Showing posts with label disappointing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label disappointing. Show all posts

Friday, January 30, 2015

Looking at: The Nvidia 970

Or: how to fuck up, apologize, and fuck up again

All through my gaming life there was one name I trusted above all else when it came to hardware. Being a primarily PC gamer meant that I've had to buy and replace hardware a lot over the years, and it was important to have someone you could trust. For the longest time that name was Nvidia (EN-VID-e-yah). Nvidia were like Senheiser sound equipment, or Volkswagen cars, you just knew you could trust them to be reliable. But over the course of the last week or so now I'm not so sure.

In the world of PC graphics there are only two names: Nvidia and AMD. Both make great cards and the differences come down to things like power consumption, noise, and drivers. Nvidia has often had an edge over AMD for their partnerships and abilities to put out new drivers faster, whereas AMD cards are often a bit beefier and have better shelf lives and cost a little bit less. At the end of the day is usually comes down to petty squabbling, and both companies do just fine.

Back in September Nvidia released it's consumer level line of 4g video cards, the 900 series. The two cards in the series were the powerful 980 and the affordable 970, with a 2g card called the 960 just released a few days ago. The promise of these cards was to deliver next generation graphics at an affordable price, with the 970 looking particularly attractive at only $400, considerably cheaper then the next available high end cards.

http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles/1/7/0/9/1/7/9/digitalfoundry-2014-nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-review-1411477399077.jpg

The MSI 970, my current card.


Predictably, these sold like hotcakes, with the 970 being the best selling graphics card several months in a row. People were ecstatic at the idea of an affordable 4g card and the benchmarks from major publications all looked really good. It was a good card, AMD had nothing that could compete, and it far out-performed other 4gig cards on the market.

Then this week happened.

Here's the condescend, very nontechnical version of the situation:

The Nvidia 970 was advertised as having 4 gigabytes of video memory, the memory used to process graphics in games.

A memory diagnostic revealed that, in actuality, the card has difficulty rendering past 3.5 gig of memory usage, with the last .5gig being considerably slower.

Nvidia explains that the card's memory is split into two parts, a 3.5g pool and a .5g pool due to how the card itself was manufactured and cut.

Nvidia then explains that they knew about this from the start and that the 4g branding was a "miscommunication between the engineering team and the marketing team" whatever that means.

AMD responds with this ad:


http://i.imgur.com/tyO1lby.png

Disclaimer: I cannot confirm or deny this is an actual AMD ad, however it was tweeted by the head of AMD marketing.

AMD also starts offering massive discounts on their competing R290x 4g cards for people returning their 970s.

Nvidia promises to release a driver update that will change how the card allocates it's memory usage, meaning that the .5g would only be used in extreme circumstances. 

Nvida backtracks on that promise. No driver is coming. 

http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-970-Can-t-Use-All-4-GB-of-Memory-470953-3.jpg

Memory usage of the 970 VS the 980. Note the sudden drop in usage for the 970.


Here's why I'm writing this, instead of my normal content: I have a 970, and more to the point, convinced two other people to buy 970's including someone who considered buying AMD's R290x card. Now I look like a bit of an idiot and I don't know if I can trust Nvidia ever again. 

I'm not upset about the card. It performs far greater then my previous 650 2g card, and even though the infamous .5g is slow it's still considerably faster then any other card. The benchmarks that were released when the 970 came out are still correct, and it's a fairly beefy card. There are frame rate issues, but this only really concerns enthusiasts. The below video shows the 970 running against other 4gig cards and it keeps a consistent <30fps the whole time. Even on my own machine at home I'm able to run graphically intensive games like ARMA 3Far Cry 4 or Metro: Last Light all at frame counts between 45-60fps. 

I'm not upset at the card, it's a great card. What I'm upset about is the lying that Nvidia did, and the fact that the card I bought to last 5 years is now only going to last ~3 years at the most. 

I'm upset that Nvidia keeps flip-flopping on the issue, refusing to give solid answers and not even promising a driver fix. 

I'm upset that I saved a lot of money for this card and now they got my ass over a barrel because it still out-performs other cards in the same price range. The 980 card is, at the cheapest $600, and the AMD options are all between $600-$800 as well. It took me months to save the $450 for my 970 and there's nothing I can do to get rid of it, since it still performs better then the 4gig 770 card from Nvidia or the R290x card from AMD. 

Lastly, I'm upset that I can never trust Nvida ever again. This is the worst part of all of this, and the fact that I now have to second guess every purchase I make is deeply upsetting. Let this be a lesson: never trust anyone, not even an old friend. 

Friday, December 19, 2014

Looking at: Video Game Review Scores

The IGN problem

Last night I was discussing the recently released game Dead State, a game that I'm rather looking forward to. It's a turn-based sandbox RPG about surviving a zombie apocalypse, like if Wasteland 2 and State of Decay got together and had a kid. Turn-based RPG's are all the rage recently, with standout titles like the previously mentioned Wasteland 2, or the amazing Divinity: Original Sin, so I was excited for Dead State. Nevermind the fact that a large majority of people working on it are leftovers from Troika games, makers of the greatest steampunk RPG ever and the greatest vampire RPG ever.

Initial reviews for Dead State have been somewhat mixed, and when I mentioned to my brother that I'd still like to give it a go he said 
"I don't know, IGN gave it a pretty bad review"
Now, IGN has an interesting position in the world of games and game criticism, and to a certain degree I almost feel bad for them. They can't seem to do anything right by people. When they give a game a positive review they get accused of being paid off, as illustrated below: 

http://i.imgur.com/SLQJc.gif

Even when they give negative reviews, like their decidedly negative review of Medal of Honor: Warfighter[sic] they get called out for "pandering" and "not being honest enough".

 I have nothing inherently against IGN. I visit them daily, and their ability to deliver breaking industry news is commendable. Recently they've made great strides in reaching out to their community, culminating in one of the best moments in recent gaming journalism:

http://i.imgur.com/IZp6jIS.jpg

IGN's response to a mislabled video of Dragon Age: Inquisition PC footage. It was revealed that the footage was actually captured from the X1 version, and not the PC version.;

The problem with IGN is what they represent, and the image they've created of themselves. People tend to question the ethics of giving a game high praise when the website around it is covered in no less then six different ads for that game. 

But I'm not here to discuss ethics in gaming journalism, there's enough of that already. I'm here to discuss review scores, and how we should use them. When I checked IGN's review score of Dead State I saw they gave it a 6.8. you can read the whole review here. It's a fair review, offering many of the same critiques as other reviews. So why is a 6.8 considered a "negative" review, but a 7 would be considered an "ok" review. And when did all of this happen? A few years ago a 6 or a 7 would be fine.

Reviewing the Review

There are several issues with the way modern games are reviewed. First, let's start with the obvious: Metacritic. I like Metacritic. It's a great site that allows me to easily gauge how good/bad a game might be, and whether or not it's worth my money/time. Here's the thing though, I don't look at the number specifically. Metacritic rates games out of 100, regardless of how the websites themselves rate games. IGN, for example, rates things on a 1-10 scale, and Metacritic converts that to a 1-100 scale. Theoretically, this kind of works, but a 6.8/10 sounds much less harsh then a 68/100. And that's dealing with a site that uses numbers. What about sites that use alphabetical rating systems, or abstain from any sort of rating system at all? 

The best way around this is to, like I said, use Metacritic purely as a gauge. If the game is receiving positive buzz, then it's probably worth your time. If the game is receiving mediocre reviews, then check it out cautiously and do extra research to see why. If it's getting negative reviews, then avoid the game and save yourself some money. Of course, the best way to see if a game is good or not is to just play it, but demo's have gone the way of the dinosaur, and shelling out $30, $40, or $50 for a complete failure can really sting. 

Technical Difficulties

The second major issue with game reviews is how people review the games. Dragon Age: Inquisition has received universal praise, with some calling it one of the best RPGs ever made comparable to the likes of Baldur's Gate 2 or Morrowind. All of this despite the PS3 version being buggy, multiple reports of frame rate issues across the board, and a DRM that does serious damage to your hard drive while it's running. Similarly, Halo: The Master Chief Collection received high praise, despite the fact that the multiplayer is buggy and unstable and a hilariously over-sized day 1 patch. Shouldn't these factor into a review? If a game is buggy and unstable, then it is not a good game, regardless of how fun the game itself might be.

My favorite example for how fucked up modern reviews are is Fallout: New Vegas. I'm a huge fan of the fallout series, having played through and beaten every game, save the terrible Brotherhood of Steel, so when New Vegas came out I bought it immediately. What I, and many others, got was a great game with one of the most realized and expansive stories and tonnes of memorable characters, surrounded in bugs and broken code. For a good week after New Vegas launched the only way to save your game on PC was through a console code, and the game still has various bugs and crashes. 

Despite being really, really good, New Vegas' reviews struggled, and it ended up with an 84/100 on Metacritic. The reason New Vegas is interesting is because the dev team missed out on a promised bonus that would've been awarded with a Metacritic score of 85. All because of a few bugs. 

So why then does Dragon Age or Halo: MCC get a pass when something like New Vegas or Dragon's Dogma get middling to OK review scores? Games should be examined from all angles, technical and entertainment sides alike. It doesn't matter how good the game is, if it's buggy and difficult to play then it can't be called a great game. 

Sleeping with Fishes

Then we get into the controversial area of reviewing games. Should reviewers be allowed to interact with the developers? The answer should clearly be no. Being personally involved with a person will color your view of their work, regardless of how much you may think otherwise. Don't worry, I'm not going to go full #Gamergate here, but this shouldn't be an issue that requires a full-blown consumer revolution. This is journalism 101, and the fact that it's still going on is indicative of how shitty the industry has gotten. 

I'm not saying these people can't interact. Giantbomb has always been one of my favorite game sites on the internet, sort of acting as an inti-every one else, and guys like Alex Navarro, Jeff Gerstmann and the late Ryan Davis are all great examples of what people in the industry should be. But my biggest issue with Giantbomb has always been the way they interact with various developers. To me there's something wrong about playing a game side-by-side with the developer, then turning around and giving that game a glowing review. I'm not saying you can't have fun with people, this industry is built on the idea of people having fun together, I'm saying perhaps don't taint the ethical side of your review by interacting with the vary person who's work your reviewing. 

Then there's the idea of paid reviews. I'm headed back to IGN for this one since they, more than any other site, have been accused of this time and time again. I'm not going to indicate IGN specifically, but the idea of paid reviews is real, as revealed in this interview. For quick reference, here's the quote:

"NG: How often do gaming publications (big and small) collude with developers for review scores, or exclusives? Is this more common than the public could ever foresee?
Allen: I have personally sat in negotiations where a publisher negotiated a higher review score for a game in exchange for an exclusive cover or assets for a separate upcoming game. It is common, especially with previews. This is why you often see glowing previews of bad games, or pre-release reviews that have to be revised post-launch."

The idea that this is happening is somewhat disturbing. No, fuck that, it's really disturbing. Reviews are supposed to safeguard we, the consumer, against bad, unfinished, or unplayable games. How can we trust them if they're lying to us, just to score some more page views. 

Final review

Game reviews are a dying beast, with publications lashing out in their death throes. Numerical scores are meaningless, and should only be used a a guide line for how good or bad the game might be. Never put stock into a number, or a decimal point. Were it up to me we'd be on a 1-3 system:

1 - Don't play. It's a bad game.
2 - Play at your own risk, problematic and may contain bugs
3 - Very well designed, fun to play, and stable throughout.

That's it. If it has major bugs, like DA:I or Halo:MCC do, then it's a 2. If it's bugs are minimal and don't detract from the gameplay, then it's a 3. If it's a piece of steaming shit, then it's a 1. Simple. 

I'm not going to implement this system, as I don't see my writings as reviews. I started this blog as an echo-chamber of my opinions, and that's the way it will remain. All I want to do is remind people to look out. The industry is going through some major changes, both good and bad, as it reaches it's awkward and violent adolescents. Pay attention, keep your eyes open, and always remember to think for yourselves. 









Looking at: 2014 in gaming, part 1: the Miscellaneous

Opening Words

http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/articles/life/food/2013/07/130717_FOOD_WomanLaughingAloneWithSalad.jpg.CROP.article568-large.jpg

SAMPLE TEXT HERE

2014 is quickly drawing to a close, and while most people will be out spreading holiday cheer and spending time with family and friends, I'll be here, writing words about games, movies, and the occasional bout of pure insanity.

Today, and for the next few days, I'll be looking back at 2014 in gaming, and talking about what games managed to not completely disappoint me this year. Generally this is known as a "best of" list, or a "Top Ten" list, but I don't play that way. Instead, each day I'll be going through one quarter of the year and looking at the best games from that time frame, and why you should play the fuck out of them.

A heads up, it was a fucking disappointing year. I could only muster together 24 games that didn't completely disappoint or enrage me. That means there was only two good games a month, and some of these were real stretches too.

Today is the cast offs, the games I didn't like, didn't play, or couldn't play. I'd like to preface this by saying this is simply my opinion, and like everything I say/do/write, means nothing. If you disagree with me, that's fine, having an opinion merely means you're still human.

The Dissapointments

Far Cry 4

http://psmedia.playstation.com/is/image/psmedia/far-cry-4-listing-thumb-01-us-13may14?$Icon$

A great game, that we've already played.

Far Cry 4 isn't a bad game, in fact it's quite a good game. But it's a game we've seen before. One of my favorite things about the Far Cry series was that, true to their name, each of them were a far cry from the last one. FC1 was a sci-fi shooter, FC2 a hard hitting Africa war sim, and FC3 an all-American power fantasy. FC4 is just a really good re-skin FC3. It's a fun game, but that's because it's the game we already knew was good. It's Ubisoft's best game this year, but being Ubisoft's best has become it's own hyperbole, as this year has proven.

Borderlands: Pre-Sequel

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/smFJaRWwvRs/maxresdefault.jpg

Moon Australians are more annoying the regular Australians. 

Now here was a good look at what happens when you don't let a good IP just die. Borderlands:PS is the worst way to keep something alive, ie, handing it off to a new dev team. The ideas of a good Borderlands game are here, mostly taken from the far superior Borderlands 2, but wrapped in so much stupid horseshit it's hard to enjoy. For every good idea presented, there's two or three bad ideas along with it. The character talk more, but they're all annoying as hell. There's no more cringe-worthy memes, but now there's shoe-horned in LGBT characters because Anthony Davis is a crazy person. It's enjoyable with friends, sure, but I've beaten the game and have no plans to replay it. Playing it just makes me want to play BL2 again, so I did.

Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare

http://gearnuke.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Call-of-Duty-Advanced-Warfare-feature-image-3.jpg

Ol' Faithful, never fails.

2014 was such a shitty year that I really considered putting this on my best of. COD: AW is a completely competent game, bolstered by great performances by Troy Baker and Kevin Spacey. But like FC4, it's a game we've all seen before. I missed last year's Ghosts, so my last experience with the series was Black Ops 2 and, aside from much better graphics, it was the same game. I'm tired of the COD series, and I suspect a lot of you are two, but Sledgehammer games might be able to save it. Just not this year yet.

Watch_Dogs

http://www.consolectrl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/watch-dogs-aiden-pearce-wallpaper.jpg

Bland, generic, and a waste of a new IP.

You knew this was coming. Watch_Dogs has become the poster boy for over-hyping a game. A great E3 trailer does not a great game make, and this is evidence. A boring plot, a psychotic and unlikable protagonist, a complete misunderstanding of the basic ideas of it's own concept, and a dumbed down PC version are enough to make Watch_Dogs one of the most disappointing games this year. Add to that Ubisoft lying to people and it's a marvel this game got any positive attention at all.

Star Bound

http://cdn.akamai.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/211820/header.jpg?t=1412593025

Early Access to no content.

Early Access games are a controversial topic in PC gaming circles right now, and Star Bound has found itself a poster boy for why it's a bad idea. A great game that's received acclaim, abandoned and left to die on the vine, As of today the devs have finally announced the long awaited next step, but should people have to wait almost a year for any form of development on a game they paid full price for? I don't think so, and neither should you.

The Didn't/Couldn't play

EA Games

It might be passe now, but I have an ongoing boycott against EA games. It's a personal thing, something I rarely bring up, and I don't discourage others from playing EA game, it's just that I don't. I've been doing this in protest of games like Sim City and BF4, games released in a broken state that never seem to get fixed. (Note: I did NOT boycott Mass Effect 3. Bad writing is no reason to boycott a game) What this means is that I didn't and won't play games like Dragon Age: Inquisition, Sims 4, and TitanFall, as well as any EA sports games. I have no opinion one way or the other on these games, save for what I can only speculate on.

GTA V HD

I like GTA V. I really liked GTA V. I only haven't played it again in HD because the PC version doesn't come out till next year. With today's announcement of online heists, and the promise of a proper PC port, instead of whatever the PC version of GTA IV was, I'm really looking forward to this.

Five Nights at Freddy's 1/2

Despite my love of horror games, I didn't get a chance to play FNaF at all. They both look quite good, and I hope to play them one day, if I get the courage to.

Destiny

I don't play console games that much anymore, simply because I find PC gaming to be much easier. Therefore I didn't get a chance to experience Destiny, the followup from Halo creators Bungie. It sounds like I dodged a bullet though, since I've heard complaints about nearly ever aspect of the game. The PC version is due some time next year, but I honestly don't know if I'll play it, even then.

The Talos Principle

Believe me, this is top of my list right now. The recently released puzzle game has got me intrigued, with it's promise of challenging puzzles and a tonne of secrets to discover. The holiday time is just a little to rough on the ol' VanderWallet, so like so many other great game it's getting passed over till next year.

Donkey Kong: Tropical Freeze

Trust me, I wanted to, but I don't have a WiiU handy to often. I love DK games, be them in 3d like the classic DK 64 or the old SNES platformers. I really do hope I get my hands on this game soon, since it looks like a tonne of fun.

DoubleFine Games

DoubleFine technically released two games this year. I say technically, because in reality they released half a game, and a broken mess. Despite being released very early in the year, we have yet to see episode two of Broken Age, proving that perhaps money can't buy greatness since this game cost three million to make. Speaking of broken things, Spacebase DF-9, a game so shitty that Steam has had to re-write it's content codes for what can be released on Early Access. At least Star Bound has promised us content, but DF-9 has gone the way of the prom-night baby and been left abandoned with no support. Really shameful actions considering how highly we once held Tim Schafar in such high regard.

Outro

http://www.foodiggity.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/salad-woman.jpg

The Closest this blog will ever get to being about food.

Well that's it. The short list of games that utterly failed to impress me this year. To be fair, most of them were close calls, and had they been just a little bit better they wouldn't be on this list. Look forward to my breakdown of the best games this year, starting next week.

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Looking at: Far Cry 4

http://i57.tinypic.com/14t0l5v.jpg

The Late, Great, Far Cry

http://oyster.ignimgs.com/mediawiki/apis.ign.com/far-cry-4/f/f0/0x6001.jpg

One new addition is Far Cry 4's drop-in, drop-out co-op. There's also Honey Badgers. 

I mentioned in my look at the Far Cry series that Far Cry 3 was, and still is, one of my favorite shooters of all time, right up there with Doom 2 and COD: Modern Warfare. It's an incredibly enjoyable game with a huge open world, tonnes of activities to keep you busy, a well controlled upgrade system, and one of the more interesting stories in recent shooters. I've played FC3 several times now and I still enjoy every moment of it.

I also mentioned in that article how I was afraid for the Far Cry series. Ubisoft has had a recent trend of massacring it's PR, and it's shoddy handling of the once great Assassin's Creed franchise shows what can happen when they attempt to annualized a series. Far Cry 4 is, technically, the third Far Cry game in as many years, with FC3 in 2012, Blood Dragon and 2013, and now FC4 earlier this year. Thankfully Ubisoft haven't announced a new Far Cry game yet, but we'll wait and see. As for FC4? It doesn't ruin the franchise, but the seeds are certainly planted.

The Familiar

http://static4.gamespot.com/uploads/original/1365/13658182/2732189-fc4_screen_pvp_bear_attack_301014_5pm_paristime_1414685442.jpg

Hunting remains largely the same, but beware enemy hunters that turn the wild life against you.

Anyone who played FC3 will be instantly familiar with FC4, mostly because they're essentially the same game. It's still an open world shooter with tonnes of activities to keep you busy, a well controlled upgrade system, and one of the more recent villains in recent history. That last one has changed a bit, and I'll explain later. There's really not much different then FC3, and this is one of the most annoying things about FC4. It's all the same,

I'd like to state right now that I didn't not hate Far Cry 4. That is to say, I sort of liked it. But I mostly liked it because, at it's best, it was just a newer, slightly better version of Far Cry 3. When Far Cry 4 was really, really good, it's because it was just apeing the things Far Cry 3 did really, really good. It was incredibly fun to unleash a wild animal on a group of unsuspecting enemies, just like it was in Far Cry 3. It was thrilling to sneak through a camp and systematically take down targets one by one, just like it was in Far Cry 3. It was a blast hunting down that dangerous animal to complete the upgrade I'd been working so hard on, just like -you get the point.

The New

http://s.pro-gmedia.com/videogamer/media/images/pub/large/far_cry_4_preview1111.jpg

Elephants can be ridden into battle, with hilarious results.

That isn't to say Far Cry 4 is devoid of new additions. For one, it's hero, Ajay Ghale, is decidedly better at being a super soldier then Jason Brody was. This time around you start with the ability to slide, use sidearms while zip-lining, and cook grenades before throwing. He also has several new abilites that put him ahead of Brody, like the ability to fire sidearms while driving, and moving corpses out of sight. These two come pre-loaded, and don't require unlocking, which is for the best since they're both incredibly useful throughout the game.

Unlockable skills this time around are arraigned into only two trees: the Elephant, focusing on offense and syringe mixing; and the Tiger, focusing on stealth and firearms usage. Rather then unlocking once a level, you now save up unlock points and gain skills as you wish, with higher end skills costing more points. It's a nice change up, and there are enough useful skills peppered through that it's worth it. Skill acquiring has also been slightly re-worked, and I rarely found myself waiting around with unspent skill points like in FC3.

FC4 uses most of the same guns as FC3, to little surprise, but does boast a few new additions. This time around there's a designated side-arm slot specifically for one-handed weapons. While this seems annoying at first, it's purpose makes sense, especially given the ability to shoot while driving, and you quickly get used to it. Besides, it's really useful after unlocking the one-handed grenade launcher, a weapon so hilarious to use I saw little reason to ever be apart from it. There's other great new weapons, like the Autocross rapid fire silent crossbow, the .700nitro double barreled hunting rifle, or the LK-1018 lock-on rocket launcher.

 Where the weapon selection really shines is FC4's host of signature weapons. All of them require certain conditions be met, and earning a signature weapon is a great reward. There's the silent variation of the AK47, a one-handed flip-cocked version of the shotgun, a fully automatic pistol with an insane firerate, or a 400-round machine gun that never gives up. All of these are great, and working towards unlocking them is a good way to experience the world of Kyrat.

Kyrat, Land of 1000 Mountains

http://www.worldsfactory.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/far-cry-4_e3_screen.jpg

Kyrat is a pleasent change from the lush Rook Islands.

An idiot once said of Far Cry 3 "Like Skyrim with guns" and while that ridiculously stupid statement meant nothing for FC3, it seems rather apt for FC4, at least as far as Kyrat is concerned. Rather then FC3's lush jungle island, Kyrat is located in the shadow of the Himalayan mountains, is a decided...far cry from Rook Islands. Kyrat is a cold, and desolate place, evoking obvious imagery of Nepal and Mongolia. There are temples scattered around, and holy sites from the local religion. It's a spiritual place, one that begs to be explored.

That is, until you try to actually explore it. Rook Islands was mostly open, and used hills sporadically to break up the terrain. Kyrat is mountainous, and allows only the occasional open field or body of water. While this is a great change, it makes traversing a real pain. I spent more time trying to figure out how to get to my destination, than actually going there. Even with the addition of a grappling hook it's annoying, since the hook is contextual as hell. Thief had the ability to deploy and use ropes at will, and that was released in 1998. Blessedly, there's still the ability to fast-travel to certain sites, and the wingsuit can be purchased only a few hours in rather then halfway through, but traversing Kyrat remains one of the more annoying parts of FC4.

The spiritual idiot, and his shrieking partner

https://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/4EILfUu2Mvs5I-XVp0_tt2XA0qE=/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2350848/FC4_PREVIEWS_KARMA_EVENT_02.0.jpg

Like Red Dead Redemption, FC4 features dynamic events to keep the world alive.

Speaking of annoying, let's talk about FC4's plot and characters. They're terrible. Ubisoft continues to not be able to write protagonists, as Ajay Ghale's motivations are even worse then Jason Brody. As Ghale, you are sent back to Kyrat, you're homeland, to spread your mother's ashes as her final wish. Your mother was part of The Golden Path, a group of rebels attempting to overthrow the dictator. Ghale is kidnapped, and finds himself rescued by The Golden Path, then gang-pressed into becoming a super hero for them.

Here's the thing, Ghale has no reason to get involved, beyond "It's my parent's fight, so now it's my fight". It's not like he's searching for his lost parents. His father is dead, and he knew his mother his whole life, so that's not the reason. The Golden Path rescues him, then tells him if he wants to fulfill his mother's wish he'll need to fight. Except that he doesn't, because he's just a tourist, and the military has no problem with him.

SPOILER WARNING: SKIP TO THE NEXT PARAGRAPH
It's made even stupider by the "secret ending". At the beginning of the game, you're told to wait while the villian makes a phone call. If you actually wait, he comes back, you spread your mother's ashes, and you go home. The entire conflict is pointless, and Ghale has no reason to fight.

Worse then the story are it's characters. The Golden Path is led by Sabal and Amita, two people so forgettable I had to look their names up on the wiki. Sabal is a backwards thinking patriot that wants to return Kyrat to it's spiritual roots, and Amita is a business minded leader that oozes that old "I'm a woman in a man's world, so I must fight" trope so much it's annoying. Neither of these two are interesting at all, and having to choose which of them to support is like choosing math class or geography, they both suck.

Then there's the supporting cast. Longinus, the biblical minded arms dealer is probably the most interesting, just because his performance is so over the top it becomes magical. Bhadra, Amita's daughter(?) who's some sort of goddess reincarnated that's never given a back story. Willis Huntly returns for a short while to be a complete asshole American sterotype. Finally there's Yogi and Reggi, two stoner idiots that represent the worst version of drug culture, and everything they say is terrible.

Love and Hatred

http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/Far-Cry-4-Uses-Lessons-about-Outposts-from-Far-Cry-3-Feedback-461720-3.jpg

Interactions with Pagan Min's army does a good job of showing how evil they are.

Then there's the villains. There's Pagan Min and his three liutenants: Noore, Yuma and Paul. Noore is the weakest of the bunch, being the whiny curator of the ancient coliseum, but her backstory is interesting enough and her motivations make sense. Paul is an interesting character, a man that will talk with his wife and daughter about mundane "dad" stuff, while slicing a hostage's head off and feeding it to dogs. Yuma is a freaky bitch that likes to use psychological horror to scar her prisoners, and is just overall really, really scary.

Finally, there's Pagan Min. FC3's Vaas was lauded as an excellent villain, but people were upset that he didn't receive enough screen time, and was killed off halfway through. Min, however, is fantastic, a mixture of ego, violence, fashion, and delusion all rolled into one purple suit. His connection with Ajay is unique, and despite attempting to destroy him, he regularly calls Ajay just to have pleasant chats. He treats Ajay as a son, and talking with him is usually the highlight of the game. All of this is no doubt thanks to the always wonderful Troy Baker, who does a great job of bringing Min to life and making him seem evil and intriguing at the same time.


Not Far Enough

http://static5.gamespot.com/uploads/original/1365/13658182/2624181-fc4_gamescom_sla_hunter.jpg

Spiritual journeys will pit you against demons as you uncover Kyrat's past.

Far Cry 4 isn't a bad game. There's a lot to love about it. What it is, is a bad sequel, and a bad Far Cry title. One of my favorite things about the Far Cry series was how different each game was from it's predecessor. Far Cry was an ahead of it's time sci-fi 80's action flick, Far Cry 2 was a deadly serious gritty Africa simulator, and Far Cry 3 was a huge, open toybox letting you stick C4 on a pig for fun. Far Cry 4 is just Far Cry 3, tweaked and re-worked. Far Cry 4 would be a great game, probably one of the best modern shooters, if only Far Cry 3 didn't exist.

Like I said, it's not a bad game, but there are numerous bad elements to it. The story and characters are annoying, and the cutscenes unskippable. Hit-detection at long-ranges is faulty, which makes sniping a crapshoot. There are a variety of bugs, ranging from the hilarious to the annoying. The world of Kyrat is interesting, but annoying to explorer. There's an odd abundance of insta-fail stealth missions and terrible tailing missions a-la Assassin's Creed.

All of this aside, there is a great game in Far Cry 4. An incredibly open toybox waiting for you to explore and exploit it. It's just to bad that the great game is Far Cry 3.

Friday, December 5, 2014

Looking at: The 2014 Video Game Awards, predictions

Hey, maybe this time it won't suck

The Video Game Awards are the latest attempt by Gametrailers.com showrunner Geoff Keighley to create a legitimate, be-all end-all award show for video games. This is now the eleventh attempt, and the third iteration of the show which is attempting to distance itself as much as possible from last year's abomination.




To call last year's show a failure is like saying Hitler wasn't a bad dude. There's some truth hidden in there, but everyone's ignoring it because of how awful it was. We had Loiter Squad making really awkward jokes, Joel McHale letting everyone know how stupid it was, and a general feeling of "oh god when will this end". It was awkward and weird, and uncomfortable for everyone. 

So this year they're trying another reboot, sans snarky celebrity host. It's also sans television coverage, since this year it's an online streaming exclusive without any imput from SpikeTV or Viacom. This actually might be the best thing for it, since Keighley has always seemed just a little held back. I have nothing specifically against Geoff Keighley, in fact I kind of like him. In an industry where the quality of journalism is so shitty that we have an entire movement of people trying to tear it down, he at least has some class to him. I'll not say that he's a great journalist, as evidenced be the picture below:

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/erikkain/files/2014/09/doritos.png

GAMES JOURNALISM

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/757/262/9a5.jpg

THERE IS NO GOD

He's trying, and he's been trying, mostly unsuccessfully for years. Maybe 2014 will be his swan song, the year when everything works. Considering how shitty 2014 has been for video games, I doubt it. 

What? Why?

I guess the underlying question is why Keighley and other believe we need an award show. It all comes back to this idea of legitimizing games as an actual media medium. It makes sense if you think about it, almost every other medium has it's own form of awards. Movies have the Oscars, TV has the Emmy's, Literature has a slew of awards, and Journalism has the Pulitzer, a prize no video game journalist will ever win. Games have long struggled to be seen as a legitimate medium, and the idea of a super prestigious awards show would go a long way to helping that. 

Except we kind of don't need it. Video games are only ever about entertainment. That's not to say they can't tell great stories, or contain powerful messages, but regardless of the contents, video games are toys. This is something of a touchy subject, especially given what's happened in the last year, but that's what people seem to forget. Nintendo often takes a lot of criticism for not having that many mature games, or games with deep stories, but I think it's because Nintendo, or at least the people calling the shots, get it. Look at Shigeru Miyamoto, the man is a giant ball of pleasant joy, and it's because he like to make things that are fun. Movies and books can be serious, and can be non-entertaining while still being engaging because they don't require any imput from the person using them. But games aren't like that, they should be enjoyed as toys. 

Regardless, Keighley will press on with his awards show. It airs tonight (5/12/2014) through Twitch, Youtube, and console specific marketplaces. Below are my predictions for the show, along with their probability of happening. I'm no statistician, so these probabilities are largely pulled from my ass.

Predictions:

The Known:

* The premier of Metal Gear Solid is weird, non-nonsensical, and kind of awesome: 67%
* Imagine Dragons is terrible, and kind of awkward: 72%
* Imagine Dragons played Radioactive: 99%
* Bloodbourne is dark, hard to see, looks a lot like Dark Souls: 80%
* The new King's Quest looks dissapointing, is named just King's Quest despite eight previous games: 79%
* The Order: 1886 continues to look really, really awful: 68%
* EA announces a new game, it's a rehash of an old franchise they should've left alone: 78%
* EA's announcement is weird, contains almost no trace of the actual game being announced: 79%
* The whole show feels weirdly PS4 centered, kind of like a pre-show for the Sony Expo tomorrow: 88%
* No Man's Sky footage is amazing, makes people actually want a PS4: 78%

The Unknown:

* Despite saying otherwise, Bethesda announces something: 55%
* Bethesda announces Fallout 4: 24%
* Capcom announces a remastered version of Dragon's Dogma for PS4, X1, and PC: 49%
* Capcom announces a new Devil May Cry, people complain: 51%
* Naughty Dog announces new Crash Bandicoot game: 69%
* Nintendo announces a new Metroid: 20%
* Nintendo announces a new Star Fox: 40%
* Ubisoft announces a sequel, it looks good but will be disappointing: 68%
* The show is actually really good, creates a whole new level of game award shows: 5%
* There's a frank and actual discussion on the deplorable level of video game journalism: 2%
* Everyone ignores how horrid and uninspired video games have gotten, how lazy and disgusting the state of video games journalism is, and how completely deplorable the actions of Kotaku, RockPaperShotgun, IGN, GameTrailers, Polygon, and even Giantbomb are: 98%
* Half Life 3 announced: .03% 

The Awards 

GAME OF THE YEAR
Bayonetta 2 (Platinum Games/Nintendo)
Dark Souls 2 (From Software/Bandai Namco Games)
Dragon Age: Inquisition (BioWare/Electronic Arts)
Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft (Blizzard Entertainment)
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (Monolith Productions/Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment)
Prediction: Dragon Age, despite only being out for a few weeks. People complain the show was rigged.
DEVELOPER OF THE YEAR
Blizzard Entertainment
Monolith Productions
Nintendo
Telltale Games
Ubisoft Montreal
Prediction: Any dev except Ubisoft would be fine. If Ubi wins, there will be blood.
BEST INDEPENDENT GAME
Broken Age: Act 1 (Double Fine Productions)
Monument Valley (Ustwo)
Shovel Knight (Yacht Club Games)
Transistor (Supergiant Games)
The Vanishing of Ethan Carter (The Astronauts)
Prediction: It should go to Transistor, Ethan Carter, or Shovel Knight. Broken Age is a broken game, with only half of the product actually released. I have no opinions on Monument Valley.

BEST MOBILE/HANDHELD GAME
Bravely Default (Silicon Studio/Square Enix/Nintendo)
Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft (Blizzard Entertainment)
Monument Valley (Ustwo)
Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS (Sora Ltd/Bandai Namco Games/Nintendo)
Threes! (Sirvo)
Predictions: If we're looking at sheer game, it should be Bravely Default. However, it's likely to go to HearthStone, because Blizzard.
BEST NARRATIVE
South Park: The Stick of Truth (Obsidian Entertainment/Ubisoft)
The Walking Dead: Season Two (Telltale Games)
The Wolf Among Us (Telltale Games)
Valiant Hearts: The Great War (Ubisoft Montpellier/Ubisoft)
Wolfenstein: The New Order (MachineGames/Bethesda Softworks)
Prediction: Any of these would be great, but Telltale is definitely the front-runner here. I'd personally give it to Walking Dead, as I found it went places other games usually stay far away from. 
BEST SCORE/SOUNDTRACK
Alien: Isolation (Christian Henson, Joe Henson and Alexis Smith/The Creative Assembly)
Child of Light (Coeur de pirate/Ubisoft Montreal)
Destiny (Marty O'Donnell/Bungie)
Sunset Overdrive (Boris Salchow/Insomniac Games)
Transistor (Darren Korb/Supergiant Games)
Predictions: I unfortunately haven't played any of these games, but since Darren Korb did the soundtrack for Bastion, he should get it.
BEST PERFORMANCE
Adam Harrington as Bigby Wolf, The Wolf Among Us (Telltale Games)
Kevin Spacey as Jonathan Irons, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (Sledgehammer Games/Activision)
Melissa Hutchison as Clementine, The Walking Dead: Season Two (Telltale Games)
Trey Parker as Various Voices, South Park: The Stick of Truth (Obsidian Entertainment/Ubisoft)
Troy Baker as Talion, Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (Monolith Productions/Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment)
Prediction: I like Troy Baker, but Talion wasn't his best work. It'll likely go to Kevin Spacey, because holy shit Kevin Spacey.
GAMES FOR CHANGE
Never Alone (Upper One Games/E-Line Media)
The Last of Us: Left Behind (Naughty Dog/Sony Computer Entertainment America)
Mountain (David O'Reilly/Double Fine Presents)
This War of Mine (11 bit studios)
Valiant Hearts: The Great War (Ubisoft Montpellier/Ubisoft)
Prediction: If there's any award likely to stir up really stupid controversy, it's this one, especially if it goes to Last of Us. Whoever it goes to, people will complain.
BEST SHOOTER
Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (Sledgehammer/Activision)
Destiny (Bungie/Activision)
Far Cry 4 (Ubisoft Montreal/Ubisoft)
Titanfall (Respawn Entertainment/Electronic Arts)
Wolfenstein: The New Order (MachineGames/Bethesda Softworks)
Prediction: Likely to go to COD, and for the first time in a while, it deserves it. Shouldn't go to Far Cry, since it's mostly a rehash of the much better FC3. If it's based on pure originality, then Wolfenstien could be a contender.
BEST ACTION/ADVENTURE
Alien: Isolation (The Creative Assembly/Sega)
Assassin's Creed Unity (Ubisoft Montreal/Ubisoft)
Bayonetta 2 (Platinum Games/Nintendo)
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (Monolith Productions/Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment)
Sunset Overdrive (Insomniac Games/Microsoft Studios)
Prediction: Definitely shouldn't go to Unity. None of these games are overly original, so I'll say Bayonetta 2 or Shadow of Mordor, since they stood out more then the rest. 
BEST ROLE-PLAYING GAME
Bravely Default (Silicon Studio/Square Enix/Nintendo)
Dark Souls 2 (From Software/Bandai Namco Games)
Divinity: Original Sin (Larian Studios)
Dragon Age: Inquisition (BioWare/Electronic Arts)
South Park: The Stick of Truth (Obsidian Entertainment/Ubisoft)
Prediction: While I like that it's getting a mention, it definitly won't go to Divinity. Likely to go to Dragon Age, but Dark Souls 2 is a contender.
BEST FIGHTING GAME
Killer Instinct: Season 2 (Iron Galaxy Studios/Microsoft Studios)
Persona 4 Arena Ultimax (Arc System Works/Atlus)
Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS (Sora Ltd/Bandai Namco Games/Nintendo)
Super Smash Bros. for Wii U (Sora Ltd/Bandai Namco Games/Nintendo)
Ultra Street Fighter 4 (Capcom)
Prediction: I'm not big into fighting games. Give it to Persona, just because that'd be kind of funny.
BEST FAMILY GAME
Disney Infinity 2.0 (Avalanche Software/Disney Interactive)
Fantasia: Music Evolved (Harmonix/Disney Interactive)
Mario Kart 8 (Nintendo EAD/Nintendo)
Skylanders Trap Team (Toys for Bob/Activision)
Tomodachi Life (Nintendo SPD/Nintendo)
Prediction: I'd say Mario Kart, just because it's the only one I've played. Probably should go to Infinity, as I've heard it's pure joy.
BEST SPORTS/RACING GAME
FIFA 15 (EA Canada/EA Sports)
Forza Horizon 2 (Playground Games/Turn 10 Studios/Microsoft Studios)
Mario Kart 8 (Nintendo EAD/Nintendo)
NBA 2K15 (Visual Concepts/2K Sports)
Trials Fusion (RedLynx/Ubisoft)
Prediction: Again, I'd go with Mario Kart. I have heard good things about Trails. FIFA is FIFA. Horizon 2 might be a contender.
BEST ONLINE EXPERIENCE
Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (Sledgehammer Games/Activision)
Dark Souls 2 (From Software/Bandai Namco Games)
Destiny (Bungie/Activision)
Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft (Blizzard Entertainment)
Titanfall (Respawn Entertainment/Electronic Arts)
Prediction: Probably COD again. Shouldn't be Titanfall, since that's just a ripoff of COD, or destiny, since it's just a ripoff of Borderlands. Dark Souls 2 is great, but won't get it. 
BEST REMASTER
Grand Theft Auto 5 (Rockstar North/Rockstar Games)
Halo: The Master Chief Collection (343 Industries/Microsoft Studios)
Pokémon Omega Ruby/Pokémon Alpha Sapphire (Game Freak/The Pokemon Company/Nintendo)
The Last of Us Remastered (Naughty Dog/Sony Computer Entertainment America)
Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition (Crystal Dynamics/Square Enix)
Prediction: Probably not Tomb Raider or Pokemon. Shouldn't be Halo, since it's still broken. That leave GTA or Last of Us, either would be great.
MOST ANTICIPATED GAME
Batman: Arkham Knight (Rocksteady Studios/Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment)
Bloodborne (From Software/Sony Computer Entertainment America)
Evolve (Turtle Rock Studios/2K Games)
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt (CD Projekt Red/Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment)
Uncharted 4: A Thief's End (Naughty Dog/Sony Computer Entertainment America)
Prediction: An award almost as stupid as Best of E3. None of these games are out, so it's pointless to award them. 
ESPORTS PLAYER OF THE YEAR
Martin "Rekkles" Larsson (League of Legends)
Xu "Fy" Linsen (Dota 2)
James "Firebat" Kostesich (Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft)
Christopher "GeT_RiGhT" Alesund (Counter-Strike: Global Offensive)
Matt "NaDeSHoT" Haag (Call of Duty)
Prediction: Oh sweet, a bathroom break.
ESPORTS TEAM OF THE YEAR
Samsung White (League of Legends)
Evil Geniuses (Dota 2)
Edward Gaming (League of Legends)
Newbee (Dota 2)
Ninjas in Pajamas (Counter-Strike: Global Offensive)
Prediction: Oh sweet, a bathroom break.
TRENDING GAMER
Evan "Vanoss" Fong
Jeff Gerstmann
PewDiePie
StampyLongHead
TotalBiscuit
Prediction: Sweet jesus not PewDiePie. I'd say Jeff Gerstmann or TotalBiscuit, just because they maintain some sense of professionalism. 
BEST FAN CREATION
"BEST Zelda Rap EVER!!" By Egoraptor
Luigi Death Stare by CZBwoi and Rizupicorr
"Mine the Diamond (Minecraft Song)" by Tobuscus
Minecraft - Titan City by Colonial Puppet
Twitch Plays Pokemon by Anonymous

Prediction: All of these make me ashamed to be a gamer. Give it to Twitch plays Pokemon, since at least that has some scientific merit

Like a trainwreck

There's no doubt in my mind tonight's show is going to be awful. It's been eleven years, and they're always awful, why should tonight be any different. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm just jaded. There's always a chance. We'll see. Check back tomorrow for my review of the show.