The Blizzard cometh

I don't believe it. GoG have cut a deal with Blizzard. Thus we have not only Diablo but both Warcraft 1 and 2 now available on GoG.

Blizzard have certainly built up an impressive body of work over the years but their use of it has been frustrating. On one hand they officially release Lost Vikings and Black-throne onto Battle.net but on the other hand, whatever goodwill they may have built up is inexplicably ditched.

Personally, I don't know what kind of deal GoG brokered but it's one I'm grateful for.
So does this mean that more Blizzard titles may be available in future?

Leagues ahead

Earlier this week, I got talked into having a shot at League of Legends.

This is not unfamiliar territory for me however: I have played the original Defense of the Ancients mod for Warcraft 3, thus giving me a fair idea what to expect and how the game works. I was also aware of the extreme popularity of the game but it didn't bother me too much.

And as it turns out, I had some fun with this game. Sure there were some frustrating moments with both my inability to take out enemy heroes and me constantly getting curb-stomped by said heroes, but once I got the hang of the game there were some moments of gold. I felt the satisfaction of every progressive step towards the enemy base. I relished each moment when everything went in my team's direction. And I felt the satisfaction of a hard-fought victory.
And suddenly the wide popularity of this game makes a whole lotta sense.

I don't see myself becoming regular player of this however: It all hinges on whether my compatriots can find the time to spare. But still, it's always there.....

Warcraft is over if you want it

Well Blizzard have announced that they aren't interested in doing a remaster for both Warcraft 1 and 2 purely because they feel that the games are dated and "not fun" (Source).

I find this reaction somewhat puzzling from Blizzard. On one hand, they acknowledge their past works and have previously made them readily available (ie Lost Vikings and Blackthorne) but on the other hand, any game that's on the Battle.net launcher and isn't Diablo 3, World of Warcraft, Overwatch or Hearthstone, doesn't have a hope in hell.
The latter is a particular sore point for me: What, I can't use the Battle.net launcher to play other Blizzard games? Well then you're not much competition for Steam or GoG Galaxy then are you? Sorry but I like my Game launchers to, you know, launch games.

But I digress.
I maintain that there is value for games to be preserved and make them accessible, both for historical and educational purposes. After all, without preservation, history is but a fading memory. This is why I value GoG so much.
You'd think Blizzard might be better off handing off Warcraft and Diablo to CD Projekt but nooooooooo.....

Granted I will admit that Warcraft 1 may have aged the worst of the lot but I have played Warcraft 2 all the way through and still think highly of it - even when this was back in 2002 and everyone was going nuts for Warcraft 3. It has a lot of charm and a humorous tone that unfortunately Blizzard seems to have forgotten about (seriously, where were the bi-intelligent Ogres in WoW?).

But hey as long as Blizzard still keeps pumping out updates for WoW they can do whatever they want, amirite?

T-20

They say that nostalgia happens in chunks of twenty years. If that is the case, then the nostalgia goggles will be aimed at the the mid-to late nineties - also known as the Fifth Console generation.

I've said it once and I'll say it again: This was a great period for the PC Gamer with them being spoiled for choice with the likes of Baldur's Gate, Doom, Warcraft, Command and Conquer, Deus Ex, Plansescape Torment and System Shock 2 among others. Sure, there was some shlock when Windows 95 rolled around but once that nonsense was sorted out, there were some real games to be found. Sure there were some interesting things happening in the console camp but they have not aged well as their PC counterparts. I remember at the time, console games of this era were being marketed as 'cutting edge' but looking at them now, they have naturally aged the worst.

This in turn presents an interesting opportunity for someone keen on nostalgia: Take a brand, fix some glaring issues with it and you'll have a certified hit. Why do you think so many have been clamoring for a remake of Final Fantasy 7? When you have a hugely successful game you have a hit guaranteed purely on brand recognition - but when you fix some of the problems the critics have pointed out, you win on both a commercial and critical level.

I myself aren't really that interested on nostalgia as, for me, it stifles progress (how can you move forward when you have eyes on the past?). But I will admit, however grudgingly, that there's something to be said for making classic games readily available, accessible without dragging some aging tech out of the deepest corner of the bedroom cupboard and in a state of preservation.
That being said, has anyone tried to resurrect some of the lost classics from the Saturn? Someone must've played the likes of Panzer Dragoon Saga and Shining Force 3 - So surely they must've been hit with inspiration strong enough to make something similar so what they enjoyed two decades ago can be enjoyed by people of the present. If anything, I'd rather play a RPG that involves traveling across on a desolate, post-apocalyptic world with minimal NPCs atop a flying, customisable beast, encountering Moebius-inspired monsters and discovering lost ancient tech than a retread of Advent Children any day....

This means War

So this has been doing the rounds lately:

Am I excited? Actually I'm astonished: I wasn't aware they were making a Warcraft movie

In the grim darkness of the far future there is ony war

Ever since my teens I've had a long-standing interest in Warhammer - as teenagers with more money than brains are wont to do. Although that interested has waned in more recent years, I still maintain some degree of interest. That being said, the Warhammer universe, both Fantasy Battle and 40k, has proven to be fertile ground for game settings over the years. But my problem is that they’ve either been shooters (ie Space Hulk, Space Marine) or strategy games (ie Dawn of War, Shadow of the Horned Rat).
If anything, I would really like to see the Games Workshop give the green light for a roleplaying game. It is indeed a crying shame that they won’t because I find both Warhammer universes solid enough settings for an RPG. So why aren’t the Games Workshop doing anything – aside from inspiring rival companies to make their own Warhammer-inspired IP? (Warcraft anyone?)
Okay, sure there was Warhammer Online but if history has taught us anything it’s that if you’re a MMORPGur that isn’t World of Warcraft then you’re Dead on Arrival.

Whilst the Warhammer Fantasy Battle world is a decent enough setting it may be difficult to say something new when similar worlds exist *coughAzerothcough*. Therefore I really want to an RPG set in the 40k universe: It is far more volatile with every faction are out for themselves and little to no sense of unity (with the possible exception of the Imperium of Mankind), and thus makes for a more fascinating setting with tonnes of potential.
If we go by the Mass Effect model, I would certainly like to take a ship and travel from one end of the 40k universe exploring many of the planets therein. There is a decent enough lore and many recognizable locations that would sweet to see rendered in computer graphics.
There is certainly enough races in the 40k universe to build up a decent party of NPCs. Indeed the diversity would be a key selling point because a party built solely of Space Marines would only be interesting for so long.  But if the diversity comes into play then who would the player control? A possible solution would be an Inquisitor – his party could be built up of henchmen and killing daemons certainly holds a lot of appeal. But an even better option would be a Rogue Trader – it presents a substantial grounding for a diverse party. And better still, it offers the unique opportunity to describe the 40k universe through the eyes of an outsider who isn’t tied to any faction – or at least an average Joe.

And I just pulled that off the top of my head – so why on earth aren’t Games Workshop green lighting something like this?!?!?

The Uncanny Xcom

Another game I had a go at over my Christmas break was Xcom: UFO Defense. Not the recent remake (although I've heard a lot of good things said about it), but the original from way back in 1994.
I recall my high school years, 1994-1997, to be something of a golden age for strategy games. Everyone I knew played Civilization 2, Warcraft, Command and Conquer, Dune 2 and, eventually, Starcraft. Even Syndicate and Heroes of Might and Magic 2 had it's fans. But strangely, I can't recall anyone ever playing Xcom or, as it was known in Europe and Australia, UFO: Enemy Unknown (incidentally now that I think of it I'm not sure if this game was ever released in Australia).
I was only aware of it through being an Amiga owner and even then I thought it had a really bizarre  image for the box art:

Still, with absolutely no idea what to expect, I took the plunge and played Xcom: UFO Defense.
And to be honest I was really surprised: This was completely different from the strategy games I'd grown up with. The flow of time could be altered, resources weren't in easy reach and required proper management, solider deaths actually mattered and something was always happening - even if the player wasn't aware of it. It wasn't enough buying soldiers: I had to provide guns and amour as well as engineers to build it and scientists to discover it.
And the combat sections were indeed tense affairs with the aliens suddenly appearing, dreading that every shot might miss and the loss felt when a soldier died (for the record: I kept an Xcom tradition with naming all my soldiers after people I know).

One thing I found tricky was the handling of the income: As I found out, it takes a lot of money to establish a base and fit it out with the necessities required. But, of course, you're expected to have an eye on every location on the glove and if one nation isn't getting the necessary attention - most likely because you're trying get a base going to deal with potential aliens - they will cut their funding. And this will make the task of organizing the defense even more tougher. Indeed, far too often I would find myself sitting on my thumbs wondering what to do and even advancing the time to get to the monthly payout - only to find that something else was already happening beyond my notice.

Still this is indeed game that grabbed me by the throat and refused to let go. Sure it may have had it's slow moments but somehow, the accolades of the 'Greatest PC game EVAH' somehow seem justified.
Needless to say, I do feel excited to one day tackle the remake but, I suspect, it won't be for a while yet. Why? Because I'm far too busy playing the original!

I don't give a damn about my bad reputation!

Something else that has cropped up whilst playing WoW: What is the point of the reputation system? Okay, so it's kinda cool to see a character progress through Azeroth and making an impression as they go, and to see whose worth hanging around but my beef with the reptuatation system is that it seems to go against the lore that Blizzard established for themselves.

Allow me to explain: In World of Warcraft, out of all the races available, the only one's that seem in any way antagonistic are the Humans, Night Elves, Orcs and Undead (fittingly, all three playable races in Warcraft 3). As for everyone else, they're all bound together by their respective alliances - yet that doesn't make them in any way friends. And in the case of the the Horde, most of the races therein have been victimized and so they've gathered together in a show of unity. But the unity is showing cracks leaving many races distrustful of one another.

So with all that considered, what does my reputation prove? I like using the Blood Elves and they're distrusted by the other Horde races due to their magical prowess - although the BE's do share some kind of common ground with the Undead. Through Rithendal I have only reached Exalted status with one racial faction and it's one of the undead factions - fitting but in terms of lore not surprising.
So in lore terms what happens when Rithendal reaches Exalted status with another race? Do race relations soften? Do they recognize someone decent in a sea of idiots? Or will achieving Exalted states do nothing to prevent knives in the back?

I don't know - most likely through playing other RPGs, I've become accustomed to making world-shattering changes in the world presented before me. And such changes may be something beyond the scope of a MMORPGer....

Balance of Power

More WoW musings - yes that's pretty all I've been playing lately but maybe that's the secret of Blizzard's success: Release a game that's so addictive, it subsequently murders the competition.

One thing that I find impressive is that the world set in WoW, Azeroth, has it's own history. It may be one that's long and complex but what I like about it, is that it incorporates the events from the previous games in the Warcraft series. And the continued use of Wow means the history of Azeroth is continually being expanded upon. And just as long as Blizzard keeps pumping out updates and the occasional major shake-up (as evidenced with Cataclysm) it would be interesting to see what Azeroth would look like in, say, 2022 (now there's a scary thought.....)

But what I find interesting is that the history of Azeroth has just been a series of some prat rumbling across the planet and taking over. So what are the chances of it happening again?
Most likely never: The Horde and the Alliance both seem to be locked in an eternal stalemate and these two forces seem more alike then they'd like to admit. Indeed, it's been noted that for every arrogant/xenophobic Alliance member there's a condescending/vicious Horde member. Furthermore the Alliance is a once glorious organization now collapsed into factions who don't see eye to eye whilst the Horde may be a gathering of victims but that doesn't make the races involved friends.
Considering Blizzard's favoritism towards the Horde, one would expect that would give them the edge to storm in and demolish the Alliance. And in a way that may set the ground for an interesting shake-up: The Alliance gets trashed in a severe manner that their power is reduced and they must get a counter attack going. But with the Alliance power reduced, the remnants must rely on the challenge of guerrilla warfare to get some ground back.
Okay that sounds like a dumb scenario.....

Ultimately though, the eternal stalemate is pretty much all WoW needs - because if one side destroys the other then really you've got not much of a game left...

Forty Thousand and Two

Last weekend I finally got my computer upgraded (thanks Stephen!) so I finally got the chance to play some games that have been on my shelf due to them being beyond the capabilities of my last computer. So the lucky first would be the Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War series.

Now I've had a long standing interest in Warhammer (both FB and 40k) stretching back to my high school days so this, for me, is the closest thing to a 'real-life' representation (for lack of better choice of words): Finally after years of text and artwork, we have actual voices, buildings, and movement. Okay sure hearing all Eldar speak in monotone voices was a big surprise to say the least but, for a long-term fan, this was pretty good to see the universe actual brought to life - and, whilst not the first game to be based on the Warhammer universe, it was the first to actually treat it seriously.

Whilst this is not the first time I've played Dawn of War it is however the longest I've spent on it. The Space Marines are great (although the lack of Space Wolves is annoying), the Eldar are great (even if I find their monotone voices far too hilarious), Chaos is hilarious and the Imperial Guard aren't too bad either.
But as a RTS game, I will admit that Dawn of War is compelling: Having grown accustomed to the formula that gave rise to Warcraft, Starcraft and the Command and Conquer series, it's interesting to see things done differently. No resource gathering (which honestly was something I found quite tedious with the Blizzard/Westwood Studios trinity) but in it's place is claiming objectives. The leader attachment to squads is kinda handy and it is indeed welcome to see a focus on building actual armies as opposed to a small empire. Indeed, it is great to get the tedious elements of RTS get discarded in favor of actually building a force to go crack some heads. Of course this may not be first time such a thing has happened but it is a welcome change from someone who keeps surrendering to the siren call of Starcraft,

So yes, I like Dawn of War, as a fan of 40k and fan of RTS games. Now if you will excuse me, I must keep on crushing heretics in the Emperor's name...

Been a long time....

As Duke Nukem Forever rolls ever so closer to showing it's face, pre-release feedback seems quite promising. Do Gearbox genuinely believe in their product? Or are they just frightened that anything less than a wonder will mean all the wait and frustration will be for naught?
As previously stated, there is a part of me that really wants this oft-delayed game to succeed. To have a great game come out awesome in spite of the delays and the fan contempt would be a victory to end all victories - not to to mention the satisfaction of silencing many an angry gaming nerd. In fact, as the fans getting so worked up over an unreleased product still holds more fascination to me than the actual game.

Makes me wonder which will attract the greater venom:
- The fact that DNF took a long (and reportedly unnecessary) long time in development
- The fact that DNF was released and (hypothetically) turned out crap
- The fact that DNF was released

Still, a game can be good even when it's been a long time in development: Warcraft 3 took a long time to produce and it's still being regularly played at LANs. Team Fortress 2 took nine years to come through and it proved quite successful with critics/gamers/LAN goers alike.
So maybe there is value in wanting to do an awesome job of one's product. Maybe we should be grateful that people like Blizzard and Valve are willing to take their time and produce the best possible result.

But what are the chances of that happening?