On the Subject of 2012

Some lovely new year boobs

As a shiny new year begins, let's have a look at what happened to those predictions I made for 2011, and concoct some new ones for the coming year.

Crisis 2
"Don't expect CryEngine 3 to be nearly as revolutionary as its predecessor ... This game is definitely on the "meh" list."

Pretty much hitting the nail on the head, I'm sure you'll agree. Crytek wanted to become console stars this year, but with gameplay never being their strong suit and ancient console hardware not doing justice to their tech expertise, neither the console nor PC audiences were terribly impressed.

The Witcher 2
"it's looking good, and even if it's no better than the original, it will still be a great game"

The Witcher was always going to be a tough act to follow, and like Portal 2, TW2 suffers from following in its predecessor's footsteps rather than blowing up out of nowhere. But it managed to be a solid and entertaining game in its own right, as expected.

Mass Effect 3
"Personally I doubt that this will see the light of day in 2011"

Damn, I'm good.

Dragon Age 2
"it could be a vast improvement over an already serviceable game, or else it could be more console trash"

Not so much console trash, as it turned out, but a pretty uninspired and rushed game by most accounts. I didn't bother with it in the end.

Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
"I guarantee old-school RPG players will find loads of shit to complain about"

Funnily enough I haven't really noticed many complaints about the actual mechanics of the game, although that might just be because (PC) players take it for granted that they will be able to modify the game to their heart's content. Of course I'm yet to play it myself so it's hard to judge but it appears to be a pretty solid effort, even if it features Bethesda's notorious (lack of) quality control with respect to bugs.

Rage
"it will massively fail to live up to expectations"

Did it ever. As predicted, Rage was largely console trash. What was more surprising was how it suffered from a lack of Id's usual technical excellence, and the PC version had various issues at launch. Even the die-hards began to fear that they had lost one of the last bastions of hardcore PC gaming.

Diablo 3
"Another game which I'm not sure we'll see in 2011"

And we didn't, although there was various beta activity should you give a shit. I don't.

Guild Wars 2
"Who knows if we'll see anything from Arena Net in 2011"

We saw various profession videos, but as yet it has been all quiet with regard to an actual release, or even a beta.

So as usual, pretty much on the money. But what does the discerning gamer (and console monkey) have to look forward to in 2012?

Mass Effect 3

Slated for March, this is my big one for the coming year. As I recall, ME was supposed to be a trilogy so in theory this should tie up the central Mass Effect story arc, although I don't imagine for a second that they won't continue to milk this franchise for many years to come. As I suggested a year ago, I still suspect that there will be much less to differentiate ME3 from ME2 than there was with the first two games. But I'm a fan, and as I said when I covered ME2, I just want it to go on forever, so the more the merrier.

Max Payne 3

I initially dismissed this as a shitty cash-in on the original (and excellent) Max Payne games, but I'm finding myself strangely optimistic about this Rockstar-developed take on the MP series. I don't know much about it, but I'm tempted to support any game from Rockstar which is released on the PC (excluding the mediocre, and late, LA Noire).

GTAV

Which brings us to GTAV. The question isn't whether there'll be a PC version any time soon, so much as will there be a PC version ever? For some reason Rockstar thought it would be worthwhile porting the over-hyped LA Noire to the PC, even though it was long after anyone stopped caring about the game, but the potentially much more impressive Red Dead Redemption is still MIA, and will be indefinitely according to the developers.
I was a latecomer to GTA4, but it was a landmark gaming experience and one I'd be keen to continue.

Guild Wars 2

It looks likely there'll be some action on the GW front this year, although whether it's a succession of betas or an actual release remains to be seen. I don't really know any more about it than I did this time last year, but if they make it, I will come.

Alan Wake

Apparently there's going to be a PC version. Of the game which was originally supposed to be a PC exclusive and Windows Vista showcase title. Meanwhile Microsoft threw enough money at Remedy to make it a 360 exclusive, the game was seriously compromised to make it accessible to the console Neanderthals and so it'll probably be a load of old shit when it finally does make it to the PC. Too little, (much) too late, Remedy.

Diablo 3

Seems to be progressing towards an actual release, via closed betas. It'll be a colossal mountain of hype, expectation and now doubt disillusionment when it does arrive, but that's less to do with the quality of the game and more to do with idiot gamers and expert marketing.

Metro: Last Light

I think I have Metro 2033 in my Steam library after some sale or other, but I haven't got around to playing it yet. Sounds like some sort of STALKER-meets-Crysis linear shooter, but many people have good things to say about it. Some of the trailer footage for Last light looks pretty sweet, although that doesn't mean much. I would expect it to be serviceable as a game, and quite likely capable of bringing a high-end machine to its knees.

In fact there aren't really many noteworthy titles to look forward to this year. Maybe a few surprises will pop up out of the blue, and I already have enough of a backlog to deal with.

The Field Marshal's New Year Honours List

I have been somewhat remiss in my reviews/rants/porn of late, but even I won't let a New Year pass without bestowing my traditional honours. 2011 couldn't have been much worse for PC gaming than 2010, but in fact there were a few gems this year, scattered amongst the endless tide of console dross. With no sign of any next-generation consoles, even console gamers are starting to notice the cracks. Meanwhile increasingly few developers are bothering to create games which take advantage of the PC's advanced technology and the unquestionable superiority of the keyboard/mouse combination as a FPS controller.
But that's a rant for another time. Let's get back to the business in hand.



The Bennett Cross
"... most conspicuous gameplay, or some daring or pre-eminent act of valour or self-sacrifice, or extreme devotion to entertainment in the presence of the enemy"

Serious Sam 3

In which Croteam gets out its pencil case and takes us back to the old school. Speaking of games developed for the PC, here comes a prime example. The game suffers from a slow start, something which has seemingly put off a lot of players (including reviewers), and really makes you work for each new weapon, but eventually you do get back to the classic SS hoards, and the game slips on like a comfortable old jacket. It's the first shooter I've played in a very long time where the mechanics just feel "right". The weapons have satisfying punch and each has value, so along with the carefully meted-out ammo you don't tend to just stick to one particular favourite.
SS3 features relatively subdued and more realistic, less cartoony environments than its predecessors (particularly SS2) but there's still humour and plenty of ridiculous, laugh-out-loud moments. There is perhaps too little variation in the environments (mostly being samey urban Egyptian streets and tombs), but apart from that it's just good old-fashioned fun. Too old-fashioned for some, but then SS3 walks a difficult line between being a proper old-school PC shooter, and incorporating the shiny innovations of more modern games. What exactly do you think it's missing, regenerating health? SS3 is easily the best single player shooter of 2011, although admittedly that's not saying much.



The Bennett Service Order
"... acts of the greatest gameplay or of the most conspicuous entertainment in circumstances of extreme danger"

The Witcher 2

It may be a shock relegation to second place overall, but that's not to say that TW2 isn't a great game, and another PC exclusive (for a few months at least). It has been handicapped by the fact that I haven't managed to spend a great deal of time with it this year, but on the other hand it deserves to be penalised for the tiresome and lazy use of quick time events.
Still, it looks great, not including the unnecessary Geralt redesign, there are tits and swearing as befits a Witcher game, the combat takes a little getting used to but is slightly more involving than that of the original game, and the atmosphere and storytelling of the original remain intact.



The Bennett Medal
"... acts of gallantry and devotion to game play under fire"

Saints Row: The Third

I bought this on a whim because Amazon had the digital download for $40 rather than the increasingly-common $60, and that's something I whole-heartedly support. I hadn't played a Saints Row before, so all I knew about the game was drawn from one or two slightly odd trailers which appeared to feature pro-wrestling moves and giant dildos. Turns out it's a more cartoonish and amped-up open world sandbox which can be compared with GTA4, but only slightly. It's not quite as polished as GTA4, and swings much more towards the arcade end of the spectrum, but there's some good variety, well-presented core missions and lots of opportunities to upgrade and customise.

Honourable Mentions
Perhaps a slightly unfair omission from The Big Three, The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim shot itself in the foot by launching in the stupid and unjustifiable $60 price bracket and was barely discounted by any retailers. I vowed not to buy the game before it dropped to $40 or less, which only occurred during the Steam Christmas sales, so it's currently languishing in my Steam library, unplayed. Test Drive Unlimited 2 is a pretty good game, but suffers from some short-sighted development decisions (shitty stearing wheel support) and a mediocre physics model which is neither arcade nor simulation. However, graphically the engine received a nice overhaul, there's a proper day/night cycle and varied weather, fun and well-implemented off-roading, and if you were disappointed that Ibeza seems, if anything, smaller than Oahu then at least they included Oahu as well. Portal 2 is more Portal, with a slightly more prominent narrative angle and a few more puzzles than the first game. Stephen Merchant's voice acting deserved better writing, and overall the game seemed much easier than the original, but it still features the legendary Valve polish.

Dishonourable mentions
Portal 2 may be a fun diversion, but it's not Game of the Year material, contrary to popular opinion. It's still too short for a full-price game, despite being maybe twice the length of Portal, and most damningly it still has absolutely zero replay potential. I haven't tried the co-op and I'm sure that adds a little to the initial longevity, but that's offset by the tiresome "humour" and surprisingly poor writing of the single-player campaign. Id Software are the kings of tech demos masquerading as games but with Rage they experienced something of a fall from grace even in the eyes of their more dedicated fans. Rage was an unashamed console game ported to the PC for the first time in Id history, and despite having "mega" in the name, the megatexture tech was designed more to work around console limitations than take advantage of contemporary PC hardware. If an Id game doesn't have impressive tech, then it has nothing at all. Oh and Crisis 2 came out in 2011, and while featuring some impressive tech, it ended up being just another console port from the PC point of view.

Neither Here Nor There
Battlefield 3 looks pretty and is the multi-player game du jour for the self-styled armchair pro FPS crowd. The increased focus (a relative term: increased from virtually nothing to very little) on a single-player campaign didn't really pay off, as it is reportedly short, uninspired, full of quick-time events and predictably just like all the Call of Duty: Modern Warefares. But as any fans will fall over themselves to tell you, the SP is irrelevant. Which is why the Battlefield games are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.

On the Subject of Diablo 3

Summer Glau

Another day, another drama in the world of video games. The latest controversy comes courtesy of fanboy wank-fodder Diablo 3, and the news that it will require a continuous internet connection in order to function, even for single-player sessions.

Now of course when a less popular company like, for example, Ubisoft, tries that sort of thing, the backlash is immediate and vocal and pretty much unanimous. But of course this is Diablo 3, and so naturally the apologists and sanctimonious, self-satisfied, smug shit-head multiplayer fucks come crawling out of the woodwork to make excuses and patronise anyone who dares to question the edicts of the almighty Blizzard. These are the people who only ever cared about the MP aspects of the game, which were obviously going to require an internet connection, so it makes no difference to them and they are incapable of understanding why people who aren't them, and who perhaps have their own preferences and priorities which may not include multiplayer gameplay, might be disgruntled. Suddenly the people who have the nerve to question these design decisions are simply suffering from acute nerd-rage, they are making mountains out of mole-hills and should "deal with it". They should vote with their wallet, and meanwhile those visionary individuals who wholeheartedly support Blizzard's courageous and progressive proposals will be busy enjoying the game while you miss out.
It's terribly easy to adopt that point of view when you are entirely unaffected by the issue at hand. And it's terribly easy to swallow anything without question when you have a company's cock rammed that far down your throat.

Blizzard for their part have apparently been "surprised" by the negative reactions. But that shouldn't come as a shock; this is a company which has been previously surprised by negative reactions to their plans to force their forum users to operate under real names. Blizzard are easily surprised, it seems. But then they operate in their rarefied world apart from the rest of the games industry, with a loyal legion of sycophants to fellate them while they roll around in the WoW subscriptions collected from millions of Chinese gold farmers.

Ultimately I don't even care. I was never into Diablo "back in the day", and by the time I was introduced to Diablo 2 it was already painfully dated and clunky. Without the benefit of the ever-popular rose-tinted specs of nostalgia it doesn't really stand up to modern scrutiny. Nevertheless I would have been interested in trying a contemporary sequel, although being as I am in possession of perfectly adequate genitalia I have no interest at all in the multiplayer, co-op or otherwise. I find it curious how obsessed many people are with the MP side of Diablo 2 when it had a perfectly serviceable single player campaign, aside from the flaws pursuant to the game's vintage. Unfortunately it seems that Blizzard are making a very conscious effort to move D3 towards a "primarily" MP experience, at which point what tenuous shadow of interest I might have possessed proceeds to dissipate entirely.

And let's not pretend that the always-on requirement is entirely for the benefit of the gamers. Let's not pretend that it will make the MP experience some sort of utopia of fairness and order and will prevent those devious individuals who might want to bring it down from implementing all manner of bots and exploits and hacks. How successful has that policy been for WoW? It's about DRM (not just in terms of piracy, but in the broader sense of managing how you use the software), and it's about additional monetisation of mandatory online features (the real money auction house, for example).

Meanwhile the fanboys can continue to pat themselves on the back for keeping the faith, and convince themselves that they will be enjoying something special and rare that the naysayers will be missing out on. Only we won't be missing out on anything except the bullshit posturing of a bunch of self-important fuckwits pissing away their lives trying to make the numbers on their screens higher than those of the idiot they're playing against. And all the while playing the special bonus mini-game of trying to one-up each other's encyclopaedic knowledge of obscure character builds in the chat window. How will I ever survive without that?

On the Subject of The Witcher 2 (Part 2)

I've now spent a little time with the game, although it has been somewhat abbreviated by my PC's recent decision to start locking up randomly (which I hope a motherboard replacement will fix, because nothing else has).

By far the biggest disappointment has been the use of quick-time events during some combat scenes (generally fistfights rather than the regular armed combat). I hate QTEs, I think they're lazy and cheap and ruin any sense of immersion, and I'm not about to give TW2 a pass on them simply because I'm a Witcher fan. I don't know if this game has a similar boxing mini-game to the first Witcher, but if it does and they use the QTE mechanism, I'll be very disappointed. I know QTEs let the designers chain mocap or whatever into a more fluid and cinematic visual experience, but it is absolutely at the expense of gameplay. You definitely lose marks for it, CD Projekt.

Anyway I've only just reached Chapter 1, which is where the "proper" games appears to begin, after the extended prologue/tutorial section. The new combat system took a bit of getting used to; it's not really any better or worse than the old "click to chain" system but it took a while to learn the rhythm of it. Although at worst it just turns into a parry/strike/parry/strike loop. Once you get the hang of it (and the fact that you now have to meditate to drink potions) it feels fairly fluid and natural.

As I'm only just getting to the more open portion of the game there are a lot of aspects I have yet to encounter, like crafting, quests etc. It's definitely a pretty game though, and has the same authentic feel as the original. I'm still not sold on the Geralt redesign, he's too much of a lantern-jawed jock now, but at least it's the same voice actor as before.

Anyway, assuming I can get my machine to behave itself, and if I can tear myself away from a recent obsession with SWAT 4, I'm looking forward to getting stuck further in, QTEs aside.

On the Subject of Battlefield 3

A nice bit of bush, lorra lorra lovely couple blinda data

It appears that E3 was a bit of a console-fest, and not a particularly impressive one at that, and it has triggered the usual round of "PC gaming is dead" hand-wringing. Confirmation that Skyrim will be a console port didn't help, although some minor relief came in the form of the legendary John Carmack admitting that focussing on developing for consoles is a bad idea. Meanwhile, one thing which seems to be obligatory in any discussion of The State of Gaming is some mention of the forthcoming Battlefield 3.

I've watched the various videos, and I've reached 2 conclusions. Firstly, the game looks incredibly pretty. Not without exceptions, mind (the section where your character attempts to locate and diffuse an IED looked pretty mediocre), but in general the various demos have been very impressive, both technically and artistically. It's interesting to contrast that with Modern Warfare (the first one, since that's the only one I've played), where above-average art direction managed to compensate for a relatively limited engine to create an impressive game experience. BF3 appears to benefit from both nice design and a top-drawer engine to often stunning effect. Large environments, some great smoke effects, richly detailed environments and characters. It's all good.

The second conclusion I've reached is that despite all the good stuff, I haven't seen a single example of gameplay which hasn't already been done to death in all the other modern warfare shooters (or the WW2 shooters before them). Even the tank sequence, despite being blanketed in arguably excessive bling-bling effects like video distortion, just reminds me of whichever CoD or MoH or Crysis or whatever it was I've done that sort of shit in before. Not to mention the subsequent airborne sequence which is straight out of MW. There's also a surplus of scripted action evident, something which might well spark the furious crucifixion of lesser games. Of course this is the almighty BF3, so you're obliged to brush aside such trivial criticisms. Gamers are such fucking hypocrites.

Multiplayer monkeys will immediately start quoting shit like "ooo 64 player multiplayer" bla bla boring wank. I don't fucking care. I don't care about the multiplayer at all. I don't care how many of you fucking idiots can get together at one time and bitch about how everyone except you sucks at the game, and how everyone else should follow your orders, before all rage-quitting. Fuck you all.
And that's the thing. Outside of the multiplayer there is nothing new here in terms of gameplay.
I understand that the BF series is historically MP-oriented, but the fact is that the majority of promotional material currently available, the material upon which hordes of shooter nerds are building their masturbatory fantasies, is taken from the single-player campaign. It remains to be seen how much SP content there is, but you can bet that if it's on a par with other recent shooters (i.e. very short) you mustn't complain, because this is BF3.

I also find it bizarre that BF3 is being heralded as the latest saviour of PC gaming when it's a multi-platform release. I suspect DICE will be wary of making the common console-related mistakes when it comes to the PC version (fov, control issues, "press start" instructions etc) but the fact is, console gamers won't be sitting in front of their PS3 or 360 wishing they had the PC version. They won't care that there's a PC version at all. No matter how much prettier it is on the PC, no one will actually care except PC gamers.

It is inevitable, given the obscene hype, that BF3 will be a let down in some way to a large number of gamers. You idiots are only setting yourselves up for a fall. Even your beloved multiplayer will be plagued by the usual cheating and hacking within moments of the game's release. Don't get me wrong, if there's a decent-sized single-player campaign you can count me in, and I don't hesitate to applaud the technical quality of the engine and the impressive design. But in the meantime no forum thread is complete without someone name-dropping BF3 as an example of how it should be done (whatever "it" is), when the game is still months away from hitting the shelves. Not a year goes by without something suffering from this sort of obsessive hero-worship, and it always, ALWAYS ends in tears.