Who is John Marsden?

If you haven't played Red Dead Redemption. What are you waiting for?
The game is without a doubt one of Rockstars most visually stunning as well as entertaining games to date. But this piece is not about the game so much as about the man you play, John Marsden.

Of all the things the game does right, and there is allot it does great; the protagonist John Marsden is probably one of the most conflicted characters in a game I've ever played. And I'm not talking personal demons, not being at peace with himself or tough decisions.

Red Dead Redemption nails the mood atmosphere and spirit of the West nicely. But it's wayward in conveying who Mr. Marsden actually is. Yes, he is a law breaker, murderer who is now trying to right his wrongs by undoing the very man who saved him  then wronged him. Hoping that in doing so, he can get to leading an peaceful life with his wife and son. In a paragraph, that all works if not a bit cliche. One gets the feeling a Western film like Unforgiven helped build the initial frame work that is Marsden.

The game tries multiple times to explain his actions. Rationalizing the purpose for crimes with Dutch and the gang, but it rarely makes any real sense - It's almost like a childs rambling excuse to do wrong. 

Unfortunately, he's a compilation of character notes that don't flow together or series of patterns that remain an unstitched quilt. His motivations, attitudes and persona are all over the place. A compassionate heartless killer that could give a hug. Polar opposites are forced together to propagate a story line with no real consequence or lesson to be learned.

It's like Rockstar wanted to cover all the bases but ultimately delivered a less than believable character. Or Marsden is a sociopath who wants the peace of family and has zero qualms having shot up corpses to litter surrounding areas attributed to him.
 
John Marsden appears to have no reflection, repentance, remorse, or regret of his past actions beyond words. It's clear he want's to reform his life but the games handling of all that is superficial. It's a shame, as this game is very beautiful, and given just a a few short cut scenes along the way would have made a more realizable ambition and transcendence believable.

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 - Shallow story and Anticlimactic

If you were a fan of the first game then be warned that this follow up loses all the charm early on. The accidental heroes of the first game are now legit - "the go to guys". Sure there is still the banter between the crew, but it's all superficial now. Take out the chatter and what you have is Call of Duty Modern Warfare 1.4. This leaves pretty much any player chemistry feeling more one dimensional than being essential to the story line.

Now about that story line....

I'm inclined to believe that Dice spent 4-5 months making game assets and 3 weeks cobbling the story together. Somebody on the story team threw out "The Japanese had a secret weapon in WWII". Then someone else said, Yeah and it makes like a Godzilla sound when it gets ready to go. From there on, the story becomes non essential. A majority of the cinematic characters both foe and friend are generic at best with the exception of just one. The talks between missions become filler stuffed between the various set pieces.

Something went real bad somewhere

I'm really getting the feeling the single game development was cut way short. There are some solid action pieces with nice construct, but there are just as many generic corridor shooter passages. I'll note the Satellite recovery mission - One minute you and your team are in a level plane environment and by missions conclusion you find yourself lost on a very high hill....literally freezing your ass off. You are tasked with running hut to hut to keep from freezing of exposure while taking out enemies. It screams Filler level.

Frostbite - What exactly was improved?

I expected more from the new Frostbite engine. As I mentioned, there are seemingly more generic corridor missions. The first game may not have had as much destruction capacity but there was more free ranging allowed than in this game. Just when you think you can flank the enemy in current game, a trail cuts out and you are either out of bounds or an invisible wall prevents you from moving on.

Even though you will find yourself in varied locales as in the first game, the scale of the areas and set pieces are decidedly smaller. The missions are also allot less varied. You will be subject to straight forward run and shoot for a majority of the game. The challenge is that foes just get more and more bullet resistant. Thankfully head shots do matter. There are the occasional target spotting and vehicle gunnery, but the experiences there are welcome but not exceptional.   

Back to that Story line again

By the time you realize you are on the last mission the events unfold in such an anticlimactic way. The choice of going guns blazing as well as the end solution result in a hollow victory up to the very last shot fired.

It wouldn't be hard to suggest the Bad Company 2 team are fans of Modern Warfare. I'm sure it's coincidence that a Russian invasion factors into both stories. Coincidence or not, the originality of Bad Company is lost and simply stands in the cold shadow of Modern Warfare. Had they stayed and developed the over the top direction of the original game, it's personality could have saved the day.   
 

Bioshock 2 - Deja Vu Rules to the end

I finished Bioshock 2 and there is little there in sense of real accomplishment as there was in the first game. As I wrote in my "half way through" review, this game follows close, almost too close to the original title. 

Towards the games conclusion the direction and story line felt more like going through the motions than unraveling a mystery and worthwhile cause. Injecting Andrew Ryan's voice recordings seem to be the only way of validating Sofia Lamb where he clearly notes their differences. A handful of voice recordings from other characters voicing their own agendas and positions on Ryan and Rapture are more or less fodder than substance.

Given that the characters aren't anywhere near as compelling as those in the first game makes this games dramatic disclosures that much more muted. Sofia Lamb's purpose, motivations, and speeches aren't gripping so the revelations that unfold in the game are allot less meaningful.

As mentioned in my previous post, the feeling of Deja Vu is prevalent. Almost on rails, familiarity plays out up to the final animated sequence. Since I saved all the little sisters in the first game, I'm treated to a similar warm purposeful ending.

It's like 2K Marin said, "if it aint broke, don't fix it". Unfortunately they followed the first games player progression so closely that its easy to compare where Bioshock 2 comes up short. There are differences, but they aren't enough of them to knock the ball out of the park. It's like riding a haunted amusement park for the 2nd time, it's not as exciting the second time around. There are no attempts of meaningful story twists and the Big Sisters really are just a new enemy class type.

What the Game Does Right

Midway through the game, updated weapons and Plasmids can really lay on the punishment. Toward the end, given your Plasmid and Weapon upgrades compliment each other, you can be a dual wielding master of pain.

I found that Electrobolt 3 and Shotgun using Phosphorous Buck was enough to bring down some biggies very quickly. The fully upgraded launcher is devastating throwing grenades that cause secondary explosions. Watching Alphas and Brutes writhing helplessly getting loads of Electrobolt and shots of Buck before going down is viscerally rewarding. 

I found Cyclone Trap 3 amusing. It's almost like a Jedi's Force Pull. Any enemy not too heavy could be hurled into walls allowing you to finish them off with cheaper ammo. It uses less Eve than other Plasmids so setting multiple traps makes allot of sense when little sisters collect Adam.

Overall, the weapons and Plasmids are the benefactors in Bioshock 2. Most of them are effective and give a level of strategy to use when taking on specific enemy types.

Summation

If you have never played the original Bioshock then you really wouldn't know what you're missing in Bioshock 2.  If you like the idea of building up and customizing your characters offensive/defensive capacities accompanied by an OK storyline that's a plus. For anyone who enjoyed the story as much as the action in the original, you should park your expectations on story and look forward to the updated Weapons/Plasmid game play.          

Bioshock 2 - Deja Vu

Somehow ... some way Bioshock 2 reminds me allot of a game I played. Almost exactly....
Hmm. Wait a minute. That would be ... the original game - Bioshock from 2007.

Really, as much as I am liking some of the polished game mechanics so far, (really liked the original) the story line is far less inspired. It's less of a driving force. Beyond the story line, it's how the game elements unfold. It follows the same pattern as the first game. I'll go so far as to say one could "Cut & Paste" the current character Delta with that of the first game and call this Bioshock 2.0. 

I would say that the battles with the Big Sisters have not added much weight to the overall story beyond wear on the D-Pad to heal in my fighting encounters. The method by which collecting Adam has changed, giving the game a more frenetic and strategic angle. Fending off Splicers and others while your Little Sister extracts Adam can be fun. By mid game I have traps, plasmids, and turrets that make these encounters more intense/enjoyable. I just don't know if these components offer enough to merit purchasing a brand new game.   

Less Inspired Story - So far

Spoilers Alert if you haven't played the first or second game.
In the original Bioshock you start off in crashing in a airplane into the sea. You happen upon Rapture by complete accident - or so it would seem.

The beauty of the first game is the story driven plot. You find out that the airline crash you  survived and virtually all events leading to the climax have been staged. That you are a pawn, an assassin sent to kill Ryan. The story unfolds in narrative and game play very well. The game elements don't make the game, they support the story.

Right now in Bioshock 2 the game elements are more interesting than the story. Where Andrew Ryan was iconic Sofia Lamb is not. Her purpose, motivations, and reasons (as of right now) are coming off as weak and bland. Ryan built Rapture, she's simply trying to take over and enforce some ill conceived socialist will on his lifes work.

Learning how Big Daddies and Little Sisters came to have a symbiotic relationship is really the only driving force right now. I'm sure at stories end I'll find out why Delta (your character) was considered a failure and was done in by Sofia. Given that the opening sequence has Sofia put a gun to your head and her surprise and intent to kill you (again), gives little mystery of why you are on this mission. Unless some serious story twist awaits, the ending is a forgone conclusion. So I think I'm more than halfway finished and Sofia's cause isn't making much of a case for herself. If I get the opportunity to take her out I'm betting I will. 

 

Bioshock 2 - A few hours in

1st off,  I played the original Bioshock and it was the first game that really hooked me into playing FPS games on the console. The game offered compelling colorful characters and intriguing story line that kept me going till the end. 

Ok now onto what the new game gets right and wrong so far.

I'll start with something noted by reviewers and the concept of being a Big Daddy. The games sound and huge drill motion really befits a huge lumbering character. You'll here huge thumps stepping down from high places and hear water spilling over your helmet and suit - very nice audio details. Despite this you are unnervingly vulnerable to simple melee attacks. I mention this because one would imagine a wooden bat would not crack your skull in four swings by a splicer. Makes one wonder what exactly your suit is made of. I'll get into what 2K should have done in a minute, but I'll get into some of the changes that are better.

Hacking of defenses and dispensers is a welcome game mechanic. Doing it just right rewards the player with added benefits. The Plasmid powers seem to have a bit more punch and the environment welcomes well placed shock and fire usage. Laying a bolt in water or fireball in an oil slick is adds a level of strategy that you can lure enemies into. The opportunities here are more than there were in the first title and help to balance the soft helmet you appear to be wearing.

As mentioned earlier - What's with your suits vulnerability?
It doesn't give much away to say that you are a humanoid character in this suit. An early in game animated sequence in the game has your character put his suit on from a 1st person view.

What would better have made the vulnerability easier to play would have been if your character were to acquire his suit as he made his way through Rapture. Far easier to explain getting struck on the head with a stick three times and being killed. Since the first game treated Plasmids as a transformation on the human level, the suit would have been an easy build up process.

Instead, like the first game you are soft and your powers and durability are enhanced as you progress through the game. Being a Big Daddy is not as bad ass as it could have been. Having a large drill and deep sea diving suit is a visual and less functional. I guess being an early prototype Big Daddy explains it, but had it been a gradual build up of the suit it would have made much more sense and possibly more rewarding.

I'm only a few hours in and the game and it still has my attention for now. It's hard to ignore some story line decisions. It's less compelling this time around, but the game play has some marked improvements from the first game. When I finish I'll do a follow up recap.

Mass Effect 2 - 3 hours in

The change sin Mass Effect 2 are not subtle. If you've played the original Mass Effect a number of times, there are some nuances in fire fights that may feel a bit simplified.

Before it starts sounding like I'm knocking the changes outright, I'll note that some of the changes are very welcome. The Inventory management was a bear to deal with in the first game. You could easily end up with ridiculous counts of the same items. There was no multiple select so purges had to be done one at a time which chewed up allot of time.  

Inventory Scrap

In ME2 the inventory is scrapped altogether. This is somewhat welcome but the changes in ammo load outs, weapons types, and armor types are now dealt with entirely differently.

Armor and Weapon changes are done at the appropriate Station bays on the Normandy or while in mission. Weapons types are now upgraded through investment of materials found during missions and ammo types are limited to character class. Your ammo type is tied to your class type and its capacity for damage is raised by applying experience points to it.

The good part about this approach is that you don't need to open your cluttered inventory to make weapons, ammo type, and armor changes, but at least in ME1 it could be done on the fly. Now that level of customization and control feels a bit more minimized. In a way it frees the player up to concentrate on the mission. As mentioned earlier you'll be putting hard earned experience points into the different ammo types to make them more effective. Although this approach does take the guess work out of which ammo type to use against which enemy, it's a notable change when deciding how to disperse your points.

Ammo types are now selected via the visual selection wheel that once only displayed Biotic/Tech powers. Depending on your class you'll see the ammo attributes there as well. This added ease is welcome as it keeps the player in the fight without long pauses going through the old inventory list.

For right the game feels balanced. For every change that simplifies choice, there are welcome game play additions that add depth. 

More on the differences between ME1 and ME2 later

Mass Effect 2 Collector's Edition  |  Mass Effect 2

Mass Effect 2 - Character Animation

In Mass Effect 2, it's clear that Bioware has really made better use of the Unreal engine, but there are a few details that stand out in the various videos  released to date.

One is the facial animation. I know that there is allot being talked about the improved eye and facial animation, but to be frank, some of the very examples they show remind me of the original. Where intense dialogue is spoke and the jawline & mouth barely notes it. Yes a bit of a nit pick, but it's not looking leaps and bounds over the original. For a game that plays allot on character, that is something that has stood out (for me) in many of the videos released.

Second is a bit bigger concern. In virtually all of the videos released showing combat, the enemies are practically static targets. Few if any appear to be able to or willing to take cover, instead firing from the open as player characters pick them to pieces from behind cover.

I'm left wondering if this is something Bioware has rigged for video demo purposes. Meaning that in order to show weapon and character class traits - it's better to have the enemies out in the open instead of hunkered down behind obstacles. In the original game enemies did run in the open, but they did a fair job of being moving targets that could use the environment for cover to some degree. Whatever the case, I hope the game balances out well giving the enemy realistic options for preservation in combat.  

Bioshock 2 BioShock 2 Special Edition Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell Conviction Limited Edition