Your Yahweh
Bring-Your-Own Brahma
Gaining Ganesh
Acquiring Allah
Owning Osiris
Intrinsic Iehovah (begins with an I)
Saturday 17 January 2009
Tuesday 2 September 2008
Thrills? All too few, man.
I won't lie. I was excited when I first heard the details for Too Human. A dungeon crawling game? RPG-ing of the grind 'n' find kind? Made by the company who made Legacy of Kain? Set in a Norse sci-fi background? The latest hyped up 360 release? Count me intrigued.
The combat is just lovely. It was a great feeling watching Baldur zip across the screen, robots flying, as more of their friends poured in from off-screen. The merest twitch of the thumbstick sends the hero Baldur homing towards the group of antagonists. The occasional fumbling left my character waving his sword at air but still... I felt like was actually good at this game. There is a lack of variety among enemies, but this didn't cross my mind as I crashed into the next mob, and the next mob and then...stopped as I was forced to 'play' through a clumsy exposition of how I came to be in this fascinatingly dark locale. Dark shadows on dark textures on dark walls, as is becoming the industry standard for 'adult' content. Thanks to Gears of War for that one.
Aside from the style of narrative, the story itself annoyed me on a visceral level. Someone needs to take the developers aside and let them in on a little secret; simply dropping Viking names into a dull, inspired story makes for... a dull uninspired story with Viking names. I actually cringed during some of the cutscenes, especially those featuring Freya and Baldur, and the baffling attempt to render vaguely eroticised body language in the game engine. This narrative intrudes upon the gameplay to a near unacceptable degree. In fact, lots of things intrude upon the game to an unacceptable degree. The walking. The puzzles. (which are ridiculously simple, they are more akin to a speedbump than a challenge). The pacing of the gaps between is all wrong, leaving a frustrated and unsatisfied player in it's wake.
I would give some credit to what I think the developers have tried to do with the game. They evidently took apart what people liked about these games, and thought of ways they could improve the subgenre. Simpler, more intuitive combat, check. A more involving narrative, check. They also thought about the staples; Grinding combat, check. Extensive loot, levelling and upgrade system, check.
Too Human achieves all these things. Yet it is not a good game. Unfortunately they forgot one thing; all of these have to be put back together, molded, sewn up, or whatever metaphor you care to use. This type of game has to play as a singular experience, that sucks the player out and away from his normal priorities and drags him through the game until the small hours of the morning, searching for that final quest that will allow him to return to the everyday world of coffee and girlfriends and furniture and jobs. Yes, this player may care about such things as a good story and great controls. But these aren't the things that make him play. The developers haven't made any real effort to smooth and pace the playing experience. Why did people keep playing Diablo, and the Dynasty Warriors titles for so long? Because the experience they offered was pure and uninterrupted. It simply offered a steady and varied stream of enemies to defeat, loot to claim and objectives to achieve. As pointless as it may seem to non-fans, this appealed to... well... the type of people it appealed to. There was an undefined, factor, be it passion or manic personality flaw, that keeps people playing through the same game over and over to uncover every single play style, item, combo. Silicon Knights have tried to improve on this, and have not succeeded.
The lack of real guidance about the combat system is intensely frustrating, as are the NPC humans who accompany you. For a game that is supposed to be about the struggle and mystery of being human in world of cybernetic Gods and robots, I found it difficult to work out if the humans had any real impact on the game at all. I dodged around a troll for about five minutes trying to work out if the rifle rounds pouring from the human's guns were having any impact, and I simply couldn't tell. If they are there simply for narrative effect, then why include them in the game engine at all? They constantly lag behind anyway, and are nowhere to be found in a fight.
The heart of any, is the urge and addiction towards finding that better piece of equipment, of sneaking up just one more level before friends and relatives gather to prise the controller from your pallid and trembling hands. For the both semi-obsessive and more sedate players, the pace of play is all important. People came back to play Dynasty Warriors and the like because they felt they could do something better, or faster the second time around. They felt that playing a new character or class could help them find new angles in what was enjoyable the first time through. I suspect that in Too Human, this different angle on play is likely to be too narrow to extend play time by much. the classes really need to feel different, to have viable alternative strategies for completing the game. With the failures in effectively communicating the narrative, the pull for this game should be to collect every piece of equipment, to master every kill, and to see the game through different play styles. The equipment all looks very similar, and the variety of swords, hammers and staves play virtually the same way, with the only real distinction being between fast weapons and slightly slower weapons.
It will probably be pretty well received online, but that's not saying too much considering the paucity of the market in this particular genre, and the hold of the Call of Duty 4 grind upon the general gamer is unlikely to be overly affected.
Too Human is certainly no masterpiece, and is hugely flawed in certain areas. The enjoyment gained from the smooth combat is stunted by the stuttering enemy placement, laughably bad story, and a lack of variety. It is painful, in the regard that there is a perfectly enjoyable game somewhere inside, but the whole package is let down by a persistent lack of streamlining and finish. It is shallow in about every department, and in such a way that isn't going to be fixed by downloadable content. Still, they have two more games to get it right, and the game probably has just enough Good Stuff to allow this to happen.
Silicon Knights needs to sort out what it wants Too Human to be. If Too Human hadnt spent most of the last decade in development, this would be excusable. But 9 years is long enough to develop a concept and run with it. To put it simply, Too Human barely manages to pull anything off successfully.
The combat is just lovely. It was a great feeling watching Baldur zip across the screen, robots flying, as more of their friends poured in from off-screen. The merest twitch of the thumbstick sends the hero Baldur homing towards the group of antagonists. The occasional fumbling left my character waving his sword at air but still... I felt like was actually good at this game. There is a lack of variety among enemies, but this didn't cross my mind as I crashed into the next mob, and the next mob and then...stopped as I was forced to 'play' through a clumsy exposition of how I came to be in this fascinatingly dark locale. Dark shadows on dark textures on dark walls, as is becoming the industry standard for 'adult' content. Thanks to Gears of War for that one.
Aside from the style of narrative, the story itself annoyed me on a visceral level. Someone needs to take the developers aside and let them in on a little secret; simply dropping Viking names into a dull, inspired story makes for... a dull uninspired story with Viking names. I actually cringed during some of the cutscenes, especially those featuring Freya and Baldur, and the baffling attempt to render vaguely eroticised body language in the game engine. This narrative intrudes upon the gameplay to a near unacceptable degree. In fact, lots of things intrude upon the game to an unacceptable degree. The walking. The puzzles. (which are ridiculously simple, they are more akin to a speedbump than a challenge). The pacing of the gaps between is all wrong, leaving a frustrated and unsatisfied player in it's wake.
I would give some credit to what I think the developers have tried to do with the game. They evidently took apart what people liked about these games, and thought of ways they could improve the subgenre. Simpler, more intuitive combat, check. A more involving narrative, check. They also thought about the staples; Grinding combat, check. Extensive loot, levelling and upgrade system, check.
Too Human achieves all these things. Yet it is not a good game. Unfortunately they forgot one thing; all of these have to be put back together, molded, sewn up, or whatever metaphor you care to use. This type of game has to play as a singular experience, that sucks the player out and away from his normal priorities and drags him through the game until the small hours of the morning, searching for that final quest that will allow him to return to the everyday world of coffee and girlfriends and furniture and jobs. Yes, this player may care about such things as a good story and great controls. But these aren't the things that make him play. The developers haven't made any real effort to smooth and pace the playing experience. Why did people keep playing Diablo, and the Dynasty Warriors titles for so long? Because the experience they offered was pure and uninterrupted. It simply offered a steady and varied stream of enemies to defeat, loot to claim and objectives to achieve. As pointless as it may seem to non-fans, this appealed to... well... the type of people it appealed to. There was an undefined, factor, be it passion or manic personality flaw, that keeps people playing through the same game over and over to uncover every single play style, item, combo. Silicon Knights have tried to improve on this, and have not succeeded.
The lack of real guidance about the combat system is intensely frustrating, as are the NPC humans who accompany you. For a game that is supposed to be about the struggle and mystery of being human in world of cybernetic Gods and robots, I found it difficult to work out if the humans had any real impact on the game at all. I dodged around a troll for about five minutes trying to work out if the rifle rounds pouring from the human's guns were having any impact, and I simply couldn't tell. If they are there simply for narrative effect, then why include them in the game engine at all? They constantly lag behind anyway, and are nowhere to be found in a fight.
The heart of any, is the urge and addiction towards finding that better piece of equipment, of sneaking up just one more level before friends and relatives gather to prise the controller from your pallid and trembling hands. For the both semi-obsessive and more sedate players, the pace of play is all important. People came back to play Dynasty Warriors and the like because they felt they could do something better, or faster the second time around. They felt that playing a new character or class could help them find new angles in what was enjoyable the first time through. I suspect that in Too Human, this different angle on play is likely to be too narrow to extend play time by much. the classes really need to feel different, to have viable alternative strategies for completing the game. With the failures in effectively communicating the narrative, the pull for this game should be to collect every piece of equipment, to master every kill, and to see the game through different play styles. The equipment all looks very similar, and the variety of swords, hammers and staves play virtually the same way, with the only real distinction being between fast weapons and slightly slower weapons.
It will probably be pretty well received online, but that's not saying too much considering the paucity of the market in this particular genre, and the hold of the Call of Duty 4 grind upon the general gamer is unlikely to be overly affected.
Too Human is certainly no masterpiece, and is hugely flawed in certain areas. The enjoyment gained from the smooth combat is stunted by the stuttering enemy placement, laughably bad story, and a lack of variety. It is painful, in the regard that there is a perfectly enjoyable game somewhere inside, but the whole package is let down by a persistent lack of streamlining and finish. It is shallow in about every department, and in such a way that isn't going to be fixed by downloadable content. Still, they have two more games to get it right, and the game probably has just enough Good Stuff to allow this to happen.
Silicon Knights needs to sort out what it wants Too Human to be. If Too Human hadnt spent most of the last decade in development, this would be excusable. But 9 years is long enough to develop a concept and run with it. To put it simply, Too Human barely manages to pull anything off successfully.
Thursday 13 March 2008
There Will Be Blood; or Why The Hell Did White Europeans Settle In The Desert In The First Place?
There Will Be Blood is not here for you, and it does not need your fucking pity. It does exactly what it wants when it wants to. And it is probably the best film I have seen in the last couple of years. It is hardly a film for the faint of heart, but we never wanted those guys in here with us anyway.
From the beautifully brief and threadbare intro sequence to the jarring and booming soundtrack, it is rare in managing to be a both artistic and apparently successful.
It is, in a sense, the anti-Lost. Lost is convoluted, and uses its shallow one-note characterisation and cheap cliffhanger endings to keep the audience hooked as well as confused. Blood does exactly the opposite. It keeps the focus narrow and dense, and instead leaps about within scenes to keep you on your toes. The editing is first rate, and introduces the dislocating scene changes, slow pans and unsteady rhythm that I usually associate with more esoteric offerings. In fact the early part reminded me aesthetically of the weirder moments in The Wicker Man. The dialogue is kept minimal and to the point. There is no dialogue for the first 20 minutes. yet when the speaking starts, it is so well measured that you don't notice the acting. Oh, the acting.
The fact is ththat there are no particularly great performances. Sure Daniel Day-Lewis is convincing and mad as a big bag of crazy, but as usual he still speaks in a maddeningly untraceable accent and still insists on chomping away on nothing, rather like an old man eating a cheesestring. The preacher-child (for it is he.) looks every inch the giggling buffoon serviceable but hardly stunning. The lines are delivered in a perfectly workable way, but it is not the acting or actors that you are looking at. It seems to be a film almost completely without subtle body language, usually the sign of first rate acting performances. If Plainview is angry, or plotting, he has to show it very obviously on his face. :-(
To put it simply, none of this matters. Themes include everything (I dont mean literally everything but its damn close) except notably love and death issues, both being as common as muck in modern media, and as such having no place in this film.
There are some downpoints though. It does severely lull at certain bits, although this may simply be exhaustion resulting from the density of the preceding scenes. As I mentioned, the acting isn't great, despite what you may have heard, but the script more than shines through.
An obvious comparison is Citizen Kane, and this is not unfair. The story of a tycoon, the lust for power and wealth (or something like it) is all too familiar. But there are no morals at the end of Blood, only lessons on consequences. This sets it apart from Citizen Kane, which is couched (though very loosely) in 30's moralising about comeuppances. This is present in Blood, but far more visceral, immediate and equitable. The differences between Kane and Blood are of distance. Despite the closer urban conditions of Citizen Kane, the viewer is often far removed from the protagonist. In Blood, you are so close to the protagonist it's hard to breathe.
From the beautifully brief and threadbare intro sequence to the jarring and booming soundtrack, it is rare in managing to be a both artistic and apparently successful.
It is, in a sense, the anti-Lost. Lost is convoluted, and uses its shallow one-note characterisation and cheap cliffhanger endings to keep the audience hooked as well as confused. Blood does exactly the opposite. It keeps the focus narrow and dense, and instead leaps about within scenes to keep you on your toes. The editing is first rate, and introduces the dislocating scene changes, slow pans and unsteady rhythm that I usually associate with more esoteric offerings. In fact the early part reminded me aesthetically of the weirder moments in The Wicker Man. The dialogue is kept minimal and to the point. There is no dialogue for the first 20 minutes. yet when the speaking starts, it is so well measured that you don't notice the acting. Oh, the acting.
The fact is ththat there are no particularly great performances. Sure Daniel Day-Lewis is convincing and mad as a big bag of crazy, but as usual he still speaks in a maddeningly untraceable accent and still insists on chomping away on nothing, rather like an old man eating a cheesestring. The preacher-child (for it is he.) looks every inch the giggling buffoon serviceable but hardly stunning. The lines are delivered in a perfectly workable way, but it is not the acting or actors that you are looking at. It seems to be a film almost completely without subtle body language, usually the sign of first rate acting performances. If Plainview is angry, or plotting, he has to show it very obviously on his face. :-(
To put it simply, none of this matters. Themes include everything (I dont mean literally everything but its damn close) except notably love and death issues, both being as common as muck in modern media, and as such having no place in this film.
There are some downpoints though. It does severely lull at certain bits, although this may simply be exhaustion resulting from the density of the preceding scenes. As I mentioned, the acting isn't great, despite what you may have heard, but the script more than shines through.
An obvious comparison is Citizen Kane, and this is not unfair. The story of a tycoon, the lust for power and wealth (or something like it) is all too familiar. But there are no morals at the end of Blood, only lessons on consequences. This sets it apart from Citizen Kane, which is couched (though very loosely) in 30's moralising about comeuppances. This is present in Blood, but far more visceral, immediate and equitable. The differences between Kane and Blood are of distance. Despite the closer urban conditions of Citizen Kane, the viewer is often far removed from the protagonist. In Blood, you are so close to the protagonist it's hard to breathe.
Tuesday 11 March 2008
Duo-quotes of the week.
'It should be noted that the female RPG-er is a theoretical construct'
http://www.achewood.com/index.php?date=03062008
http://www.achewood.com/index.php?date=03062008
'People have asked me why I made the first chapter of my first novel so long, and in an invented English. The only answer I can come up with that satisfies me is, to keep out the scum.' Alan Moore |
Monday 10 March 2008
Quote of the Week
Whoever does not miss the Soviet Union has no heart. Whoever wants it back has no brain.
Vladimir Putin
Vladimir Putin
Salt of the Earth
Last Monday I thought I was going to watch a BBC3 pilot, so you can imagine my shock when I was subjected to a Shameless episode. Mrs Inbetweeny was written by one of Paul Abbots Abbotettes and it really shows. If Caleb Ranson is trying to emulate his mentor it's kind of cute, pathetic but cute. I think it's far more likely that Paul Abbot beat what little originality there was in the script and added all the phnah phnah, carry on, lowesest common denominator bullshit that dominates Shameless. The music sounds exactly the same as Clocking Off and Shameless which is a huge mistake as it sounded dated in Clocking Off. It's shot in the same way as Shameless and is full of that "people in the north are salt of the earth, poor but happy blah blah fucking blah" bollocks a that makes all northern dramas really shit and unrealistic. If Paul Abbot had any interest in helping new writers he'd let them write their own thing, not push them into writing a crap version of Shameless (which is also dire).
So three pilots in and two were shit and one was good. Being Human was original and showed a lot of promise, it also lacked the tedious sexual slapstick prevalent in mainstream british telly. Phoo Action, in an attempt to be "down with the kids", succeeded only in making a CBBC program with worse writing and the occasional swear word.The colours clashed in such a sickening way I'm sure I've developed some sort of retinal cancer. It's disgusting that Danny Cohen greenlit this awful program before it even aired, showing his disregard for what the viewers want and I'm sure pissing off the production companies responsible for the other five pilots. I'm convinced the only reason he greenlit Phoo Action is because it looks suitably "yoof" when it's plain to see it's just childish.
So three pilots in and two were shit and one was good. Being Human was original and showed a lot of promise, it also lacked the tedious sexual slapstick prevalent in mainstream british telly. Phoo Action, in an attempt to be "down with the kids", succeeded only in making a CBBC program with worse writing and the occasional swear word.The colours clashed in such a sickening way I'm sure I've developed some sort of retinal cancer. It's disgusting that Danny Cohen greenlit this awful program before it even aired, showing his disregard for what the viewers want and I'm sure pissing off the production companies responsible for the other five pilots. I'm convinced the only reason he greenlit Phoo Action is because it looks suitably "yoof" when it's plain to see it's just childish.
Friday 22 February 2008
Quote of the Week
A militia man carrying a gun could control a small unarmed crowd only for as long as he was present; however, a single priest could put a policeman inside the head of everyone of their flock, forever.
Iain Banks
Iain Banks
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)