Thus the relationship between Ico and Yorda is less an escort mission and more co-reliant.
Peach: Exactly what is the relationship between Peach and Mario? He goes through so many levels of danger and is constantly putting himself at risk but for what? The promise of cake?! Their relationship isn't really properly defined in the game and for all we know, Mario could be doing all this for having nothing better to do. In addition, considering Peach's afore-mentioned unfazed reaction to her abductions, brings forth the possibility that maybe Mario's efforts are going unnoticed and to waste. Seriously, is the promise of cake really that big a deal? (insert obligatory Portal joke)
Helpfulness to the player character
Yorda: This scene:
Peach: Apparently she does play a more helpful role in the Mario RPG with her being part of Mario's party and taking on a healer role. But I haven't got that far in that game yet so I can't comment. But if she truly is capable of self-defense then why doesn't she do it more often?!
But alas, nothing since has come of this change of pace and apparently the Mario RPGs are considered non-canon. So close and yet so far....
Facing a legitimate threat
Yorda: Yorda's role is ultimately to serve as a vessel to the Queen/Witch. The evil bitch intends to do this as her won body is nearing it's end and possessing her own daughter is as good excuse as any.
Peach: Whilst Bowser does present a threat, and indeed an imposing presence, it is however suggested that all he wants is some lovin'. One would wonder why don't Peach and Bowser hang out together (Stockholm Syndrome anyone?) but no, she still summons Mario to come to the rescue to save her from..... something that isn't really that big a deal.
Role in gaming
Yorda: Yorda is the product of a reinvention of the whole damsel-in-distress scenario that has been with gaming for nearly forever (a reinvention that, may I add, predates Braid).
Peach: Peach pretty much started this whole damsel-in-distress scenario - nowadays it's all played for laughs but honestly? The joke has pretty much been run to the ground....
Well I've said my case. But at the end of the day this my opinion and here on the internet differing opinions run rampant. I know there are some people who will put in the boot into Ico but you know what? I'm really not that bothered by it. I know I like Ico and that's all I need. And besides: Just because someone has a different to me doesn't mean it's the end of the world (very good advice that is).
Still, I shall expect the flames arriving in three....two....
Monday, December 12, 2011
That was the year it was: 2011
So this will be my last post for 2011 - Because the festive season is here and there are people who I should spend some time with. And besides, this past week has been rather barren with things to say.
So to wrap this year up, some quick thoughts about the games I played this year. Sure not all of them were released this year but still:
Bioshock
Intimidating at first but this won me over with it's compelling plot, great use of ideas and it's well-realised setting and imagination behind it. The praise lauded on it may have left me reluctant to play it but, much to my surprise, it turned out great.
Dragon Age 2
Why didn't Bioware keep the pattern established with Origins and Awakening and give this game a subtitle? This game had some good ideas true but they were bogged down with dull environments, stupid combat and no proper goal. Still it would be interesting to see what Bioware will do now with Dragon Age 3....
Green Day Rock Band
Dookie was a welcome addition to My Rock Band Library - not sure about the other two albums though.....
Iron Brigade
I became aware of this game through a positive review on Good Game. I've enjoyed playing Mechwarrior 2 in the past so the idea of stomping around in a huge mech had some appeal. Can't say I'm a big fan of Tower Defense games but this was good fun.
Lego Rock Band
Something of a surprise: I originally got for the games for the songs but somehow, it won me over. Juvenile yes but with some a charm of it's own.
Oblivion
Another long time coming but I enjoyed this game purely for wandering around and checking the well-realised world out. But as this game is an action RPG, one would think I'd missed the point...
Portal
Somehow the memes based around this game made actually playing the damn thing redundant. Oh well...
Red Dead Redemption
I've heard some less than praising comments for this game. Can't imagine why....
Rock band 3
Well what can i say that hasn't been said before? Some changes were nice others weren't. Music Library good, stupid difficulty not.
And that's the end of Game Tumour for 2011. Thank you for reading and I'll see you on the other side of 2012
So what will the new year bring? That's a very good question...
So to wrap this year up, some quick thoughts about the games I played this year. Sure not all of them were released this year but still:
Bioshock
Intimidating at first but this won me over with it's compelling plot, great use of ideas and it's well-realised setting and imagination behind it. The praise lauded on it may have left me reluctant to play it but, much to my surprise, it turned out great.
Dragon Age 2
Why didn't Bioware keep the pattern established with Origins and Awakening and give this game a subtitle? This game had some good ideas true but they were bogged down with dull environments, stupid combat and no proper goal. Still it would be interesting to see what Bioware will do now with Dragon Age 3....
Green Day Rock Band
Dookie was a welcome addition to My Rock Band Library - not sure about the other two albums though.....
Iron Brigade
I became aware of this game through a positive review on Good Game. I've enjoyed playing Mechwarrior 2 in the past so the idea of stomping around in a huge mech had some appeal. Can't say I'm a big fan of Tower Defense games but this was good fun.
Lego Rock Band
Something of a surprise: I originally got for the games for the songs but somehow, it won me over. Juvenile yes but with some a charm of it's own.
Oblivion
Another long time coming but I enjoyed this game purely for wandering around and checking the well-realised world out. But as this game is an action RPG, one would think I'd missed the point...
Portal
Somehow the memes based around this game made actually playing the damn thing redundant. Oh well...
Red Dead Redemption
I've heard some less than praising comments for this game. Can't imagine why....
Rock band 3
Well what can i say that hasn't been said before? Some changes were nice others weren't. Music Library good, stupid difficulty not.
And that's the end of Game Tumour for 2011. Thank you for reading and I'll see you on the other side of 2012
So what will the new year bring? That's a very good question...
Monday, October 24, 2011
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.....
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.....
Friday, October 14, 2011
Under the sea! Under the Sea! There'll be no accusations Just friendly crustaceans...
Recently I've been having a crack at Bioshock. Now this is one game I've been putting off a lot but it's same old argument: I prefer to encounter games in my own time as playing a game with an open mind and zero expectations makes for a experience I can truly call my own. And, pretenses aside, I've been burnt out by games before through going in with expectations high to the point of ridiculous.
Now this may seem odd seeing that I've spoken about Bioshock in the past but that was from the perspective of being on the outside looking in. And, unlike the memes that made/destroyed Portal, my knowledge of Bioshock is rather minimal - apart from the references to objectivism and the works of Ayn Rand scattered throughout the game itself.
But in any case, I went into Bioshock with an open mind as I'm ever going to get so how's it looking so far?
Well so far so good: The plot is gripping, the action intense and it's interesting to see Rapture and explore it it as a city on the verge of collapse. The steampunk setting is great and I particularly like the use of antiqued firearms in a shooter and how they're designed. Sure the turret system is puzzling as apparently steam power can identify the difference between friend and foe but so far everything else seems rather well done. Andrew Ryan makes for a fascinating character and the details of how Rapture came to it's present state are compelling enough.
Of course this is partway into the game - things may change ahead but for now I guess it;s safe to say that all the adulation lauded onto Bioshock came for good reason.
Now this may seem odd seeing that I've spoken about Bioshock in the past but that was from the perspective of being on the outside looking in. And, unlike the memes that made/destroyed Portal, my knowledge of Bioshock is rather minimal - apart from the references to objectivism and the works of Ayn Rand scattered throughout the game itself.
But in any case, I went into Bioshock with an open mind as I'm ever going to get so how's it looking so far?
Well so far so good: The plot is gripping, the action intense and it's interesting to see Rapture and explore it it as a city on the verge of collapse. The steampunk setting is great and I particularly like the use of antiqued firearms in a shooter and how they're designed. Sure the turret system is puzzling as apparently steam power can identify the difference between friend and foe but so far everything else seems rather well done. Andrew Ryan makes for a fascinating character and the details of how Rapture came to it's present state are compelling enough.
Of course this is partway into the game - things may change ahead but for now I guess it;s safe to say that all the adulation lauded onto Bioshock came for good reason.
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Game of Thrones
Last week I observed the enduring popularity of Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time and Final Fantasy 7 noting that both games are pretty much the pinnacle of a tried and tested formula. And once it’s made clear that the formula worked, the influence of such knowledge creeps into playing both the predecessors and the successors of both games.
But I want to talk more about this: namely the enduring popularity of Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time and Final Fantasy 7. Both games were released in the late nineties yet they’ve enjoyed a continued popularity and longevity that many other games would envy. Sure the likes of World of Warcraft and Minecraft may have racked up millions of users but even if those games have both revealed a surprising degree of longevity they have no hope in hell of catching up to OoT and FF7.
In a way the continued popularity/longevity of OoT and FF7 is surprising - surprising when you consider that no such thing exists in this industry where things tend to run at a sprint-like pace. Why is this attention and regard continually reserved for these two? I refuse to use the N-word because that is really more half-arsed excuse – and if N…Nos….Nostradamus is such a potent force then Final Fantasy 7 would be outpaced in acclaim and esteem by it’s younger brother Final Fantasy 6 and as we know this is not the case.
In addition, I refuse to believe that things from your childhood can still work in adulthood: More often than not, games one played as a kid look different from an adult perspective. The former is blinded by the enthusiasm of new discovery but the latter is has experience and the ability to think critically. By way of example, I recall playing Alex Kidd on the Master System when I was a little tacker but to play it now as an adult I’m wonder how the wonky controls and tough difficulty didn’t drive me off the rails. Besides, if I was recall games I played when I was ten years old, I would dust off games from the Commodore 64 era that I would rather much like to forget.
So it’s pretty much fair to say that the continued popularity of OoT and FF7 is that they are really good games. I will not deny that (even if I think the OoT camera is frustrating and FF6 was better) but here’s what I want to know: are OoT and FF7 the holy grail? The pinnacle of gaming? Irrefutable proof that things aren’t going to be better so it’s pointless to even try? How awesome does a game have to be that it can still be enjoyed no matter how much both time and technological advancements can throw at it?
It would seem to usurp the continued reigns of both OoT and FF7 a game would need to impossibly good. Is that even possible? Or even worth doing? Or do game designers have to do something different to grab one’s attention? True Portal did that with it’s black humour but that may have proven it’s undoing: Sure it made us laugh but it’s the laughter that people remember. Thus whilst everyone can recall the Cake Being a Lie, they are still none the wiser of how they came to that conclusion. Thus it becomes clear that if you make people laugh, they’ll follow you over a cliff. Why, I see GLaDOS being continually regarded as a memorable baddie but I doubt it is for any reason other than: ‘she made me laugh’.
But I digress. True playing OoT and FF7 may represent a point in time but ultimately it may be time to move on. More games have been released since and the latest gaming advancements mean that anything is possible – even that which was once impossible now being feasible. It may be unlikely that something mind-blowingly awesome will come storming in and usurp the throne held by OoT and FF7 but that is no reason to stop trying.
I mean, by way of comparison, it’s not like movies stopped being made for nearly seventy years just because Citizen Kane was made.
But I want to talk more about this: namely the enduring popularity of Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time and Final Fantasy 7. Both games were released in the late nineties yet they’ve enjoyed a continued popularity and longevity that many other games would envy. Sure the likes of World of Warcraft and Minecraft may have racked up millions of users but even if those games have both revealed a surprising degree of longevity they have no hope in hell of catching up to OoT and FF7.
In a way the continued popularity/longevity of OoT and FF7 is surprising - surprising when you consider that no such thing exists in this industry where things tend to run at a sprint-like pace. Why is this attention and regard continually reserved for these two? I refuse to use the N-word because that is really more half-arsed excuse – and if N…Nos….Nostradamus is such a potent force then Final Fantasy 7 would be outpaced in acclaim and esteem by it’s younger brother Final Fantasy 6 and as we know this is not the case.
In addition, I refuse to believe that things from your childhood can still work in adulthood: More often than not, games one played as a kid look different from an adult perspective. The former is blinded by the enthusiasm of new discovery but the latter is has experience and the ability to think critically. By way of example, I recall playing Alex Kidd on the Master System when I was a little tacker but to play it now as an adult I’m wonder how the wonky controls and tough difficulty didn’t drive me off the rails. Besides, if I was recall games I played when I was ten years old, I would dust off games from the Commodore 64 era that I would rather much like to forget.
So it’s pretty much fair to say that the continued popularity of OoT and FF7 is that they are really good games. I will not deny that (even if I think the OoT camera is frustrating and FF6 was better) but here’s what I want to know: are OoT and FF7 the holy grail? The pinnacle of gaming? Irrefutable proof that things aren’t going to be better so it’s pointless to even try? How awesome does a game have to be that it can still be enjoyed no matter how much both time and technological advancements can throw at it?
It would seem to usurp the continued reigns of both OoT and FF7 a game would need to impossibly good. Is that even possible? Or even worth doing? Or do game designers have to do something different to grab one’s attention? True Portal did that with it’s black humour but that may have proven it’s undoing: Sure it made us laugh but it’s the laughter that people remember. Thus whilst everyone can recall the Cake Being a Lie, they are still none the wiser of how they came to that conclusion. Thus it becomes clear that if you make people laugh, they’ll follow you over a cliff. Why, I see GLaDOS being continually regarded as a memorable baddie but I doubt it is for any reason other than: ‘she made me laugh’.
But I digress. True playing OoT and FF7 may represent a point in time but ultimately it may be time to move on. More games have been released since and the latest gaming advancements mean that anything is possible – even that which was once impossible now being feasible. It may be unlikely that something mind-blowingly awesome will come storming in and usurp the throne held by OoT and FF7 but that is no reason to stop trying.
I mean, by way of comparison, it’s not like movies stopped being made for nearly seventy years just because Citizen Kane was made.
Monday, July 11, 2011
There is a bear in the woods
It seems a current trend, both in games and movies, to have Russians as baddies again. A trend I find nothing but baffling. What? Is the US annoyed that the Cold War ended? Are they irate their favourite former rival is more interested in other things? Are those bought up in the Reagan era working on a contempt inherited from eighties nostalgia?! And what do those in Russia think of this?
The more I think of this trend the more it becomes clear that it's the work of someone spoiling a fight. It's someone inventing a scenario on the unflinching hope it does turn out true. It's someone who'd bother old opponents just for the sake of having someone to fight.
Now, some would say that this resurrection of Russians of baddies trends is just writers struggling to find a compelling baddie. But I call BS on that: I can think of a much more compelling baddie and he's described in the previous paragraph.
So, to work on this idea and continue with my trend of violating the bond of trust between game and gamer, I present my own idea for a scenario in a warfare/shooter type game.
The gamer is playing a soldier, fighting in an army, led by a charismatic general named.......Barry. As the player progresses through the game, Barry is shown in cut scenes delivering encouraging speeches and urging his men forward, insisting the baddies are foes worth fighting and we're fighting for the glory of their country.
However as the game progresses, something starts to grow amiss: Traveling through enemy territory reveals soldiers belongings made up of family letters and diaries questioning the movements of their enemy (ie YOU). It is in these pieces of text that the soldiers you've been fighting are confused as to why this war is happening, why the enemy (ie YOU) are doing this and why they suddenly decided to break a peace treaty that has been lasting for many years.
And then it is revealed: Barry is a career soldier. It was he who started this war just for the sake of starting a scrap. With a genius for conflicts, he's having trouble adjusting to a peacetime so he decided he'll start a war out of nothing better to do. Such is Barry's contempt for peace that he's taken upon himself to invade another country and disguise it to the war-hungry with propaganda. And seeing the country in question was an old foe, any excuse will do.
And thus the player has gone into battle thinking he was fighting for freedom when it was he who ended up the aggressor. It's a good idea and one I wish games would do more often.
It's an ideal scenario but the only problem I can see is that Portal may have beaten me to it. Damn....
The more I think of this trend the more it becomes clear that it's the work of someone spoiling a fight. It's someone inventing a scenario on the unflinching hope it does turn out true. It's someone who'd bother old opponents just for the sake of having someone to fight.
Now, some would say that this resurrection of Russians of baddies trends is just writers struggling to find a compelling baddie. But I call BS on that: I can think of a much more compelling baddie and he's described in the previous paragraph.
So, to work on this idea and continue with my trend of violating the bond of trust between game and gamer, I present my own idea for a scenario in a warfare/shooter type game.
The gamer is playing a soldier, fighting in an army, led by a charismatic general named.......Barry. As the player progresses through the game, Barry is shown in cut scenes delivering encouraging speeches and urging his men forward, insisting the baddies are foes worth fighting and we're fighting for the glory of their country.
However as the game progresses, something starts to grow amiss: Traveling through enemy territory reveals soldiers belongings made up of family letters and diaries questioning the movements of their enemy (ie YOU). It is in these pieces of text that the soldiers you've been fighting are confused as to why this war is happening, why the enemy (ie YOU) are doing this and why they suddenly decided to break a peace treaty that has been lasting for many years.
And then it is revealed: Barry is a career soldier. It was he who started this war just for the sake of starting a scrap. With a genius for conflicts, he's having trouble adjusting to a peacetime so he decided he'll start a war out of nothing better to do. Such is Barry's contempt for peace that he's taken upon himself to invade another country and disguise it to the war-hungry with propaganda. And seeing the country in question was an old foe, any excuse will do.
And thus the player has gone into battle thinking he was fighting for freedom when it was he who ended up the aggressor. It's a good idea and one I wish games would do more often.
It's an ideal scenario but the only problem I can see is that Portal may have beaten me to it. Damn....
Monday, July 4, 2011
Link! He come to town!
Well it's finally happened: I got off my arse and sat down to play Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time on the Virtual Console.
It may have been a long time coming but, truth be told, I'm something of a newcomer to the Zelda games: I never played them during the respective heyday of the NES/SNES/N64 and the only way I heard of Link and Princess Zelda was through write-ups, artwork and that lousy cartoon in the eighties (not the best source but still...).
So it's only been in recent years that I've become a fan of the Zelda games: I played Link to the Past and it was pretty much all over. Since then, I've played the original LoZ, Twilight princess and have cosplayed as Link - I even managed to persuade my partner to cosplay as Zelda to match! However there was the issue of Ocarina of Time....
Why is that an issue? Simple: it was a case of intimidation. In the time since my proper introduction to the Zelda series, Ocarina has grown in status as one of, if not THE, greatest games ever made. People younger than me now recognized it as an integral part of their childhood. Personally, I downloaded Ocarina (and Majora's Mask) back in 2009 but it is only now I actually committed myself to beating this game.
Again, it's a simple matter of discovering things in my own time, knowing the reward will be sweeter for it. And in the case of Ocarina, people revere it on a level comparable to Jesus so that knowledge is indeed enough to put one off. Indeed, this is not the first time I've been intimidated by game only to have the experience soured by other people telling me how it's going to be.
Grumbling aside, how's the game going insofar? Actually it's quite enjoyable. Sure the controls are bit disagreeable at times and the camera is utter rubbish but all in all, Ocarina of Time is turning out to loads of fun. And it's aged quite well which is more than can be said for other games of the fifth generation *coughMario64cough*.
So from here - who knows? Guess I'll have to go deeper into Hyrule to find out...
It may have been a long time coming but, truth be told, I'm something of a newcomer to the Zelda games: I never played them during the respective heyday of the NES/SNES/N64 and the only way I heard of Link and Princess Zelda was through write-ups, artwork and that lousy cartoon in the eighties (not the best source but still...).
So it's only been in recent years that I've become a fan of the Zelda games: I played Link to the Past and it was pretty much all over. Since then, I've played the original LoZ, Twilight princess and have cosplayed as Link - I even managed to persuade my partner to cosplay as Zelda to match! However there was the issue of Ocarina of Time....
Why is that an issue? Simple: it was a case of intimidation. In the time since my proper introduction to the Zelda series, Ocarina has grown in status as one of, if not THE, greatest games ever made. People younger than me now recognized it as an integral part of their childhood. Personally, I downloaded Ocarina (and Majora's Mask) back in 2009 but it is only now I actually committed myself to beating this game.
Again, it's a simple matter of discovering things in my own time, knowing the reward will be sweeter for it. And in the case of Ocarina, people revere it on a level comparable to Jesus so that knowledge is indeed enough to put one off. Indeed, this is not the first time I've been intimidated by game only to have the experience soured by other people telling me how it's going to be.
Grumbling aside, how's the game going insofar? Actually it's quite enjoyable. Sure the controls are bit disagreeable at times and the camera is utter rubbish but all in all, Ocarina of Time is turning out to loads of fun. And it's aged quite well which is more than can be said for other games of the fifth generation *coughMario64cough*.
So from here - who knows? Guess I'll have to go deeper into Hyrule to find out...
Monday, June 13, 2011
So GLaD you decided to join us
Recently I finally got my claws on the Orange Box. It may have taken me awhile but I saw a sale and snapped it up for $25. Five bucks for a game? Sounds like a sweet deal for me!
And once I got it home, I made a beeline for Portal. Having heard so much about this I had very high hopes for it and was keen to see how it would hold up.
And what did I think of it?
To be honest I'm not entirely sure.
To begin with, lets get what we know out of the way: When Portal came out in 2007, it was a completely new title that came packaged with two well-established brothers (Half Life and Team Fortress). In the time since then, Portal has scooped up plenty of praise, awards and spawned a whole lot of memes. And it's into this environment I step into.
Maybe I'm an interesting candidate to assess Portal: Unlike everyone who first played it back in 2007, I know exactly what to expect, I have an understanding that this is a highly regarded game and I have become familiar with both the phrase 'The Cake is a Lie' (although more through accident than design) and the song Still Alive (to the point I have downloaded for use in Rock Band).
But that's the thing: Through many words being written about Portal and the prevalence of the Cake is a Lie meme, a lot of the mystique about the game is gone. Anyone playing Portal now is going to go through a completely different experience then those playing it for the first time in 2007 had.
That's not to say that I didn't enjoy Portal: Far from it. I liked the black humour, I liked the challenge of the puzzles and the final confrontation with GLaDOS was intense - yet bizarrely counter-balanced with her witty insults.
But for me the popularity of Portal has more or less killed the subtle nature of the game itself. With Portal being a huge hit and inspiring more than a few catchphrases, there are no surprises left. Sure seeing 'The Cake is a Lie' scribbled on the wall may be a surprise but it's not when you've heard many times elsewhere. And I found the promise of Cake isn't really featured that many times in the game itself - which left me wondering why that aspect of the game got more attention than it did. There were some great ideas being put to work in Portal but it a shame that many of them got lost in GLaDOS' witticisms and endless youtube clips of Still Alive. And I find the reaction to the heart-cube puzzling - and indeed the presence of the heart cube plushy's seem more of an undermining of the point Valve were trying to convey (although personally if you're going to invoke feelings of remorse towards the player you may as well not bother becuase Shadow of the Colossus has already been made).
I guess humour is really hard to pull off in a game: If it's not funny then the game looks silly. But if it's really funny then it ends up being repeated endlessly in chatrooms and e-mails everywhere and it gradually loses it's impact.
And that's what bothers me about Portal: There were some great ideas at work but they seemed to have been lost in a tidal of wave of fandom. Imagine if someone wrote a novelization about Ico and gave their own interpretation on the characters and events in the game. Wouldn't it suck to have all that mystery taken away? Wouldn't it suck to have your own ideas squashed by someone else's? Wouldn't it ruin your own perception of the game?
But then again, Valve have made more games and more fans then that of Team Ico so maybe the adulation should come as no surprise.
Mind you, one consistent theme in this blog is how I've been discovering games in my own time and how I've come out better for it. Indeed this is not the first time I've been intimidated by a game through reputation alone. But in the case Portal, it has made such an impact within such a small space of time - is it any wonder why someone like me would be intimidated?
I don't know: Maybe I should've left it for a few more years.....
And once I got it home, I made a beeline for Portal. Having heard so much about this I had very high hopes for it and was keen to see how it would hold up.
And what did I think of it?
To be honest I'm not entirely sure.
To begin with, lets get what we know out of the way: When Portal came out in 2007, it was a completely new title that came packaged with two well-established brothers (Half Life and Team Fortress). In the time since then, Portal has scooped up plenty of praise, awards and spawned a whole lot of memes. And it's into this environment I step into.
Maybe I'm an interesting candidate to assess Portal: Unlike everyone who first played it back in 2007, I know exactly what to expect, I have an understanding that this is a highly regarded game and I have become familiar with both the phrase 'The Cake is a Lie' (although more through accident than design) and the song Still Alive (to the point I have downloaded for use in Rock Band).
But that's the thing: Through many words being written about Portal and the prevalence of the Cake is a Lie meme, a lot of the mystique about the game is gone. Anyone playing Portal now is going to go through a completely different experience then those playing it for the first time in 2007 had.
That's not to say that I didn't enjoy Portal: Far from it. I liked the black humour, I liked the challenge of the puzzles and the final confrontation with GLaDOS was intense - yet bizarrely counter-balanced with her witty insults.
But for me the popularity of Portal has more or less killed the subtle nature of the game itself. With Portal being a huge hit and inspiring more than a few catchphrases, there are no surprises left. Sure seeing 'The Cake is a Lie' scribbled on the wall may be a surprise but it's not when you've heard many times elsewhere. And I found the promise of Cake isn't really featured that many times in the game itself - which left me wondering why that aspect of the game got more attention than it did. There were some great ideas being put to work in Portal but it a shame that many of them got lost in GLaDOS' witticisms and endless youtube clips of Still Alive. And I find the reaction to the heart-cube puzzling - and indeed the presence of the heart cube plushy's seem more of an undermining of the point Valve were trying to convey (although personally if you're going to invoke feelings of remorse towards the player you may as well not bother becuase Shadow of the Colossus has already been made).
I guess humour is really hard to pull off in a game: If it's not funny then the game looks silly. But if it's really funny then it ends up being repeated endlessly in chatrooms and e-mails everywhere and it gradually loses it's impact.
And that's what bothers me about Portal: There were some great ideas at work but they seemed to have been lost in a tidal of wave of fandom. Imagine if someone wrote a novelization about Ico and gave their own interpretation on the characters and events in the game. Wouldn't it suck to have all that mystery taken away? Wouldn't it suck to have your own ideas squashed by someone else's? Wouldn't it ruin your own perception of the game?
But then again, Valve have made more games and more fans then that of Team Ico so maybe the adulation should come as no surprise.
Mind you, one consistent theme in this blog is how I've been discovering games in my own time and how I've come out better for it. Indeed this is not the first time I've been intimidated by a game through reputation alone. But in the case Portal, it has made such an impact within such a small space of time - is it any wonder why someone like me would be intimidated?
I don't know: Maybe I should've left it for a few more years.....
Friday, March 11, 2011
Go West
When I was a kid, one of my favourite shows on TV was Monkey. Like so many other children of the eighties I’ve known, I would watch this show religiously after school. Whilst I watched many cartoons during my school years, I do recall Monkey, along with the original Dr Who, as being one of few live-action series I really enjoyed. I recall Monkey fondly with its sense of adventure, the action sequences involving gardening implements and the Buddhist philosophies that served as a framing device for the entire episode. It was only years later that I found out this series was an adaptation on the classic Chinese story Journey to the West – and was not the only one at that.
This now brings me to Enslaved: Odyssey to the West: a game made by people who boldly claim to have taken more than a few inspirations from Journey to the West. Well why not? There have been many adaptations of the text so why not a game? The only problem I can see is that a classic seventies TV show did the job so well that anything else is left in the dust. Indeed, I recall being ten years old and reading a comic adaptation where the story was missing one of the pilgrims (Sha Wujing/Sandy) and immediately thinking it wasn’t the same story I’d come to know.
Being an anime geek, I can name quite a few adaptations of Journey to the West. Aside from the obvious, Saiyuki and the original Dragonball, other noteworthy entrants are Alakazam the Great and Spaceketeers. All of which follow the source material quite closely – In fact the only JotW-based anime that deviates the most from the source is Goku Midnight Eye – a futuristic anime featuring a private eye protagonist who shares Sun Goku’s name and shape-shifting staff. Indeed, such is the deviation that it owes little to the source material but the makers didn’t claim it was such an adaptation anyway.
Unlike Enslaved: Odyssey to the West: What annoys me is that the claims made by the developers haven’t really delivered on their promise. Firstly: the player characters are numbered two: Pigsy isn’t a player character and both Sandy and the Water-Dragon/horse are conspicuously absent. Secondly, there’s not much of a connection to the original text. So why even bother? The afore-mentioned Goku Midnight Eye proved you can take inspiration from another source but to claim a full-blown adaptation of said source is another matter entirely.
Why didn’t they just take elements from the source and come up with something new? Were the makers too scared to? Or is it really that difficult to get something new made in a profit driven industry?
Indeed, Portal proved that something new can work but why did it succeed when many others have failed? Was it because it was included in a box with four other familiar games? Was it because it was made by the distinguished company Valve? Was it because it had black humour and a catchphrase destined to be repeated a million times afterward?
Of course, there is the possibility that was actually a really good game but who’d believe that?
This now brings me to Enslaved: Odyssey to the West: a game made by people who boldly claim to have taken more than a few inspirations from Journey to the West. Well why not? There have been many adaptations of the text so why not a game? The only problem I can see is that a classic seventies TV show did the job so well that anything else is left in the dust. Indeed, I recall being ten years old and reading a comic adaptation where the story was missing one of the pilgrims (Sha Wujing/Sandy) and immediately thinking it wasn’t the same story I’d come to know.
Being an anime geek, I can name quite a few adaptations of Journey to the West. Aside from the obvious, Saiyuki and the original Dragonball, other noteworthy entrants are Alakazam the Great and Spaceketeers. All of which follow the source material quite closely – In fact the only JotW-based anime that deviates the most from the source is Goku Midnight Eye – a futuristic anime featuring a private eye protagonist who shares Sun Goku’s name and shape-shifting staff. Indeed, such is the deviation that it owes little to the source material but the makers didn’t claim it was such an adaptation anyway.
Unlike Enslaved: Odyssey to the West: What annoys me is that the claims made by the developers haven’t really delivered on their promise. Firstly: the player characters are numbered two: Pigsy isn’t a player character and both Sandy and the Water-Dragon/horse are conspicuously absent. Secondly, there’s not much of a connection to the original text. So why even bother? The afore-mentioned Goku Midnight Eye proved you can take inspiration from another source but to claim a full-blown adaptation of said source is another matter entirely.
Why didn’t they just take elements from the source and come up with something new? Were the makers too scared to? Or is it really that difficult to get something new made in a profit driven industry?
Indeed, Portal proved that something new can work but why did it succeed when many others have failed? Was it because it was included in a box with four other familiar games? Was it because it was made by the distinguished company Valve? Was it because it had black humour and a catchphrase destined to be repeated a million times afterward?
Of course, there is the possibility that was actually a really good game but who’d believe that?
Friday, June 11, 2010
For the love of Yuna and Tidus
Hello again and welcome to another blog post, where I harp on and on about various things from the angle of a gamer. So what to talk about today? Well, I am a gamer yes and, at heart, a romantic. So how about combining the two?
Having grown up with gaming developments since the late eighties, romance has always played something of an important role in gaming development. In the beginning, rescuing one's significant other from some monstrous baddie has been a motivational aspect for the player to get playing. Thus Mario sets out to rescue Princess Peach (and does so for many games afterwards) and Link does so much and invests so much effort to rescue Princess Zelda. After all, what guy can say no to a Princess?
Later developments add a degree of interactivity so the player can choose one partner and, through choosing the right options, be treated to some fascinating outcomes. Thus, Cloud can end up having a date with either Tifa or Aerith. Likewise my Baldurs Gate 2 character can either have Aerie, Jahiera or Viconia every time I play through. Indeed, having this degree of interactivity certainly adds a variety of depth to the character as you lead them through thick and thin.
Granted maybe watching a romance develop in game may not be as satisfying or enjoyable as the real thing but in a way it is fun to watch two characters develop, see them watch out for each other, stay with each other through the various ups and downs and hoping they'll eventually come out on top. Indeed, when your guiding your BG2 Half-Elf Ranger/Cleric to a relationship with Aerie whilst saying "You two belong together!!!" then something must've clicked. And in a way it can even provide something of an insight into what to do and what not to do.
So which is my favourite couple in gaming? Well in my mind some work, some don't. I always felt Mario could do better than Peach as a) he's an Italian so you'd think he'd have better taste and b) she's ineffectual as a princess as she doesn't really do much beyond making cakes and getting kidnapped. Link and Zelda aren't really given much chance to develop as someone keeps hitting the reset button in-between games. I enjoy Cloud and Aerith both as a couple and the tragic element therein but whereas I don't see the appeal in Tifa, a whole lot of other people do. And whilst the romances of Baldur's Gate 2 are fun, they are really all running on the same script, thus leaving no room for something special.
That being said, what is my favourite gaming couple?
Well, it comes from a game called Final Fantasy X and concerns a lad named Tidus and a summoner called Yuna.
Of course by now I can imagine many of my readers throwing up their hands in disgust but for me these two work on a number of levels - many of them distinguishing it from many other romances in the Final Fantasy series and gaming in general. Okay I will concede that yes Tidus may have been irritating but I have my reasons and they are as follows:
Firstly, whereas many games use the concept of romance as a leading hook to get the gamer involved with the plot (as described above). Not so here: In the world of FFX, we see a lad lost out of time as he is transported to a completely alien world and subsequently falls in with a band of unusual characters. It isn't established from the beginning that Yuna and Tidus will eventually become romantically involved (well there is that opening cinematic but that technically doesn't count as it's set in the middle of the story). Instead the romance itself is something that's developed over time and, in a way, in a rather unexpected manner. There is no masterplan or anything of that nature, it's just something that simply happens and is handled in a distinctly mature manner - much like a real relationship itself. To establish such human emotions is indeed an impressive feat in a game of all things.
Secondly, the romance from FFX plays out differently then those established in it's predecessors. Previous Final Fantasy games have had a romance yes but they seem to follow the same formula of having the male being a grumpy, angsty jerk who has little time for people and the female who is a more 'pure' character whose presence brings the male out of his emotional shell. A very escapist perspective indeed but that's what it is. It may not represent fact but it works on an escapist level.
So what makes Yuna and Tidus special? Well, for one thing the tried-and-tested formula is ditched for something different and more mature. Thus Yuna and Tidus come across as being the mirror images of the same character: They are orphans, each bearing the legacy left by an absent father. And as they deal with said father's absence, they come to terms with the responsibilities left for them.
What's also a welcome difference from the previous Final Fantasy's is the nature of the quest. Tidus may be the character controlled by the player but, unlike his predecessors, the quest he goes on isn't his. Instead, the driving force behind the game is Yuna. In a welcome case of role reversal, she is the one heading out on the quest, thus reducing Tidus to the role of tagalong.
In any case, I credit the makers of this game ditch formula and try something new. Anyone can do something with a formula but it takes a brave person to try and do something different with it.
Thirdly, I like the progression of the relationship. It isn't an instant attraction, it isn't a bond forged out of an intense situation (of sorts). What it is though is another notch for the maturity aspect that keeps the relationship afloat: Like any other relationship, it takes a lengthy progression time for the two people involved to develop something special and eventually admit to it. In the case of Tidus and Yuna, it take many an hour of gameplay to arrive at that point, of admission, in the game. Again, it is a feat in itself that the makers took the time-honored approach to such development - not to mention a refusal to sugar-coat anything that may have ruined anything genuine. And again, I like games that can convey a range of emotions - it is an achievement to make something of an emotional resonance in a medium not known for doing so but to do so without any degree of falseness or saccharine elements is an impressive feat indeed.
Finally, what seals the deal is that tragic undercurrent. The entire relationship is built on taking things in a mature manner and running the full gauntlet of emotions. And all of this comes to it's zenith with it's conclusion. Yuna's quest is to cast the final summon to defeat the antagonist Sin so the people of Spira can enjoy ten years of peace. Yet as the game progresses it is eventually revealed that at the end of her journey Yuna has to fulfil the role of a sacrifice. Hardly the best choice of a romantic partner true but that knowledge implies a sense that the time spent together is limited and every minute should be cherished - and thus the relationship is all the better of for it.
And indeed, at the end of the game comes the most bittersweet of endings: An alternate solution is put to work, Sin is defeated forever and Yuna's life is spared. However it also means an end to the relationship as Yuna and Tidus face a seemingly lasting separation. Now I'm not one to readily admit this but the ending to FFX did leave an impression on my cold jaded heart. The moment that got me was when Yuna runs after the departing Tidus and what she says afterward. I mentioned in my assessment of Ico that I did get somewhat teary eyed at the end of it and well, the same thing can be said here. Indeed, it is a sign of a great game when one can trigger such emotion. and it is a brave move from the Square that they went with a bittersweet ending and refuse to compromise with a happy ending (which also leaves me wondering why FFX2 needs to exist).
So to summarise, why does Yuna and Tidus work for me? Well, what sets their romance apart for me is that it's handled in a mature and realistic manner - in a field not known for it's subtlety. It ditches formula from established conventions to say something of it's own. It runs though a whole lot of emotions that really establish a substantial connection with the player, without any sense of sappiness whatsoever. It is compelling enough to see these characters go through so much and hoping they'll come out on top. And it has the balls to not fall into the cop-out trap of having a happy ending.
Indeed, I have found Yuna and Tidus and their romance so compelling that I found them an interesting starting point for a blossoming romance. In early 2008, I was interested in cosplay to a point that I wanted to, some day, get together with someone and do a cosplay couple. I heard from my friend Kath that she was interested in doing Yuna for AI-Con. Seeing a chance for my goal to be realized, I suggested that I cosplay as Tidus to match. She agreed and we did - and subsequently became something of a hit at AI-Con.
This in turn was the first time we did cosplay couple but certainly not the last time.
The first, and defining, image of the entire relationship
Genuine couples aren't something that's seen a lot in cosplay but when it does happen, it really becomes something special and it shows a lot to everyone else. Indeed, at Manifest this year I had the pleasure of meeting two teenagers who were cosplaying as Tidus and Yuna. Through talking to them, I found out that they were a couple and they were doing the cosplay for the couple element. I too said I was part of a cosplay couple and I'd previously done a Tidus+Yuna. I said they looked great, got them to pose for a photo and, to cap it off, I joined the Yuna in singing Still Alive from Portal. It wasn't just seeing two people cosplaying as some of my favorite characters, it wasn't just seeing what everyone sees when they see a cosplay couple and it wasn't just picking up the genuine feelings between them. No, it was seeing that someone else thought the same thing I did. And it is great feeling that you're not alone in something you saw.
So that's my thoughts, not to mention my experiences, on Tidus and Yuna. Two video game characters who, along with their connection, left a lasting impression indeed. And now, having taken the time to type this all out and share this with all of you, I do believe it safe to say that I have pretty much cemented my status as an absolute nerd.
Yeah I thought so too
So here's two masses of pixels!
Having grown up with gaming developments since the late eighties, romance has always played something of an important role in gaming development. In the beginning, rescuing one's significant other from some monstrous baddie has been a motivational aspect for the player to get playing. Thus Mario sets out to rescue Princess Peach (and does so for many games afterwards) and Link does so much and invests so much effort to rescue Princess Zelda. After all, what guy can say no to a Princess?
Later developments add a degree of interactivity so the player can choose one partner and, through choosing the right options, be treated to some fascinating outcomes. Thus, Cloud can end up having a date with either Tifa or Aerith. Likewise my Baldurs Gate 2 character can either have Aerie, Jahiera or Viconia every time I play through. Indeed, having this degree of interactivity certainly adds a variety of depth to the character as you lead them through thick and thin.
Granted maybe watching a romance develop in game may not be as satisfying or enjoyable as the real thing but in a way it is fun to watch two characters develop, see them watch out for each other, stay with each other through the various ups and downs and hoping they'll eventually come out on top. Indeed, when your guiding your BG2 Half-Elf Ranger/Cleric to a relationship with Aerie whilst saying "You two belong together!!!" then something must've clicked. And in a way it can even provide something of an insight into what to do and what not to do.
So which is my favourite couple in gaming? Well in my mind some work, some don't. I always felt Mario could do better than Peach as a) he's an Italian so you'd think he'd have better taste and b) she's ineffectual as a princess as she doesn't really do much beyond making cakes and getting kidnapped. Link and Zelda aren't really given much chance to develop as someone keeps hitting the reset button in-between games. I enjoy Cloud and Aerith both as a couple and the tragic element therein but whereas I don't see the appeal in Tifa, a whole lot of other people do. And whilst the romances of Baldur's Gate 2 are fun, they are really all running on the same script, thus leaving no room for something special.
That being said, what is my favourite gaming couple?
Well, it comes from a game called Final Fantasy X and concerns a lad named Tidus and a summoner called Yuna.
Of course by now I can imagine many of my readers throwing up their hands in disgust but for me these two work on a number of levels - many of them distinguishing it from many other romances in the Final Fantasy series and gaming in general. Okay I will concede that yes Tidus may have been irritating but I have my reasons and they are as follows:
Firstly, whereas many games use the concept of romance as a leading hook to get the gamer involved with the plot (as described above). Not so here: In the world of FFX, we see a lad lost out of time as he is transported to a completely alien world and subsequently falls in with a band of unusual characters. It isn't established from the beginning that Yuna and Tidus will eventually become romantically involved (well there is that opening cinematic but that technically doesn't count as it's set in the middle of the story). Instead the romance itself is something that's developed over time and, in a way, in a rather unexpected manner. There is no masterplan or anything of that nature, it's just something that simply happens and is handled in a distinctly mature manner - much like a real relationship itself. To establish such human emotions is indeed an impressive feat in a game of all things.
Secondly, the romance from FFX plays out differently then those established in it's predecessors. Previous Final Fantasy games have had a romance yes but they seem to follow the same formula of having the male being a grumpy, angsty jerk who has little time for people and the female who is a more 'pure' character whose presence brings the male out of his emotional shell. A very escapist perspective indeed but that's what it is. It may not represent fact but it works on an escapist level.
So what makes Yuna and Tidus special? Well, for one thing the tried-and-tested formula is ditched for something different and more mature. Thus Yuna and Tidus come across as being the mirror images of the same character: They are orphans, each bearing the legacy left by an absent father. And as they deal with said father's absence, they come to terms with the responsibilities left for them.
What's also a welcome difference from the previous Final Fantasy's is the nature of the quest. Tidus may be the character controlled by the player but, unlike his predecessors, the quest he goes on isn't his. Instead, the driving force behind the game is Yuna. In a welcome case of role reversal, she is the one heading out on the quest, thus reducing Tidus to the role of tagalong.
In any case, I credit the makers of this game ditch formula and try something new. Anyone can do something with a formula but it takes a brave person to try and do something different with it.
Thirdly, I like the progression of the relationship. It isn't an instant attraction, it isn't a bond forged out of an intense situation (of sorts). What it is though is another notch for the maturity aspect that keeps the relationship afloat: Like any other relationship, it takes a lengthy progression time for the two people involved to develop something special and eventually admit to it. In the case of Tidus and Yuna, it take many an hour of gameplay to arrive at that point, of admission, in the game. Again, it is a feat in itself that the makers took the time-honored approach to such development - not to mention a refusal to sugar-coat anything that may have ruined anything genuine. And again, I like games that can convey a range of emotions - it is an achievement to make something of an emotional resonance in a medium not known for doing so but to do so without any degree of falseness or saccharine elements is an impressive feat indeed.
Finally, what seals the deal is that tragic undercurrent. The entire relationship is built on taking things in a mature manner and running the full gauntlet of emotions. And all of this comes to it's zenith with it's conclusion. Yuna's quest is to cast the final summon to defeat the antagonist Sin so the people of Spira can enjoy ten years of peace. Yet as the game progresses it is eventually revealed that at the end of her journey Yuna has to fulfil the role of a sacrifice. Hardly the best choice of a romantic partner true but that knowledge implies a sense that the time spent together is limited and every minute should be cherished - and thus the relationship is all the better of for it.
And indeed, at the end of the game comes the most bittersweet of endings: An alternate solution is put to work, Sin is defeated forever and Yuna's life is spared. However it also means an end to the relationship as Yuna and Tidus face a seemingly lasting separation. Now I'm not one to readily admit this but the ending to FFX did leave an impression on my cold jaded heart. The moment that got me was when Yuna runs after the departing Tidus and what she says afterward. I mentioned in my assessment of Ico that I did get somewhat teary eyed at the end of it and well, the same thing can be said here. Indeed, it is a sign of a great game when one can trigger such emotion. and it is a brave move from the Square that they went with a bittersweet ending and refuse to compromise with a happy ending (which also leaves me wondering why FFX2 needs to exist).
So to summarise, why does Yuna and Tidus work for me? Well, what sets their romance apart for me is that it's handled in a mature and realistic manner - in a field not known for it's subtlety. It ditches formula from established conventions to say something of it's own. It runs though a whole lot of emotions that really establish a substantial connection with the player, without any sense of sappiness whatsoever. It is compelling enough to see these characters go through so much and hoping they'll come out on top. And it has the balls to not fall into the cop-out trap of having a happy ending.
Indeed, I have found Yuna and Tidus and their romance so compelling that I found them an interesting starting point for a blossoming romance. In early 2008, I was interested in cosplay to a point that I wanted to, some day, get together with someone and do a cosplay couple. I heard from my friend Kath that she was interested in doing Yuna for AI-Con. Seeing a chance for my goal to be realized, I suggested that I cosplay as Tidus to match. She agreed and we did - and subsequently became something of a hit at AI-Con.
This in turn was the first time we did cosplay couple but certainly not the last time.
The first, and defining, image of the entire relationship
Genuine couples aren't something that's seen a lot in cosplay but when it does happen, it really becomes something special and it shows a lot to everyone else. Indeed, at Manifest this year I had the pleasure of meeting two teenagers who were cosplaying as Tidus and Yuna. Through talking to them, I found out that they were a couple and they were doing the cosplay for the couple element. I too said I was part of a cosplay couple and I'd previously done a Tidus+Yuna. I said they looked great, got them to pose for a photo and, to cap it off, I joined the Yuna in singing Still Alive from Portal. It wasn't just seeing two people cosplaying as some of my favorite characters, it wasn't just seeing what everyone sees when they see a cosplay couple and it wasn't just picking up the genuine feelings between them. No, it was seeing that someone else thought the same thing I did. And it is great feeling that you're not alone in something you saw.
So that's my thoughts, not to mention my experiences, on Tidus and Yuna. Two video game characters who, along with their connection, left a lasting impression indeed. And now, having taken the time to type this all out and share this with all of you, I do believe it safe to say that I have pretty much cemented my status as an absolute nerd.
Yeah I thought so too
So here's two masses of pixels!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)