P2P Games

Mount & Blade: Warband Review

2010-04-18T16:00:00.001-04:00

Mount & Blade: Warband Review

Mount & Blade: Warband, developed by Taleworlds and published by Paradox Interactive.

The Good: Chaotic 64-player multiplayer with seven game modes, shiny new graphics, can become king and marry sexy ladies

The Not So Good: $30?, multiplayer is typically unorganized chaos, no cooperative modes, slower weapon times are frustrating, minor single player enhancements

What say you? This standalone expansion to the excellent mounted role-playing game is $10 too much, despite the occasionally pleasing multiplayer bedlam: 5/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

What drew me towards Mount & Blade was its effective mounted combat, which made the game far more interesting than a traditional role-playing game. Skill-based things are always better than luck and die rolls in my opinion, and the unique aspects of the original game made it one of the very few RPGs I enjoy. Well, it’s time for the publisher (and, to a lesser extent, the developer) to make some money through everyone’s favorite plague: the standalone expansion! Yes, you too can charge an exorbitant price for a couple of new features! What we do get here is sixty-four player online chaos and a revamped single player campaign. This raises a couple of important questions:

Is it worth it for existing owners of Mount & Blade

Is it worth it for newcomers to the series?

Can I get a fancy new hat?

All these questions and more might be answered in the following review!

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Mount & Blade: Warband features significant graphical enhancements for a standalone expansion. The textures have gotten an overhaul, upping the detail from the individual soldiers to the landscapes you’ll be battling in. The game map remains largely untouched, though. Mount & Blade: Warband includes all sorts of fancy new processing like HDR (whatever that means), anti-aliasing, soft particles, and tone mapping. Welcome to the future! The game also includes new motion-captured animations for more realistic killing and/or dismemberment. Honestly, I never thought Mount & Blade: Warband was a bad looking game, especially for an independent title, but the added improvements here do let you take advantage of your fancy PC.

ET AL.

Since the general awesomeness of Mount & Blade has been well established, this review shall focus on whether Warband is worth it for new players and existing players. The main addition that Mount & Blade: Warband brings to the table is multiplayer pandemonium for up to sixty-four players (though most of the plentiful dedicated servers support thirty-two). There are a number of game modes to enjoy, from the tradition deathmatch for individuals and teams to more team-oriented events. Battle mode is team deathmatch with no respawn; if there isn’t enough dismemberment, a capturable flag is automatically placed (how nice!). Capture the flag also makes an appearance (you have to dismount to capture, to negate an obvious advantage for mounted individuals), as does conquest (called “assault” here) with control points to capture. Putting the setting to good use are the last two modes: fight and destroy where the defender must protect a catapult and trebuchet, and siege where the defender must protect a castle. Servers support options for random or custom maps, friendly fire, a gold bonus, or time limit. The number of game modes and options is the best part of Mount & Blade: Warband’s multiplayer features.

Each side has access to three classes: infantry, cavalry, and archer. You cannot use weapons outside of your class, but there doesn’t seem to be a restriction to how many players can be in each particular class (everyone could be mounted, for example…sounds sexy!). Mount & Blade: Warband features a cash-based equipment system where you purchase items between rounds: weapons and armor for increasing your stats. The items aren’t linearly balanced: there is almost always a “best” item to choose that balances price and stats, and the most expensive items usually aren’t worth it. Usually you’ll earn enough money to purchase the same equipment every time, as long as you aren’t suckered in by the best stuff. Each class has a weakness: horses can be brought down, ranged units take a long time to reload, and rank-and-file infantry need to be up close to rack up kills. Friendly units are clearly identified with crests floating over their head (they had icons in the Middle Ages, yes?) and you can incorporate bots if you so choose.

Mount & Blade: Warband is much better with an organized group of many people: most matches online devolve into a mess of horses running around, ranged units firing at nothing, and melee units turning around looking for targets. You are almost required to coordinate because of the high effectiveness of shields: you can simply hold down the “block” button and deflect most incoming shots. The only way to kill effectively is to double-team people from opposite sides. Traditional first person shooters get around mandatory teamwork by allowing individuals to successfully kill opponents (you are, of course, more effective by working together, though), but since you must work together in Mount & Blade: Warband, the game’s success depends on how well people are coordinated, and usually they are not. And if one side is coordinated and the other is not, expect quick slaughter. Mount & Blade: Warband can be entertaining if the matches are organized, but this is an uncommon occurrence in my experience.

The single player experience gets some minor adjustments. First off, the map gets an unnecessary makeover: an increase in size that needlessly spreads thing out, requiring much more travel time (and subsequent waiting) between cities with nothing added in between. Despite the addition of multiplayer, the campaign remains a one-person venture. On the good side of things, there are more complicated, multi-step quests added for more role-playing variety. Additionally, Mount & Blade: Warband adds marriage (Marriage? Nooooooo!). Male characters will need to increase their reputation by fighting and learning poetry from traveling characters. Females will attend feasts and kill people for the men to respect you. Pretty much how it works in real life! Successful marriage gives you land and better standing within your faction, so it’s a nice diversion along the usually progression up the character ladder. Trading is more balanced, and the end-game has gotten better since you can now rule an entire faction, get royal underlings, and give allied heroes land for their very own. These additions are nice but nothing spectacular or ground-breaking.

Combat has received some tweaks as well. Soldier morale is included: you will now see units rout during battle, scampering towards the edge of the map in an act of cowardice. You are also given many more specific commands for your troops, but since there are so many to choose from (stay ten paces back, spread out, hold fire, use blunt weapons), it now takes two button presses to issue one order, doubling the amount of time it takes, which may become an issue in the heat of battle. Mount & Blade: Warband features more realistic combat, meaning you swing and reload weapons much more slowly. While this makes for more stately combat, the result is more frustrating battles when you are surrounded by many foes (a common occurance) since you can’t dispose of them as quickly. You will automatically deflect incoming projectiles and you can pick up weapons from fallen soldiers (nice for archers who always used to run out of arrows), and you can throw weapons in close combat (spear in the face!). Still, the combat has gotten slower, which does not lend itself well to the game in my opinion.

IN CLOSING

The highlight of Mount & Blade: Warband is the multiplayer, and it’s a mixed bag. The game is far more effective when you battle many lesser-skilled opponents in the single-player campaign. But when you are up against similar foes, the powerful combat devolves into a chaotic mess. The game is more enjoyable using coordinated attacks with friends rather than joining a public server where everyone is doing their own thing. That said, there are many instances of satisfying combat to be had, from demounting a riding opponent to picking off enemies from a distance. The blocking system means most one-on-one attacks are impossible to land, leading to a lot of frustration if you don’t work well with others. The game does feature a wide array of multiplayer modes and the class-based combat seems to be balanced where no soldier type of overpowered. The single player game has received subtle, yet negative, changes: the map is bigger (for no reason) requiring more sitting around during transit times and commands require more button presses. But, hey, you can marry (some might consider this a negative, too)! The campaign cannot be played cooperatively, though, and most of the changes actually make the single player game worse. If you play Mount & Blade a lot, you’ll be getting this regardless of what I have to say (thanks for stopping by!). I would feel at lot better if Warband was $20; casual fans should wait until the inevitable Gamer’s Gate or Steam sale to indulge in the enhanced campaign and frenzied multiplayer.

Game du Jour: Week of 19 April 2010

2010-04-16T12:00:00.001-04:00

Game du Jour: Week of 19 April 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. April 19th: 45% off on The Adventures of Mary Ann: Lucky Pirates

Tue. April 20th: 45% off on Mystery Case Files: Dire Grove [Game review] Definitely worth it!

Wed. April 21st: 65% off on Heartwild Solitaire: Book Two

Thu. April 22nd: 65% off on Mahjongg Dimensions Deluxe

Fri. April 23rd: 45% off on The Palace Builder

Sat. April 24th: 65% off on Vampireville

Sun. April 25th: 65% off on Kuros

Lead and Gold: Gangs of the Wild West Review

2010-04-14T16:00:00.001-04:00

Lead and Gold: Gangs of the Wild West Review

Lead and Gold: Gangs of the Wild West, developed by Fatshark and published by Paradox Interactive.

The Good: Area buffs and mobile respawn points encourage teamwork, several game modes, four distinct classes, short brutal combat, weapons and maps evoke historical setting, inexpensive

The Not So Good: Control scheme requires unnecessary button holding, no dedicated servers, only six maps

What say you? This low-cost western shooter emphasizes team coordination with distinctive gameplay: 6/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Yeehaw! No, I am not talking about the unincorporated community in Osceola County, Florida, I’m talking about cowboys! There simply aren’t enough Western games on the PC, as exemplified by a lone entry in the great Out of Eight pantheon. I like the online shooters, so what better way to visit the neglected Old West than shooting other cowboys in the face. Lead and Gold: Gangs of the Wild West features just that, a struggle for gold that may or may not involve lead (spoiler alert: it does). This is Paradox Interactive’s first foray into the evil world of console gaming, but the developers at Fatshark were nice enough to release the game on the PC first, and at a low price tag of $15. How does it stack up against other team-based shooters?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

The graphics of Lead and Gold are quite good, especially for a $15 game. The environments in which the game takes place all have nice attention to detail, with animated mills and varied terrain that harkens the historical setting well. The buildings are plenty detailed as well, and the wooden structures like ripe for intense firefights. The characters are nice, too: each of the game’s four classes have distinctive models (the game is in third person) that exhibit good animations when moving and switching between weapons. The game also has some nice effects, with cherry-red blood, explosions, and tracers a-plenty. I was pleased with the graphics in Lead and Gold. The sound design isn’t bad, either, with powerful weapon effects and the occasional rootin’-tootin’ (“no spelling suggestions”…I bet not) canned saying. The game also features some subtle background music that fits the overall theme of the game so well that I hardly noticed it and had to play the game again specifically to evaluate the tunes. Lead and Gold far exceeds its $15 price tag in terms of graphics and sound.

ET AL.

Lead and Gold is a team-based online third person shooter, centered around (a) lead and (b) gold. The game borrows match types from several other titles, although it changes things up by replacing a flag with a bag o’ money. There are six game modes and each are slightly different. Robbery is an assault mode where the attackers must carry gold bags from the defenders’ base. Greed is a capture the flag mode where both teams must carry a single gold bag back to their base. Conquest involves occupying three map zones in sequential order, while powder keg mode entails blowing up certain points of interest. There is also the usual team deathmatch mode called shootout and a cooperative defense game against AI bots for two players. Most games consist of two rounds, where sides are alternated to be fair. I like how the developers have changed up some rules to make classic game modes at least somewhat fresher: gold is heavy so people who carry it are slowed, and powder kegs can be blown up in transit, making them a dangerous commodity to transport. There are only six maps to play on (and powder keg and robbery only support two of them), but they are designed well enough and provide variety (large open spaces, mines, buildings) to keep things interesting. Lead and Gold supports up to ten players (five-on-five), but the maps are sized so that a smaller player count (four players or so) isn’t detrimental to the game experience. There isn’t any single player action to speak of, other than a brief tutorial against AI bots to explain the controls. Being a multiplayer-centric title, then, it surprises me that Lead and Gold lacks dedicated servers: there are the occasional connection issues, as you would expect with peer-to-peer hosting. I think that’s the reason why the maximum player count is kept so low: people simply can’t host more than ten at a time.

While you would think a control scheme for a shooter would be historically defined for any PC game, Lead and Gold includes a poor translation of controls clearly designed for a console gamepad. The problems manifest themselves twice: first, the “zoom” button (use required by all but one of the classes) must be held down instead of offering a toggle option. Secondly, there is a key that must be held down while pressing “fire” to activate your trait ability. Simply binding it to a button (“Q” for example) without having to hold it down would have worked just fine for setting traps or setting dynamite; the limitations shows the developers tried to cram the controls onto an inferior console gamepad. Unfortunately, neither of these options can be changed. Apart from that, though, Lead and Gold rarely has significant issues. The interface is designed well, clearly indicating important locations on your display, and there aren’t any other usability problems to speak of.

Lead and Gold features four classes of characters, each with different abilities and strengths. The blaster is the short-ranged class, with a powerful shotgun and dynamite. The gunslinger gets a short-to-medium-range revolver that can be fired quickly. The deputy is medium-to-long-range with the ability to spot enemy units for allies. And the trapper is the sniper who can lay traps. The game maps are varied enough where each class gets a location that highlights their attributes. Each class also has a buff that is automatically applied to surrounding troops: blasters provide improved armor, gunslingers better accuracy, deputies enhance damage, and trappers offer more critical hits. Additionally, being near others also heals you over time. Experience earned by shooting others and completing game objectives levels your character up, enhancing your particular buff. Buffs do not stack, so it benefits everyone to have one person in each class; a listing of the number of players in each class on the selection screen would remove guesswork in this aspect of the game. The synergy system rewards working together as a group, since everyone benefits from sticking together. The trapper is an inappropriate class for these benefits, however, as long-range sniping lends itself towards solitary confinement.

Combat in Lead and Gold is short and brutal: the semi-automatic weapons all deliver a punch and seem to be well-balanced, as each class is powerful at their optimal range. Weapons are more accurate when you are stationary, which seems realistic enough to me. Lead and Gold is a matter of playing your class correctly and coordinating with your team in order to maximize damage. Since you can revive teammates who are injured but not dead, being near your teammates is important. The game could do a better job clearly showing whether you are dead or simply incapacitated, though. Fortunately, Lead and Gold does a good job placing you with your teammates, as someone can carry around a respawn flag where others can appear; this really helps to coordinate your efforts and also significantly cuts down on travel time each time you die. Lead and Gold does not have voice chat, though, but since the objectives are straightforward enough, good communication is not necessary for good organization. A couple of other wrinkles to the gameplay include powder kegs that can be exploded and the removal of fall damage, which works to the game’s benefit. It's clear that teams that work together will win, which is the goal of any good team-based shooter.

IN CLOSING

Lead and Gold is a very nice team-based shooter that differentiates itself in several areas. First is the setting: the Old West theme is strong throughout the game, from detailed levels to convincing characters and weapons. The game also features a number of game modes culled from a variety of other titles, slightly adjusted to fit the theme: straightforward deathmatch, capture the flag (gold in this case), assault, and conquest. Although the game only includes six maps, each landscape is detailed enough and provides multiple paths to each objective location where repetition isn’t an issue. The lack of dedicated servers, however, can become an issue if the host is a poor server. The four classes are balanced nicely, from the short-range blaster to the long-range trapper. The buffs each unit grants to others, coupled with the mobile spawn point a team member can carry, helps to keep players working together; this is far more effective that simply saying “work together!” and not funneling people towards that goal. The old-school weapons mean gory combat, where only a couple of shots are required for death. This actually works quite well with the lower player count and respawn locations, providing intense battles over territory. The controls could use some PC makeovers, as using your special abilities and iron sights require simultaneously held buttons. Still, fans of team-based shooters will find a unique setting and some nice features to promote team-based play.

Facebook’s Jewel Comes to PC: Bejeweled Blitz

2010-04-14T12:00:00.003-04:00

Facebook’s Jewel Comes to PC: Bejeweled Blitz

I’m a BB-holic, a Bejeweled Blitz-holic. I couldn’t stop playing the game over winter break until I finally set a resolution to break free. I played one day in the first week of January and haven’t touched it since.

Well, Popcap Games — the company behind the addiction — has released a Bejeweled Blitz for Windows. You don’t have to be on Facebook to play it. You don’t have to be connected to the Internet to play it.

The Windows version offers:

Full screen play.

Ability to play without an Internet connection.

More control over your screen size.

More audio sound and effects.

One million coins for “Blitz Boosts,” power ups and score-stimulating effects (must buy the game from Popcap to get the coins and use with Facebook Connect).

48 achievement badges to earn.

Connect Facebook from the game’s main menu and play the game from the PC without having to open a Web browser. The game will publish high scores and star medals to your Facebook page when logged in Facebook.

You can download a free trial of Bejeweled Blitz, or buy the game.

Game du Jour: Week of 12 April 2010

2010-04-14T12:00:00.001-04:00

Game du Jour: Week of 12 April 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. April 12th: 65% off on Whisper of a Rose: Gold

Tue. April 13th: 60% off on Dawn’s Light

Wed. April 14th: 65% off on Green Moon

Thu. April 15th: 50% off on My Life Story

Fri. April 16th: 65% off on Super Granny 5

Sat. April 17th: 60% off on Lilly and Sasha: Curse of the Immortals

Sun. April 18th: 45% off on Diner Dash 5: Boom [Diner Dash 5 review]

Game du Jour: Week of 8 March 2010

2010-04-14T08:00:00.005-04:00

Game du Jour: Week of 8 March 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. March 8th: 50% off on House Racers

Tue. March 9th: 50% off on New Star Tennis

Wed. March 10th: 100% off on Space Spy – Free Game

Thu. March 11th: 45% off on Azada: Ancient Magic

Fri. March 12th: 65% off on Youda Legend: The Golden Bird of Paradise

Sat. March 13th: 60% off on Shaman Odyssey: Tropic Adventure

Sun. March 14th: 50% off on Hidden Identity – Chicago Blackout

PC Game Review: Diner Dash 5: Boom!

Can you guess what happens in Diner Dash 5: Boom!? Diner Dash Flo indeed sees her diner go ka-boom! in Flo decides to provide a health conscious menu, so she posts a sign that says, “Fat-Free Breakfast.” Someone removes the “Fat-” on the the sign to show “Free Breakfast.” Naturally, when her diner opens, the whole town rushes in and destroys the diner. The nasty Mr. Big comes in and announces he has a standing contract with the city that any lot that goes unused for a week becomes his.

Hal, a contractor and huge Flo diner fan, offers to help her rebuild her diner within one week. While he gets to work, Flo goes from neighborhood to neighborhood running outdoor diners to help Hal with the rebuilding. As he progresses, he’ll ask you what design and color you want for the diner. The diner you customize will appear near the end of the game.

The game play remains the same in that you fill in as Flo. You’ll take orders, deliver the dishes, clean up, fulfill customer requests for special snacks and fix problems that pop up. You’ll met new customer types as well as some from past Diner Dashes. As usual, customer personalities can drive your strategy. Lawyers and working women have little patience, so you probably want to serve them first in a chain. One customer type takes his time. Librarians and bookworms like the quiet while the working men make a lot of noise talking on their cell phones.

Gain bonus points by matching customers’ colors with the seats and doing a bunch of the same activity in a row (chaining). For example, deliver the check to as many customers as possible ready to check out. The more you chain the same task, the higher your bonus.

For each level, you need to earn a minimum amount to advance. Those who like to challenge themselves can work toward the expert scores. After all, the more money you earn, the more you have for shopping for power ups before starting the next level. Power ups let you speed up activities whether it’s Flo getting around or Cookie cooking faster. But there’s one new type of power up — the kind that’s only good for one level, if you can afford it. You can hire Quinn of Wedding Dash to fill up the salad bar, get another set of hands for carrying things or a hostess to keep the people in line happy.

Oh, that’s right, we have the salad bar element. Sometimes diners choose to go to the salad bar instead of ordering from the menu. You need to drag the salad folks to the salad bar while ensuring the salad bar remains full. If one column of food is empty, the diners can’t move on.

Another new feature is Facebook. Diner Dash 5 can send your game updates to your Facebook page. You don’t have to use the Facebook feature. You can also win virtual gifts that you can give to a Facebook friend. While a cool feature, I didn’t know anyone who is a Diner Dash fan. If you send it to someone who doesn’t have Diner Dash 5, it’s useless.

One big improvement in Diner Dash 5 is that it’s easier. I could never get far in past games because they were very (yes, I am using this modifier) hard. This one, I did. Diner Dash pros — don’t fret… believe me, there are challenges in the game. This game does a great job of easing the challenge while retaining it for advanced players.

I still have problems with chaining at times. I’d be running all over, click, click, click only to find something failed and that failure can mean the difference between standard score and expert score. Plus, snacks break the chain. I don’t think that’s fair.

You get a lot of game value for the time. Once you play through the game, you can replay levels to reach expert scores. As of this time, only the Collector’s Edition is available and it requires a Big Fish Games Club Membership. The regular one — read: cheaper and no extras — will be available later. Extras include:

Advanced levels: Extra game play for those who love a good challenge.

Strategy guide: Walkthroughs to help you conquer levels and reach Expert scores.

Story comics: Review the story, which is divided into scenes. I wish it came with fast forward, previous and pause. The game plays the whole scene and repeats.

Wallpapers: Six screens for your background.

Screensaver: One animated screensaver, but it doesn’t let you preview how it looks.

“Flo Over Time”: Looks back to the history of Diner Dash.

The extras may or may not be worth it. You can get walkthroughs from forums around the web. You can review the story by going back to previous levels. I rarely change screensavers and wallpapers, so these had no value to me.

Download iner Dash 5.

FTC disclosure: Review based on expired review copy received from publisher.

Game du Jour: Week of 1 March 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. March 1st: 50% off on Imperial City: The Crown of the King

Tue. March 2nd: 50% off on New Star Soccer 2010

Wed. March 3rd: 60% off on Knight of Dulcinea

Thu. March 4th: 60% off on Be Rich

Fri. March 5th: 45% off on Treasure Seekers: The Enchanted Canvases

Sat. March 6th: 65% off on Magic Maze

Sun. March 7th: 65% off on Escape From Lost Island

Game du Jour: Week of 29 March 2010

2010-04-14T08:00:00.003-04:00

Game du Jour: Week of 29 March 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. March 29th: 50% off on Dark Souls

Tue. March 30th: 50% off on Dark Souls II

Wed. March 31st: 50% off on Kara’s Quest

Thu. April 1st: 50% off on Last Heroes

Fri. April 2nd: 65% off on The Serpent of Isis

Sat. April 3rd: 65% off on Miss Teri Tale 3 – Danger Next Door

Sun. April 4th: 65% off on 1 Penguin 100 Cases

Game du Jour: Week of 22 March 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. February 22nd: 65% off on Million Dollar Quest

Tue. February 23rd: 60% off on Amazing Pyramids

Wed. February 24th: 50% off on Leeloo’s Talent Agency

Thu. February 25th: 65% off on Shutter Island

Fri. February 26th: 65% off on The Dracula Files

Sat. February 27th: 50% off on Amazing Adventures The Caribbean Secret

Sun. February 28th: 65% off on Mystery of the Lunar Archipelago

Game du Jour: Week of 15 March 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. February 15th: 50% off on Born Into Darkness

Tue. February 16th: 65% off on The Clumsys 2: Butterfly Effect

Wed. February 17th: 65% off on Evoly

Thu. February 18th: 50% off on Many Years Ago

Fri. February 19th: 65% off on Farm Mania 2

Sat. February 20th: 65% off on Azteca

Sun. February 21st: 65% off on Green Valley – Fun on the Farm

Diner Dash 5: Boom! Regular Version Released

The regular version of Diner Dash 5: Boom! is now available for $6.99. Here is the review of Diner Dash 5: Boom!

The Collector’s Edition includes:

Exclusive advanced levels for extra gameplay

An interactive strategy guide

Behind the scenes concept art

Animated screensaver and wallpapers

“Flo Over Time” historical retrospective

Colony Defense Review

2010-04-14T08:00:00.001-04:00

Colony Defense Review

Colony Defense, developed and published by Mana Bomb Games Studio on Gamer’s Gate.

The Good: Challenging, action packed with almost constant building, enemy resistance prevents over-building a particular turret

The Not So Good: Planetary setting adds nothing since enemies are path restricted, terrible control scheme, slow linear unlocks, few weapons, insignificant upgrades

What say you? A very traditional tower defense game with wasted potential that adds nothing to the genre: 3/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

As Al Gore continues to warm the Earth in order to sell more books, it is imperative that we reach out to other planets in our Solar System, so that we may pollute them into submission. I suggest colonizing Uranus (never gets old). Of course, we must defend these newly founded colonies against alien attack, and such is the premise of Colony Defense, an entry in the increasingly popular tower defense genre. We've seen games that range from very good to pretty good, successfully avoiding poor entries in the pantheon of tower defense games. Does our streak continue?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

The presentation of Colony Defense is pretty much what you would expect for an independent game: adequate. The game reminds me of Light of Altair, taking place on a series of planets, but Colony Defense is worse off. The planetary textures are OK, although the planets are usually monochromatic and indistinct. Of course, you can’t make a sphere terribly varied, so some leeway should be granted here. The enemies have some nice models and you quickly learn the capabilities of each combatant based on appearance. The backgrounds are typical space stuff, and the paths the enemies follow are discrete yet subtle, blending well into the topography of the planet. Of course, having them move through actual canyons or valleys would make more sense, both visually and realistically. The sound design is acceptable, thanks to background music that I almost found entertaining. The sound effects are pretty basic: lasers and explosions that sound appropriate enough. What you get is what you expect in Colony Defense.

ET AL.

Colony Defense roots itself in a traditional tower defense game: there’s aliens afoot, and it’s up to you so construct static defenses and stop their unending quench for destruction. The game comes with thirty-four planets that offer different paths the enemies take; all of them take place on a spherical planet, so one planet looks almost the same as another. The paths almost always converge, granting you a choke point designed for maximum death. There are usually multiple spawn points and multiple bases to defend. There is a set amount of enemies that must be destroyed before the level ends, and you are usually allowed ten aliens enter your base before epically failing. The thirty-four levels, despite being displayed on an ever-expanding triangle, unlock in a strictly linear order, as do the weapons: disappointing. The weapons unlock slowly, partially due to the fact that there are only ten. Every level should feel different, or else why have it? Plants vs. Zombies was very good as adding something new each level, but Colony Defense suffers from an excessive amount of monotony. Good performance is rewarded with talent points, which can be spent on insignificant upgrades to tower cost, damage, and firing rate. Really, am I going to notice a 2% increase in credit income?

Significantly distressing is the absolutely horrible control scheme employed by Colony Defense. Clearly designed for a console controller (which is always an indicator of failure), you can use the mouse but not to place objects on the screen: the target reticule is always at the center, and you must scroll to place instead of using the mouse. I cannot express how limited and truly annoying this design choice is. The problem is only exacerbated by the fact that the spherical maps must be scrolled constantly: your hands will be tied to WASD to navigate around (you can’t move the mouse to the edge of the screen to scroll, of course). You get used to it after a while, but I still want to use the mouse to place towers anywhere in view, not have to scroll around. Yes, “designed for a gamepad” is simply a euphemism for “crappy.”

Probably the most disappointing aspect of Colony Defense is the use (or lack thereof) of the planetary setting. Enemies are still confined to paths: although there are multiple paths on each map, you can still predict with certainty where aliens will appear. Why, then, does the game take place on a planet? Even flying units are confined to the paths (which makes no sense); at least the developers could have placed the units in canyons or something to at least justify the restriction. There is simply no difference between playing Colony Defense and a traditional tower defense game on a 2-D map, except this game requires a lot more scrolling (with the keyboard, of course). The turrets you place come in several flavors: lasers for medium ranged attack, flame throwers for short ranged attack, artillery for slow but powerful attack, and air to air weapons. The six basic weapons can be accentuated with boost towers that can slow the enemies down or improve range, speed, and damage of nearby turrets. And that’s it: you’ll run through the gamut of options pretty quickly, and Colony Defense becomes a matter of slowing down units and placing turrets at choke points. You can’t overlap turrets and each has an area of effect that is clearly shown while placing a turret, which is helpful. Cash is earned by destroying enemies, which can be used to purchase turrets and upgrades. If you place too many of a certain type of turret, enemies become resistant to them, requiring you to place other turrets or upgrade existing ones, which improves range and firepower. Once you place your turrets, it’s just a matter of waiting for things to die. You can use an orbital cannon (firing on the target reticule that’s always fixed to the center of the screen) to eliminate pesky units, but it’s slow and underpowered enough to make it meaningless. Humorously, units disappear before the cannon shot hits them, which initially confused me. Levels can be complex enough where you need to constantly move, so there isn't a lot of waiting, and each level is short enough to keep the action flowing. Still, Colony Defense doesn’t offer anything above and beyond any other tower defense game, so there’s real no reason to play it.

IN CLOSING

Simply put, Colony Defense should have used the planet setting to better effect. What we get is a very standard tower defense game that takes place on spherical maps that require you to constantly move the camera. Enemies are still confined to paths (even flying ones!) so their movements and behaviors become quite predictable. The game is challenging, though, and you are busy constructing new turrets most of the time. You are given six weapon turrets, but really they are repeats of two themes: slow and powerful or fast and weak. Four support turrets are also granted to slow down the enemies or provide small bonuses, but your strategic options feel very limited. The maps are quite repetitive and never distinctive, offering slightly different paths that cross, providing easy choke points to defend. Like most tower defense games, Colony Defense becomes a matter of simply placing and upgrading structures. Doing this is more frustrating than it should be, since the controls are absolutely horrible. Why support a mouse if you can’t use it to place objects? Restricting interaction to a static reticule constantly positioned at the center of the screen is archaic and cumbersome. Because of the proliferation of tower defense games on the PC, a new title should provide a unique experience (like Creeper World) or a highly polished one (like Defense Grid), but Colony Defense does neither and fails to capitalize on its unique setting by relying on traditional linear enemy paths.

Game du Jour: Week of 12 April 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. April 12th: 65% off on Whisper of a Rose: Gold

Tue. April 13th: 60% off on Dawn’s Light

Wed. April 14th: 65% off on Green Moon

Thu. April 15th: 50% off on My Life Story

Fri. April 16th: 65% off on Super Granny 5

Sat. April 17th: 60% off on Lilly and Sasha: Curse of the Immortals

Sun. April 18th: 45% off on Diner Dash 5: Boom [Diner Dash 5 review]

Facebook’s Jewel Comes to PC: Bejeweled Blitz

The Windows version offers:

Full screen play.

Ability to play without an Internet connection.

More control over your screen size.

More audio sound and effects.

One million coins for “Blitz Boosts,” power ups and score-stimulating effects (must buy the game from Popcap to get the coins and use with Facebook Connect).

48 achievement badges to earn.

Connect Facebook from the game’s main menu and play the game from the PC without having to open a Web browser. The game will publish high scores and star medals to your Facebook page when logged in Facebook.

You can download a free trial of Bejeweled Blitz, or buy the game.

Game du Jour: Week of 5 April 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. April 5th: 65% off on Empress of the Deep

Tue. April 6th: 65% off on My Kingdom for the Princess

Wed. April 7th: 100% off on Hidden Expedition: Devil’s Triangle

Thu. April 8th: 65% off on Mishap: An Accidental Haunting

Fri. April 9th: 65% off on Jane’s Realty 2

Sat. April 10th: 60% off on Unwell Mel

Sun. April 11th: 45% off on Alice’s Tea Cup Madness

Distant Worlds Review

2010-04-05T16:00:00.001-04:00

Distant Worlds Review

Distant Worlds, developed by Code Force and published by Matrix Games.

The Good: Gigantic living galaxies to explore with up to 50,000 planets, smart automation or advisor guidance of tasks, self-regulating economy simply requires protection, robust starting options with twenty different races, fairly easy access to tons of information, all-inclusive ship and base design, per-component combat damage, intelligence operations for sneaky types, customization with game editor

The Not So Good: No multiplayer, general instructions and limitations for automated military ships would be nice, nuanced learning curve

What say you? Grand strategy and classic 4X mechanics combine in a vibrant world made easier with optional automation: 8/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Another game set in space gives me yet another opportunity to make a joke about Uranus. Oh, what a gift from the gods the name of that planet is, far more hilarious than, say, Neptune or OGLE-TR-211. So let’s get the formalities out of the way first: Distant Worlds, 4X game, in space, huge galaxies, macro-scale, send a probe to Uranus looking for black holes. And, we’re finished. On to the review!

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Distant Worlds features decent graphics for a title in the 4X genre. The game is entirely in 2-D, which makes it easy to import custom bitmaps for a more personal (or copyright-infringing) feel, but it also produces rougher zooming and less dynamic effects. The overall look obviously pales in comparison to more flashy titles like Sins of a Solar Empire, but it is similar to more graphically conservative games like Armada 2526 and Space Empires. The ships do rotate and show some progressive damage, but the weapons are simple effects at best. The art for the aliens looks good: while static and not animated, it does create some interesting species to interact with. Planets and asteroids look like, well, planets and asteroids, revolving around their respective stars in an elegant ballet of elegance. The background fits the space setting, and can be easily modified if desired. Despite the 2-D graphics, Distant Worlds does need a high-end machine to smoothly simulate large galaxies: it’s certainly playable on modest systems like mine, but zoomed out the game displays at only one frame per second. The sound design is functional: appropriate effects when important in-game events occur, and music that is appropriate for the theme. Graphics certainly aren’t the primary focus of independent games like Distant Worlds, but they are functional and that’s all that ultimately matters.

ET AL.

Distant Worlds starts out like any other 4X strategy game: a small empire must expand throughout the stars, colonizing planets and waging war in an epic struggle for survival. Except it doesn’t: you can start out as a feeble newcomer, but Distant Worlds gives you comprehensive options for your nation including age, meaning you can start out as a mature empire with colonization already completed and conflicts soon on the horizon. This is great for players who prefer a more military-focused game and like to rush through the colonization part of a game, since you can skip it altogether. Additional options include the galaxy shape, size (from 100 to 1,400 stars), frequency of independent aliens, AI aggression, research speed, and amount of creeps and pirates. Distant Worlds gives you twenty races to choose from, each with different reproduction rates, intelligence, aggressiveness, cautiousness, friendliness, and trustworthiness. Most races have a more appropriate form of government to choose from the twelve available; these affect approval ratings, population growth, war weariness, research speed, corruption, maintenance costs, troop recruitment, and trade income. Your empire and those of your soon-to-be enemies can be given a specific starting location, home system quality, and tech level to make for more varied encounters. In fact, Distant Worlds includes several “quick start” options for fast or epic games where you can be the lead empire dealing with numerous hostile underlings. You can even edit your galaxy while playing from within the game, a neat feature that I’m surprised other single player space games haven’t allowed. Speaking of, yes, Distant Worlds is only for single players, but honestly the AI is decent enough and the universe is alive, which makes it feel like a multiplayer title, just without the connection issues. While Distant Worlds is one of those games that works without victory conditions, you can specify a percentage of total colonies, population, or economy that can result in triumph. You can continue to play forever, though, even after the victory conditions have been fulfilled. Learning the game can be difficult and involve several play-throughs before nailing the basics, since mechanics in Distant Worlds are quite different from other 4X strategy titles (automation and fuel, namely); the tutorial does a decent job explaining the basics, while the Galactopedia gives beneficial context-sensitive help at any time by pressing F1.

The main feature of Distant Worlds (other than the massive scale) is the use of automation to assist in running your empire. This does not mean that everything is done for you, however, as you can disable any of the options as you wish. You cannot, however, disable transporting goods in the economy (as this is done by private vessels), but honestly this process is so tedious I can’t imagine anyone wanting to worry about it. Most options can be set to fully automate, human controlled, or a happy medium where advisors give suggestions on what to do next. What are those options, you ask? Good thing you said something, as I spent some time typing up a list: colony tax rates, ship design, agent recruitment, troop recruitment, fleet formation, colonization, ship construction, intelligence agent missions, attacks against enemies, sending diplomatic gifts, treaties, and declaring war and trade sanctions. The great part of the automation is that Distant Worlds can appeal to different gamers with different tastes. Want to concentrate on mining and exploration? Great, automate the military and diplomacy. Prefer to design custom ships? Have at it. And so on. In addition, you can even give input in an automated area for tweaks along the way, like designing a custom ship or signing trade pacts; just because it’s automated doesn’t mean it’s locked from your input. Automation is a fantastic feature that allows you to make Distant Worlds your own, and allows you to run a massive empire without getting completely overwhelmed.

I found the interface to take some time to comprehend, as I had the habit of finding information through the most inefficient means possible as I was learning the game. The two key features are the expansion planner and the selection panel. First, the expansion planner lists all of your resource needs and any planets that can be colonized, the resources they would produce, their size, proximity to capital, and native population (if any). You can also see a list of planets that can be mined for resources, either ones your empire demands or would make for good galactic trade. It’s a very, very handy application that makes expanding throughout the 1,000 star galaxies (with 5-10 planets in each solar system) manageable. The selection panel, which display information about the currently highlighted object, has tabs that can be used to cycle through your planets, star bases, constructors, exploration vessels, fleets, or idle ships. There is also a gigantic list of all ships and bases, which can be filtered to show specific types and any information column (type, firepower, location, fleet) can be used for sorting. Also notable is the mini-map with pre-set zoom levels (planet, solar system, sector, entire galaxy) for getting around. Some of the information is sequestered in odd locations, like placing your resource needs on the expansion planner, but once you learn where everything is and the fastest way to access it, navigating through Distant Worlds becomes easy.

Step one: explore (step two: rinse, step three: repeat). Because of the huge hugeness of the galaxies in Distant Worlds, you must explore early and often by sending out exploration ships. You can set them to fully automate, or do what I do and tell them to search everything in a specific sector (I don’t fully trust the AI to do it as efficiently as I could) and assign a new sector when finished. You are allowed to move anywhere in space at any time, in contrast to more restrictive games like Armada 2526 or Sins of a Solar Empire. The galaxy is populated with tons of planets (continental, gas, volcanic, ice, desert, swampy) and other objects (nebula clouds); your race can only colonize a couple of types, which eliminates a lot (but not too many) potential sites for development. Those that are unsuitable for colonization can still be mined for their juicy resources, though. Colonies grow by having low tax rates and a high development level, improved by providing luxury goods. The universe of Distant Worlds feels alive, much more along the lines of a space adventure game with NPCs going about their business without your input. Most (if not all), 4X games are a barren wasteland of military vessels, but Distant Worlds is much more convincing with tons of traders and miners shuttling around your distant worlds. And I must also mention the fact that planets and asteroids actually revolve around their stars (yay!), and there are space creatures and pirates out in the dark reaches of the universe that must be dealt with. Exploration also comes with events, half of which are good (a new ship, money, or technology) and half of which are bad (lots of monsters). The living nature of the galaxy and extensive size makes exploration in Distant Worlds seem less tedious than in other 4X titles.

Unlike most 4X games, both the economy and research are completely automated with no direct input. What you can do, however, is support them through auxiliary actions: colonizing and mining specific planets and keeping trade routes safe from pirates and space monsters. With many other things to worry about in the universe, this is actually a very nice approach, and adds to the immersive nature of the game by featuring lots of little private freighters flying about you don’t need to worry about. Sources of income include taxing the private citizens, sales taxes from trade, citizens purchasing ships from you (automated, of course), and trade agreements. Finding a balance in taxation levels is key, as too low will reduce your funding while too high will cause colonies to revolt; taxation (like most other things) can be handled by the AI for you. Distant Worlds features a ton of resources that are required for ships, space ports, and individuals; choosing the right targets for colonization and mining and making sure goods are protected while being transported is how you keep your economy humming along. As for technology, research projects are completed at random, but you can guide the results by placing labs that emphasize four different fields of research (energy, high tech, industrial, and weapons) around your planets. The seventeen different areas of research provide gradual improvements in components available in ship design, making your empire a more formidable opponent.

Before you haphazardly invade every opposing empire in the game, you might want to conduct some diplomacy first. Relations with other nations are affected by ongoing trade, government type, gifts, hostile actions, and static alien ratings (like friendliness). You can enter trade agreements to acquire precious resources, mutual defense treaties, or impose trade sanctions. You can also trade technologies, money, or colonies; the game gives a numerical value of each item once it’s added for easier negotiating. The interface, however, doesn’t explain why another empire rejects a trade agreement, leaving you to infer the cause from the relationship score. The diplomatic options in Distant Worlds are not terribly original and somewhat limited in their scope overall. If you want to decay relations, several intelligence operations are available for your agents to carry out. You can sabotage construction, incite colonial rebellions, or steal maps and research. Agents given a longer amount of time to complete their mission will have a higher success rate, and the interface specifically states the chance of victory.

Distant Worlds includes space ships. Weird, right? They cost both an initial investment for construction and a monthly maintenance, so keeping an eye on your budget is important. There are many types of ships in the game, from military vessels (capital, frigate, destroyer, cruiser, escort) classified by size to space ports (defense, ship construction, research) to explorers and transports. An extensive aspect of Distant Worlds is ship design: rather than having set hulls where a limited number of parts are plugged in, the game just has a few minimum requirements (engines, life support) and lets you fully customize your vessels otherwise. The game helpfully provides hints (add shields, dummy!) and warnings to assist in making functional designs, and can filter out obsolete components for a shorter list of items. You can also specify a ship’s behavior against stronger and weaker opponents, during invasions, and when to retreat. You want components? You got them: area weapons, armor, beam weapons, cargo storage, colonization modules, combat targeting, command center, commerce center, construction yard, ECM, damage control, docking bays, energy collectors, engines, fuel storage, habitation modules, hyperdrive, life support, long range scanners, manufacturers, medical scanners, passenger storage, proximity arrays, reactors, recreation centers, research labs, resource extractors, resource profile sensors, shields, stealth, torpedoes, and vectoring engines can all be added. Yes, that list made my review significantly longer. In short, if you like to design ships, Distant Worlds has robust features. And if you don’t, just let the AI do it: they do a good job, although the results are less efficient and more scripted than if you designed them manually. You can, of course, add in the occasional design and let the AI worry about designing and upgrading the less exciting ships for a happy medium.

Ships can be ordered to move, patrol, attack, blockade, escort, build, colonize, explore, escape, retrofit, retire, repair, refuel, or stop. Because of the size of your galaxy and the number of ships that must be constructed, most of your vessels should (but don’t have to) be automated, and I assign a number of ships to manually-controlled fleets, which can be easily accessed using the selection panel tabs. Usually, I have my more powerful military ships assigned to a couple of fleets and use those to engage the enemy and pick off pesky pirates and space creatures; the automation does a good job assigning patrol and escort missions to keep your economy humming along. Invading enemy colonies is as simple as bringing along a troop transport filled with eager marines and right-clicking on the target. Space combat is just as simple: just point and shoot. Ships can be damaged on a per-component basis, which is a cool amount of detail. Ships do not earn experience or level-up during combat, however; while the ship properties should remain the same (more fights doesn’t arbitrarily strengthen your armor), I could see making ships “smarter” by having more experienced captains at the helm. Ships could be more situationally aware, as there are many instances of nearby enemies that are ignored by ships who aren’t given a specific “attack” or “patrol” order.

One of the key concepts of Distant Worlds when it comes to ships is fuel. Since you are free to quickly travel anywhere in the galaxy along any path, there must be some strategic limitation, and that limitation is fuel. Ships must recharge at a friendly base or a deployed resupply ship (done by giving the “deploy” command on a gas giant containing the fuel your ships’ engines require) or they can’t fire weapons or move very fast. Automated ships will do this on their own, but manually controlled fleets must be specifically instructed to refuel every so often. Initially, you fee like you are giving up control by automating half of your military. But then you realize that’s what the game wants you to do, so the smaller ships can escort miners and merchants without you having to worry about it. The best course of action it seems is to keep one or two fleets under manual control for pirate hunting, monster killing, and eventually planetary invasion. I would like to know what automated ships are doing: they AI seems to do a good split between issuing escort and patrol missions, but an optional list of preferred patrol locations would be a nice addition. Newly constructed ships always start automated; I would like to see an option to automatically assign them to a fleet (like a rally point) or place them under manual control from the start. Distant Worlds could also use no-fly zones for automated military ships: too often they have entered territory owned by other nations and caused wars to start without my intervention.

Because Distant Worlds lacks multiplayer of any kind, it better have strong AI, and it does. Your competition will provoke you with small, isolated attacks on your mines, trade routes, and outlying colonies. Alien races will also attack vulnerable systems with little to no defenses. Additionally, the always-automated freighters and merchants and optionally-automated ships behave intelligently, with the small caveats I mentioned earlier. While AI is never a substitute for unpredictable humans, it does a good enough job here. The pace of the game always gives you something to do: there is no waiting around for stuff to happen, with pirates, creatures, attacks, mining, new ship designs, colonization, diplomacy, and trade routes to worry about. Most 4X games feature a lot of “end turn” at the beginning of the game, but Distant Worlds offers constant action, and you can even skip the initial colonization in the game settings and start with a developed imperial power if you choose. In short (too late!), Distant Worlds lets you play how you want, highlighting the parts of 4X games you like and leaving the tedium to automation.

IN CLOSING

What saves Distant Worlds from being completely unmanageable is the optional automation the game features. This allows you to focus on the parts of the game that interests you the most, whether it be the military, ship design, diplomacy, colonization, exploration, economy, or intelligence. Of course, this may left you feeling like your empire is being run without your input, but you can always intervene in any aspect of the game that is being directed by the AI and disable it if you want more direct control. Honestly, running an empire spanning hundreds of star systems and thousands of planets would be too daunting and frustrating otherwise. It seems better to automate most things and intervene when necessary (move troops, build a new ship design, conduct diplomacy). That said, when another race asks you to leave their system, there should be an option to prohibit automated military ships from entering it before war erupts. Distant Worlds features very nice game customization options that are beyond the one-colony norm for the genre: you can start out with a fully colonized system and concentrate on military and economic conflict, rather than wasting your time exploring if you wish. You can also customize the behavior, proximity, and strength of all the alien races, or leave it up to chance. Distant Worlds even lets you edit the galaxy during the game. The interface gives easy access to all of your assets, from the useful expansion planner that makes colonization a breeze to the selection panel where you can cycle through specific ship types easily. The universe of Distant Worlds is alive with activity, with NPC merchants and miners going about their business automatically, leaving you to worry about the big picture: a very nice change of pace from the usually micro-intensive offerings of the 4X genre. You own fleets and bases can be custom designed, choosing from an extensive array of components including weapons, construction yards, fuel storage, life support, research labs, and stealth. Or you can leave the design up to the AI, who tends to produce more scripted but usable offerings and upgrades them as better components become available. The AI puts up a decent fight, invading with force at vulnerable locations when appropriate. People might be miffed that economy and research are both automated, but you can still influence the direction of each by protecting trade routes from pirates and constructing research labs to guide technological advances. It takes some time to learn the game, but this is simply because it is different (in a good way) from other 4X titles. Distant Worlds features uninspired diplomatic options and lacks multiplayer, but these are insignificant complaints in what otherwise is a hallmark 4X strategy title.

Game du Jour: Week of 5 April 2010

2010-04-02T12:00:00.001-04:00

Game du Jour: Week of 5 April 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. April 5th: 65% off on Empress of the Deep

Tue. April 6th: 65% off on My Kingdom for the Princess

Wed. April 7th: 100% off on Hidden Expedition: Devil’s Triangle

Thu. April 8th: 65% off on Mishap: An Accidental Haunting

Fri. April 9th: 65% off on Jane’s Realty 2

Sat. April 10th: 60% off on Unwell Mel

Sun. April 11th: 45% off on Alice’s Tea Cup Madness

GearGrinder Review

2010-04-01T20:00:00.001-04:00

GearGrinder Review

GearGrinder, developed by Targem Games and published by Buka Entertainment and Headup Games on Gamer’s Gate.

The Good: Twelve distinct race types, racing and combat truck modes, weapons and vehicle upgrades

The Not So Good: LAN-only multiplayer, very inconsistent difficulty, push-over AI produces bland repetitive racing, essentially unlimited ammunition makes for dull destruction, obvious weapon upgrade choices, terrible cut scenes

What say you? An impressive array of racing modes is hindered by boring AI, shallow gameplay, and limited multiplayer in this arcade combat racing game: 5/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Now that NASCAR has thankfully filled the void between the end of football season and the beginning of football season, we can turn our attention to the five-month diversion that is auto racing. And what better way to kick off the start of the racing calendar than with a racing game? I surely can’t think of a better way! GearGrinder realistically depicts the exciting and competitive world of truck racing, by placing weapons on semis. That’s how it’s done in real life, right? Let’s blow up some trucks and check out this diesel-fueled take on combat racing games like Death Track.

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

GearGrinder certainly looks and sounds like a budget game, or at least a racing title from, say, 12 years ago. The trucks models are the best aspect of the graphics, consisting of a nice amount of detail, especially when it comes up the various upgrades you can equip on your vehicle. The other cars: not so much. In fact, the explosions are downright disappointing and the repetitive sedans that populate the roadways are, well, repetitive. The default third-person view is terrible, as you can't see over the cab of the truck! The in-cab first-person perspective fares much better, and has the added benefit of a realistic implementation of the user interface on the dash. The circuits are generic caricatures of the U.S., with urban and rural settings with a low amount of detail. GearGrinder also has some shockingly terrible cut scenes with laughably bad voice acting; luckily, you can skip these with a quick press of the escape button. The music can also be bypassed, as you can import your own MP3 to rock out to during your dance of destruction. Overall, I was disappointed in the presentation, considering what competing budget racing games have mustered up.

ET AL.

GearGrinder is a combat racing game where you hop in a truck and shoot and run into other trucks and innocent passers-by. Good family fun! The single player “story” mode involves something about gangs and cops and vehicular homicide; like I stated earlier, I made a conscious effort to skip past all of the cut scenes. Taking place over forty levels spread across six episodes, the highlight of GearGrinder is the numerous racing events you will encounter along the way. In addition to “normal” races where the objective is to finish in first place, there are survival races where the last place driver is eliminated each lap, timed missions where you must destroy enemies or neutral cars for more time, arena missions where you must survive an enemy onslaught in an enclosed space, slalom races with pick-ups on the track (like the gatecrasher mode in DiRT 2), bowling events where you crash into a set of vehicles (eerily similar to FlatOut), times where you control a remote control car equipped with a bomb (eerily similar to Grand Theft Auto), rail shooting events where you control a turret instead of the truck, transporting events where you do not control the speed, destruction events where you inflict damage, protection missions where you protect a friendly vehicle, and boss battles. Impressive, no? Some races begin with a “hot start” timing mini-game, which is conducted like kicking in Madden, adding some more diversity. This variety saves GearGrinder from being complete drudgery.

While the races are organized in a tree, you will only encounter the occasional choice in the next level: a disappointing limitation that becomes an issue when you come across a very difficult level and subsequently get stuck (as I did). You don’t have to win to progress through the campaign, but you do need to at least get the bronze medal; this is sometimes difficult, especially in the timed game modes. You can go back and replay earlier levels using a better-equipped truck to place higher and unlock better parts to make a better-equipped truck. It’s a vicious cycle. Racing games are always fertile ground for multiplayer, and GearGrinder surprisingly has very limited options at your disposal. You can only play over a LAN. Yeah, I know. In addition, you can only enjoy circuit races or arena destruction derbies, limited options considering how many event types are available in the single player campaign. I realize that, in all likelihood, there wouldn’t actually be anyone playing GearGrinder online anyway, but you should still have the option. You can add bots to fill out the field, but then it’s no different than advancing your way through the campaign.

Unlike other combat racing games, GearGrinder has two distinct modes for your vehicle: racing and combat. You can switch between the two during a race: racing mode makes you move faster, while combat modes lets you shoot things at a decreased driving speed. There really is not enough of a transition delay to really make a tactical difference in your approach to a race, but it’s an interesting concept nonetheless. You are given a primary and secondary weapon (which are fired simultaneously with the same button) in which to dispose of those pesky competitors, in addition to spikes for ramming and mines for mining (I assume). Weapons are given essentially unlimited ammunition in the form of rage, accumulated by smashing other cars or just driving along. This really reduces the interest of GearGrinder, as you can just hold down the trigger while in combat mode and then transition back to racing mode when everyone done got blowed up. Upgrades to these weapons and other truck attributes (acceleration, engine, transmission, control, brakes, armor) are earned with gold medals in the events. The upgrades are very obvious choices: they are always positive, increasing the stats of your truck without any tradeoffs. The physics of the game are firmly entrenched in the “arcade” zone: trucks are easy to control and braking never becomes an issue except during hairpin turns. The AI competition is not good, easily beaten in racing events with little effort. Strangely, the requirements for timed missions are disproportionally hard, producing some questionably unpredictable difficulty. Some simple tweaks in the timed mission limits would greatly reduce the annoyance in the game.

IN CLOSING

GearGrinder takes a really fascinating assortment of racing modes, the likes of which we have not seen since FlatOut, and almost completely ruins them. Why, you ask? GearGrinder is plagued by very erratic difficulty: the AI in racing events is not competitive, but the timed events border on impossible. It's hard to get the difficulty right in an arcade racing game like this, so GearGrinder goes for the manic-depressive angle to annoy everyone. That’s too bad, because I was well prepared to give this game a higher score based on the variety of race types, from straight-up races to more destruction-oriented events. The fun stops there, however, as the campaign unfolds in a very linear fashion (despite the presence of a mission tree) and weapon upgrades are no-brainers, as each increases the capabilities of your vehicle with no real drawbacks. I do like the strategic decision of utilizing racing and combat transformations during an event, but this is the only unique aspect of the gameplay. The infinite ammunition causes the shooting in GearGrinder to be quite dull (just spray and pray) and removes any inherent strategy or skill. The final nail in the coffin is LAN-only multiplayer; because of this, GearGrinder must rely on the quality of its single player mode, which unfortunately is too inconsistent to be enjoyable.

Just Cause 2 Review

2010-03-29T16:00:00.001-04:00

Just Cause 2 Review

Just Cause 2, developed by Avalanche Studios and published by Square Enix.

The Good: Grappling hook and parachute produce very unique stunt-based gameplay with over-the-top action, extensive sandbox world to explore and subsequently destroy, large library of upgradable weapons and vehicles

The Not So Good: Repetitive outside of missions, atrocious voice acting, no multiplayer

What say you? An exhilarating action movie come to life: 7/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

First person shooters have been in a realistic mode of late, entrenching themselves in Modern Warfare Battlefields of Bad Company. There’s only so much room for titles like ArmA II and its extreme attachment to reality. Sometimes, you just want to run around and blow crap up. That’s Just Cause 2 in a nutshell: you are recruited to overthrow an evil government by laying waste to fuel tanks and cranes. Makes sense to me! Just Cause 2 comes with two “killer apps”: a grappling hook that can be attached to anything (or between any two objects) and a parachute that can be deployed at any time. That sounds like physics-filled fun and mayhem; does Just Cause 2 provide enough longevity to make tethering a jeep to a helicopter fun each and every time?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

The graphics of Just Cause 2 are generally quite good. First off is the setting: the island of Panau, being a completely fictitious setting, exhibits a dramatic range of climates, from desert to jungle to glaciated. Each of these biomes is littered with tons of detail, from small hamlets to large cities and military bases, all complete with lots of (albeit repetitive) buildings and things to blow up. Explosions are nice fireballs, and vehicles show some amount of gradual damage before they burst into flames (darn those flammable windshields!). Character models are well done, with some nice detail on the protagonist that you will be staring at for most of the game, as Just Cause 2 is played from a third person perspective. The most impressive aspect of Just Cause 2’s graphics is the draw distance: you can see the terrain from one end of the archipelago to another, and travel to anything in between. There is no fog on the horizon here, just some concessions on surface object detail based on the power of your machine. Things also look nice as you transition into nighttime, complete with scenic sunsets. I experienced good performance and little lag when accessing a new part of the map: pretty impressive. The sound design is less impressive, however: while the weapons sound convincing enough, the voice acting (if you can call it that) is truly terrible, and not in an amusing way. From mispronunciations to stereotyping, listening to people speak in Just Cause 2 is a painful experience all around. You can skip most (but not all) of the cut scenes that will burn a hole in your soul. Still, Just Cause 2 delivers solid graphical results, so that’s certainly something.

ET AL.

You are Rico “Stereotype” Rodriguez, hired to shoot some guy in the face in the Asian island nation of Panau. Your first choice is difficulty, without actually knowing how challenging Just Cause 2 is; I just went with the “normal” option and it seems to be well balanced. The tutorial, which lasts the first two missions before you are let loose, actually lets you do fun stuff instead of inane target practice that is so common in combat-focused games. Just Cause 2 allows you to save your progress at any point, but if you exit the game, you’ll always start again at the nearest stronghold, though anything you’ve collected and destroyed will stay intact (well, not intact, I suppose). If you die during a mission, you thankfully don’t have to do the whole thing over, as the frequent automatic checkpoints are liberally distributed. The biggest (and really only) missing feature is multiplayer: you cannot enjoy Just Cause 2 with others. It’s actually probably a good thing that Just Cause 2 doesn’t contain competitive multiplayer. Think about it: imagine thirty-two people running around with grappling hooks and parachutes. You’d never be able to hit anybody; it would be idiotic chaos. Now, cooperative multiplayer with two people would be fun, but I do not think it’s a must-have inclusion. The world of Just Cause 2 is vibrant enough to make single-player-only features sufficient.

Just Cause 2 features a more complicated control scheme than your typical shooter. It takes a little while to become accustomed to the correct commands, but the constant on-screen hints help the process. I do prefer having more keys for the various actions rather than recycling the game buttons, though, so at least Just Cause 2 takes advantage of the keyboard’s increased range of options. Before too long, you’ll be evading and grappling with ease. Just Cause 2 does feature quick time events using the number keys; I always prefer having a skill-based affair rather than coordinated button mashing, but at least the decrypting sequences make contextual sense. Just Cause 2 features an impressively large and detailed game world, spanning a thousand square kilometers over several islands. There are over three hundred points of interest set in many different climates that provide a variety of places to kill some enemies, from towns to military bases and offshore oil rigs. Just Cause 2 features a good waypoint system: just middle-click on any place on the map and arrows superimposed on the roads show you the way.

Most of your time in Just Cause 2 will be spent blowing up government structures, clearly marked with red and white stars. These range from gas pumps to SAM facilities to radio towers to propaganda trailers. “Clearing” villages by destroying all of the red buildings and collecting all power-ups is the fastest way of unlocking new missions and items. It can take some trial and error finding everything hidden away: there is a radar in the upper left corner of the screen that blinks if you are close to objects, but the game does not indicate where destroyable objects might be lurking. I have several towns that are 90% complete and I can’t seem to find the last pesky item to destroy: kind of annoying. Earning chaos by destroying things unlocks missions from the agency and three criminal factions, new strongholds to storm, and additional black market items. The missions are somewhat repetitive, usually involving escorting a unit, killing a key enemy, or destroying a specific item, but there is some variety in the enemies you’ll encounter and the friendly units that will assist you. It’s certainly more interesting than mindlessly blowing stuff up. Taking a stronghold for a faction will unlock new missions in that area and give you a base to respawn at when you die. Enemy units will engage you when you start destroying their shiny things, but interest dies down quickly enough so you aren't constantly harassed by enemies. The racing challenges, however, are completely out of place.

Time to talk about what makes Just Cause 2 unique. First is the grappling hook, which can be attached to any object for movement purposes or between any two objects for even more fun and excitement. The possibilities here are endless and you’re always trying to think of new ways to use it. The game has some suggestions through the achievements you can earn: pulling enemies off ledges, dragging enemies behind cars, hanging enemies from a ceiling, dangling a car beneath a helicopter and using it as a wrecking ball, attaching enemies to a gas canister and shooting it so it flies away. This is stuff that simply can’t be done in other games, and that’s the appeal of Just Cause 2. This is coupled with the liberal use of the parachute, which can be deployed at any time. Need to get out of a car before it hits a fuel tank? Deploy parachute! You can also move around vehicles easily while they are on the move, jumping from hood to hood and using the grill as cover. Action sequences such as driving a vehicle head on into an enemy jeep, parachuting out at the last second, grappling to a helicopter, throwing the pilot out, blowing up an enemy silo with rockets, jumping out and grappling to a sniper tower, dragging an enemy off another tower, grappling an enemy jeep to the ground causing it to flip, and detaching a turret for increased firepower are common-place in Just Cause 2. And that’s why it’s awesome.

What’s an action game without guns? Lots of guns. Rico can carry two one-handed weapons (pistols, submachine guns, sawed-off shotguns), one for each holster, and one two-handed weapon (assault rifle, shotgun, sniper rifle, rocket launcher), secured to his back. Makes sense, and you can see your character take them out in third person, which is kind of cool. Add in grenades and triggered explosives and you have a walking force of nature. You can dual wield two one-handed weapons simultaneously (personal favorite combination: sawed off shotgun and submachine gun), though that obviously limits your ability to throw grenades. Just Cause 2 features limited ammunition, which means you’ll be picking up new weapons from fallen enemies often, kind of annoying since guns are expensive to purchase. You’ll also have access to a variety of vehicles: motorcycles, jeeps, tanks, helicopters, jets, cars, and boats. There are a variety of ways to get around the islands. You can use the vehicles to knock down trees, or attach a car to a helicopter and crush some enemies. Vehicles suffer damage over time and you can actually blow out tires to slow down pursuers. Just Cause 2 features plenty of unnecessary explosions. If you can’t find interesting weapons and vehicles, the black market dealer can provide them for a price. New items are unlocked over time and can be upgraded with collectable upgrades for weapons, vehicles, and armor. The black market dealer can also provide speedy transportation to any previously visited location around the islands for free. He’s so nice!

Just Cause 2 obviously features unbalanced battles, where you are up against superior numbers in almost every confrontation. The enemy AI does show some intelligent behavior, taking cover behind vehicles or other objects. They don’t run to those objects, though, so if you start shooting at them in the middle of the road, they are as good as dead. You certainly need to cleverly utilize your grappling hook in order to dispose of the enemies efficiently, though. Picking your battles is important and retreating when you are outnumbered, waiting for the heat to die down, is a good strategy. Teammates are almost useful: they will man guns on equipped vehicles and at least give you ten seconds of fire support before they get shot (or you drive into a ditch, flipping them out of the turret…oopsy!). This behavior occurs outside of scripted missions, too, increasing the immersion of a living world. There is no auto-aiming on the PC to compensate for an inferior control mechanism (mouse and keyboard FTW!), but the grappling hook indicator does preferentially select enemy units for easier grabbing and pulling. You commonly look for unconventional and exotic ways to dispose of the enemies; simply shooting them one at a time will not suffice, since they are always several of them and only one of you. There is no severe penalty for death: you simply respawn at the nearest base (or reload the last checkpoint if you are on a mission) with all of the progress saved. Because of this, even the most heavily guarded bases can be cleared eventually, since you get an infinite number of retries (although ammunition is continually used up). You are intrinsically motivated to clear everything, and Just Cause 2 gives you enough tools to make the adventure action-packed. The action does get a bit repetitive, since most villages are comprised of the same features (water tower, trailer, statue). But then you find a tank, and all is right with the world.

IN CLOSING

Just Cause 2 is one of those games you tell stories about, like the time I tethered a motorcycle to the back of my jeep and used it as a nunchuck, whipping enemies off their feet. Good times. The game successfully executes its unique combination of outrageous stunts involving stunts, the parachute, and the grappling hook. You can attach yourself to anything, or attach anything to anything else: this amount of freedom is fantastic and allows you to pull off some amazing stunts and truly inventive ways of disposing pesky enemies (melee kill a dangling enemy, for example). Add in vehicle stunts (riding on the hood and moving around the grill) and we have completely unrealistic but completely fun mechanics. The AI isn’t a total push-over, as they will use nearby cover (walls, vehicles) to make for a more difficult opponent, but expert use of your grappling hook will dispose of them quickly enough. The extensive control scheme takes some time to learn, but the game helpfully provides constant hints on how to pull off various actions. The island nation of Panau is amazingly large and exquisitely detailed, with over 300 villages and bases to explore and/or destroy. It is also a vibrant setting, as normal citizens go about their normal activities while you blow stuff up around them. And blow up you will, as destroying government structures is required to advance along the main story line and unlock new missions and items to buy from the black market dealer. There is a wide selection of upgradable weapons and vehicles to purchase and/or steal. The missions serve up the same general objectives (kill somebody or collect something), but the varied elements you’ll encounter along the way make for some distinctive jobs. Yeah, cooperative multiplayer could have been really cool and the sandbox nature of the game does get a bit repetitive after a while, but Just Cause 2 sure is a fun ride.

Rise of Prussia Review

2010-03-26T21:00:00.001-04:00

Rise of Prussia Review

Rise of Prussia, developed by AGEOD and published by Paradox Interactive.

The Good: Reduced unit count and smaller geographic area makes the game easier to control, comprehensive orders and postures for historically detailed units, variety of leader attributes, mostly informative interface, capable AI, play by e-mail, nice 2-D map, unique setting

The Not So Good: Too similar to previous titles, needs more smaller scenarios

What say you? A smaller scale makes for a more intimate and relatively simplified strategy experience: 6/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

If there’s one country that’s been waiting far too long for its due, it’s got to be Prussia. I mean, it’s like Russia, but with extra “P”! You simply can’t get any better than that. Thankfully, the grand strategy forgers over at (this must be shouted) AGEOD have crafted another title: Rise of Prussia. Following a series of mostly successful games, it looks to be about time to grab your musket and head to Germany to shoot some Prussians and/or Austrians during the Seven Years' War. To be honest, I didn’t realize the conflict was so large (or even existed, actually), spilling over from the French and Indian War that gets much more focus here in the States. Let’s see how AGEOD’s engine has adapted to the 18th Century conflict.

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

If you’ve played any of AGEOD’s previous titles (Birth of America, American Civil War, Napoleon's Campaigns), then you know exactly what you are going to get in terms of graphics: a very nice 2-D map. Rise of Prussia continues the developer’s tradition of offering a detailed rendition of the region (this time Germany) with a nice artful style that looks great. Additionally, Rise of Prussia contains seemingly historically accurate portraits of most leaders in the game, when white wigs were all the rage. This really helps to immerse you into the game: you are playing with actual people, instead of rectangles with lines in them. There are no battle effects to be seen (just numbers counting down), but this is not a big deal: I would much rather see nothing than a crappy 3-D scene. The music selection is also period-specific, putting you in the mood for historical bloodshed on an epic scale. In short, Rise of Prussia gives you a great presentation for 2-D wargaming.

ET AL.

Rise of Prussia features the Seven Years’ War, a major conflict from 1756 through 1764 pitting Prussia and Great Britain against Austria, France, and Spain. The game includes three tutorials to teach the basics of the game, from the interface to the command structure to attacking enemy units. Once you have the essentials down, there is a short scenario introducing the start of the war and six larger campaigns offering different starting dates. All of the main scenarios end in 1764, starting from 1756 through 1762, depending on your level of dedication. Like previous AGEOD titles, Rise of Prussia suffers from a lack of short scenarios to ease you into the grand campaigns: it would be nice to have small missions sequestered to a portion of the map involving only a couple of armies, but my constant, annoying pleas remain ignored. One thing Rise of Prussia has going for it is the smaller (relatively speaking) map: it makes for a more simplified game (in a good way), with less geography to worry about and lose units across. Victory points are earned by controlling cities and destroying enemy units, and high national morale means an instant victory. If the AI isn’t enough of a challenge for you, play by e-mail is available, although the 100+ turn length of the grand campaigns would require a significant time investment.

The interface of Rise of Prussia is pretty good. Most information is displayed on the main map, from the terrain to weather and resources. Units statuses are also shown on their icon (posture, strength), offering a quick glance at the effectiveness of your military. The new addition to Rise of Prussia is an army outliner, partially stolen from Europa Universalis III, which lists all of your army units along the right side of the screen for easy access. While this is quite nice, it does not allow you to see a list of corps or brigades that are independent of an army, making the outliner only useful for finding a handful of units. Here’s hoping the feature will be expanded in the future. I should also note that it can be difficult to differentiate between countries, as the portrait backgrounds look too similar for Prussia and Austria (blue and gray…seriously?). The comprehensive ledger shows a list of all of your units, in addition to victory conditions and possible replacements, but it’s very unwieldy and should be more streamlined.

Units in Rise of Prussia cover the usual gamut of things that make boom, from infantry to cavalry to marines to artillery to sharpshooters. These units are organized (automatically, according to historical records) into elements (companies, batteries, squadrons), units (battalions and regiments), brigades, corps (is the plural corpses?), and armies. This natural stacking makes controlling a large number of units very easy, as all you need to do is move armies and corps around and all of the subordinate attached units will follow. Couple this with the reduced unit count found in Rise of Prussia and you have a game that’s much easier to control than any of its predecessors. Constructing new units or reinforcing existing ones is a straightforward affair using the revamped interface that features filters meant to simplify the process, which works well. Units are comprehensively rated in a bunch of different areas: offensive fire, defensive fire, initiative, range, rate of fire, protection, discipline, assault, ranged damage, assault damage, cohesion, movement, speed, detection, hide value, weight, support, police, supply, ammo, patrol, and blockade. Not only is that an impressive list, but including it also made my review significantly longer. It’s win-win! Each unit is can be given a number of orders, from simple movement commands to raiding a province to entrenching against an enemy or building a depot. You can also dictate a unit’s offensive or defensive posture and rules of engagement, which determines when they will retreat. For a game that essentially only features moving units around on a map, Rise of Prussia offers up a lot of options to keep it more interesting. The level of detail when it comes to leaders is also impressive: from attributes to special abilities like skirmisher, partisan, hothead, and admired, each leader has distinctive qualities that make them stand out, much more than a generic infantry man found in other games. Leaders can be promoted and demoted, and if you choose to bypass seniority, there is a penalty to be paid in national morale and victory points. The level of detail that was paid to the units and leaders of Rise of Prussia would make and historian proud.

There are a number of variables that must be considered when waging war around the wilds of Germany. Terrain plays an important role, as marshland, bridges, and rich territory can alter your strategic plans. Capturing cities and towns is your primary goal, since this is where all of the victory points are earned. Towns are also where most of your supply is earned, automatically distributed by the computer (thank goodness), so they are doubly important. Supply wagons can carry supplies and units can forage for food, but these are short-term solutions that must be enhanced by capturing territory. Of course, marching into enemy lands has its drawbacks, as attrition from supply shortages and unpleasant weather conditions will take their toll. Combat is completely automated, using all of the attributes and abilities of your units to determine a victor. You can view a detailed battle report to view the kills round by round, but only the truly obsessive will even bother. The AI puts up a nice fight, going after vulnerable units, taking objective locations, and managing its army well; I have no complaints here. While Rise of Prussia features a very detailed engine in which to do battle, so did all of the previous titles, and the lack of extreme innovation is why this game will only ultimately appeal to fans of the series.

IN CLOSING

If you like any of AGEOD’s previous efforts, then you will like Rise of Prussia. If you hated any of AGEOD’s previous efforts, then you will hate Rise of Prussia. If you were intimidated by any of AGEOD’s previous efforts, Rise of Prussia is a good place to start: the smaller map and decreased unit count makes it easier to handle in comparison. The game would benefit from more shorter scenarios, but you can start the conflict in pretty much any year from 1756 to 1762 until the end of the war in 1764. The tutorials do a decent job teaching the basics, and the interface is effective: the new army outliner makes it easy to access your largest units, but it would be nice to put corps and independent units on there as well. There are a multitude of options available for your strategic needs, from commands to postures to placing units in hierarchical order. Rise of Prussia also seems to be historically accurate, giving you all of the correct units and leaders for each of the starting conditions. The units and leaders themselves are detailed, with plenty of attributes to make automated battle outcomes more interesting. You must also pay attention to supply (thankfully automated), weather, and disease, adding to the strategic depth. The AI is just as good as before, offering up solid competition if you prefer not to engage in a play by e-mail contest. The problem is that we’ve seen this all before, so in the end Rise of Prussia is just Birth of America and American Civil War and Napoleon's Campaigns in a slightly different setting: it all plays out in the same way, so you can think of Rise of Prussia more as a standalone expansion (the game is priced appropriately at $30). The end result is that fans of the developer will be pleased with essentially the same product, and those who steer clear of the series need not apply. Rise of Prussia is the most approachable of any of the games so it is a fine place to start, but it just doesn’t offer that many differences from what’s been available several times over for the past three years.

Game du Jour: Week of 22 March 2010

2010-03-26T17:00:00.005-04:00

Game du Jour: Week of 22 March 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. February 22nd: 65% off on Million Dollar Quest

Tue. February 23rd: 60% off on Amazing Pyramids

Wed. February 24th: 50% off on Leeloo’s Talent Agency

Thu. February 25th: 65% off on Shutter Island

Fri. February 26th: 65% off on The Dracula Files

Sat. February 27th: 50% off on Amazing Adventures The Caribbean Secret

Sun. February 28th: 65% off on Mystery of the Lunar Archipelago

X³: Gold Edition Review

X³: Gold Edition, developed by EGOSOFT and published by IGS-INTERACTIVE.

The Good: Detailed universe with a robust trade economy, non-linear progression with the ability to build large fleets and factories, extensive selection of items to purchase, mouse-driven interface, varied starting conditions, excellent graphics

The Not So Good: No integration of Reunion content into Terran Conflict requires two full installs, terrible tutorial, restrictions on saving games, immense distances requires liberal time acceleration usage, no multiplayer

What say you? Despite being completely unnecessary, the gold edition of X³ still provides satisfying space trading and combat: 6/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Despite my affinity for space exploration games, I had avoided the X series of games, mainly because the publisher ignored my requests for a free copy of the game (the nerve!). Until now! The gold edition of X³, appropriately titled X³: Gold Edition, contains both of the games published under the banner: the original Reunion from 2007 and the standalone expansion Terran Conflict, released a year later. Gold Editions are popular among publishers because they can squeeze out some more money from a three-year-old franchise, and those people who missed the series the first couple of times around and see what all the hubbub is about. Let’s explore the hubbub!

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

The graphics of X³: Gold Edition hold up very well (at least the Terran Conflict side of things), despite being a couple of years old. Increased capabilities of computers have enabled users to crank up all of the detail that X³: Gold Edition can offer, and the result is a fantastic looking space game. Everything in the X-Universe is quite detailed, from the space stations with extraordinary textures and models to the planets and asteroids. The game also does not rely on cheap nebulae to color the backgrounds, although you do fly through dust clouds while navigating through the extensive game universe. The weapon effects and explosions also look good; X³: Gold Edition is certainly one of the best-looking space games out there. The sound design isn’t too shabby either, with a computerized voice dictating all of the surrounding points of interest. The voice acting could be better (you can hear the game’s German development roots), but the music is effective at creating an out-of-the-world atmosphere (or lack thereof, I guess). I was not disappointed at what X³: Gold Edition brings to the table in terms of the presentation.

ET AL.

X³: Gold Edition comes with both X³ games: Reunion and Terran Conflict. Unfortunately, they are separate installs and not linked in any way because Terran Conflict was a standalone expansion and the developers are lazy. I don’t see the need to install everything twice to enjoy all of the content: why couldn’t have the missions from Reunion been imported into Terran Conflict with its improved interface and graphics? As it stands, you’ll have to switch back and forth the different executables. I found that prospect to be quite annoying, so I ended up playing Terran Conflict exclusively after a while. In essence, I was playing the standalone expansion, so the Gold Edition was superfluous, except for the soundtrack CD that was included (oooo!). Clearly, there is no reason to get X³: Gold Edition if you own Terran Conflict.

X³: Gold Edition is open-ended: there is a linear sequence of missions you can undertake, but you can ignore them and just focus on trade and/or combat if you wish. You start out by choosing a career: basic options are available at first (defender, patriot, merchant, assassin), but more are unlocked with increased play time (commander, adventurer, insurgent). Each career gives you varied ships and initial funds, so your initial hours are slightly different. On the features front, X³: Gold Edition falls short in a couple of areas. While you can sink a tremendous amount of time into the game, there is no multiplayer (not that you would notice anyway, as the universe is liberally populated) and you can only save progress when you are docked, unless you buy salvage insurance, and even then you can only use it once. I dislike arbitrary saving restrictions, even if it’s “realistic.” The tutorial is also boring and long, and it uses the same instructions for all ship types: try firing weapons from a merchant ship (it doesn’t have any) and see how far you progress.

The interface of X³: Gold Edition is probably one of the best I have seen in a space simulation, a genre notorious for overwrought controls. The game uses a combination of the joystick (pretty much required, as the keyboard or mouse isn’t as satisfying) and the mouse to an effective result. You can actually point and click on things to target them, something missing from more archaic space simulations. The game also places most of the important information along the screen edges, allowing you to easily access your missions, maps, ships, targets, and stations, along with pertinent trading information. Icons for all of the objects in your current sector are also placed along the screen edges, and can be clicked on. The sector map also lists nearby stations and ships, making navigation in X³: Gold Edition fairly straightforward.

The universe of X³: Gold Edition is extensive, consisting of eight races and eight corporations competing for cold, hard cash. The AI does a nice job placing you in a vibrant setting, as neutral ships buzz around, taking care of their own needs. The universe is so extensive that things are really far apart, even in the same sector. Jump gates are placed for travel between the far reaches of the universe, but traveling between points of interest in the same area can take minutes. You will learn to love the “J” key, used to accelerate time so you aren’t sitting there forever and ever. While it might be more realistic to place things further apart, it doesn’t make for efficient movement.

X³: Gold Edition is about trade, and making money from said trade. Basic trade is very traditional, although there is a clear resource relationship between what a factory produces and what raw materials it needs to make for some interesting production trees. Once you learn this flow, it becomes almost trivially easy to make tons of money. In fact, it borders on tedious: the long transit times don’t help matters, and if you don’t enjoy trafficking goods around the universe, X³: Gold Edition will not appeal. Things get better when you can afford transport ships that automate the process, though. The “best buys” takes a lot of the guesswork (and writing down prices) out of trade, but it’s still boring and tedious if you don’t enjoy that sort of thing. Factories make things interesting, especially when you consider that you can build your own and enter the game’s economy as a private corporation: that’s neat. That’s the one innovative trading feature X³: Gold Edition brings to the table.

Not everyone is going to be friendly, happy traders, so you’ll probably have to engage in some laser-to-laser combat (especially if you chose one of the more combat-intensive initial occupations). Weapons come in two flavors: pew-pew (lasers) and boom-pow (missiles). There are lots of specific types of weapons, from chainguns to anti-matter launchers to torpedoes, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. You can also indulge in various upgrades, from freight scanners to rudder optimizations to a suite of exotic artifacts. All of these things require money (or blowing somebody up), which requires you to do at least some trade or complete missions in order to earn enough cash to purchase them. There are also a lot of ships to destroy: fighter transports, destroyers, frigates, bombers, and the like. If you like an enemy’s ship, you can board it if you have marines at your disposal. You don’t have to limit your upgrades to your own ship, as X³: Gold Edition allows you to control a flight wing and issue orders to all of your subordinates. This means you can become a formidable entity in the galaxy, either economically through resource production or combatively through force. This amount of freedom makes the game interesting, and the AI holds its own in combat situations. If you can stand the tedious nature of trade and the long, boring travel times, X³: Gold Edition offers a lot to like with the economic and military options at your disposal in a non-linear career.

IN CLOSING

As a gold edition, X³: Gold Edition takes the easy way out: just two DVDs, one for each game, installed separately to maximize the proportion of your hard drive that is wasted. It would have been much better to incorporate the missions from the first game into the second, but none of the improvements to the interface and graphics have been back-ported into Reunion. It’s lazy. Apart from that, though, X³: Gold Edition provides some engrossing open-ended space trading, exploration, and combat. You can start out in a number of different careers of varying difficulties, offering up starting conditions from “easy” to “hard” setups. In any case, the open nature of the X-Universe works quite well, providing a vibrant environment in which to conduct your business. The emphasis is clearly on trade here: although you will enter spats of combat on occasion, you will need to make money in order to upgrade your ship and make it competitive. There are a lot of upgrades, weapons, and items to choose from, letting you customize the role of your ship and find an arrangement that makes you comfortable. The interface is good for a space game, fully integrating the mouse so that you can point and click on things, instead of having to rely on a long list of keyboard commands. There are still some lingering issues that should have been solved by now, like allowing everyone to save anywhere and actually having a decent tutorial, but these are small issues that fans of space games will overlook. If you’ve never taken a gander at X³ before, the Gold Edition is a good place to start, assuming the price isn’t too much higher than the standalone Terran Conflict expansion.

Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight Review

2010-03-26T17:00:00.003-04:00

Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight Review

Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight, developed by EA Los Angeles and published by Electronic Arts.

The Good: Diverse classes with specific units and upgrades, unique “capture the flag” resource collection, fast-paced multiplayer appeals to a wider audience, looks nice

The Not So Good: New players prohibited from using most content and placed at a distinct disadvantage by linear unlocks, requires persistent online connection (even for single player), terrible pathfinding and units cannot fire and move simultaneously, horrendous game balance with arbitrarily constrained unit counts, pointless skirmish mode with no AI coordination, multiplayer maps are too big for less than ten players, linear conventional campaign, slow repair times makes it a pointless endeavor and negate unit experience, indistinct combatants

What say you? Clearly not a sequel, unique classes and resource collection are countered by a tedious and unfair unlock system, online requirement, oversimplified and unbalanced mechanics, and unit disorganization: 3/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

My first foray into the real time strategy genre was a little niche title called Command & Conquer: Red Alert (you probably haven’t heard of it). My most memorable aspect of the game was my personal favorite weapon: the Tesla coil. Ah, frying those pesky Americans to death. Good times. Anyway, many iterations later (none of which reviewed here, as Electronic Arts is sporadic at best providing review copies, seemingly once every three years) brings us to the conclusion (probably) of the Tiberian half of the Command & Conquer universe, a “twilight” if you will. An lo, it was to be called “Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight.” And it was good. Or was it?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

As you would probably expect, Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight looks good. The game includes varied terrain in different environments (desert, snow, urban) with nice attention to detail. The most apparent feature is the use of clouds, which go across the landscape in a dramatic dance of drama. The unit animations are also well done, the models are varied, and the weapon effects are quite nice, with plenty of glowing explosions of death. In addition, Command & Conquer 4 runs well on mid-range systems with most of the graphical options cranked up; you can’t ask for much more. The full motion videos of games past make a return; while the campy nature has been turned down, the acting still leaves a lot to be desired, making them a less enjoyable feature. The sound design is acceptable, with appropriate effects to accompany the mayhem. Some of the instructions are voiced and others are not (especially in the tutorial) and the game features some repetitive unit responses that aren’t terribly funny. I did enjoy the music, though, so Command & Conquer 4 delivers a solid presentation.

ET AL.

Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight features the epic conclusion (maybe) to the epic struggle between the epic GDI and epic NOD. Epically. The campaign can be played alone and with a friend; while it features objectives that are clearly indicated on the map, it is terribly linear with scripted events and no variety in your objectives. Clearly, Command & Conquer 4 has not evolved beyond the same format used fifteen years ago. The campaign missions are not interesting at all, and actually can be infuriating. Take the first NOD mission, for example (which includes a scripted event during which your units don’t fire…makes sense to me!): you have to guard a convoy that advances whenever your crawler gets near it, preventing you from actually defending it as it always stays far ahead of your troops. Additionally, the first three missions are tutorials that don’t give you any experience, just wasted time. Skirmish games are equally inane: since Command & Conquer 4 requires teamwork to secure all of the required objective locations, coordination with the unresponsive AI is impossible. Multiplayer can be entertaining if you have a good team that sticks to their roles. Victory points are earned from capturing nodes, destroying units, and harvesting tiberium. The online game is very friendly to novice players, since you can respawn with no penalty. Even the multiplayer game is subject to criticism, though, as the maps are designed for five-on-five matches only, and games involving less than ten players result in too much undefended territory. In addition, automatch takes three minutes to find no matches, and custom games frequently have players drop in and out; actually joining a multiplayer game can be quite painful. At least multiplayer is timer-based (there will eventually be a winner), so there are no stalemates.

OK, time for two big complaints. Command & Conquer 4 has opted to go for persistent unlocks, like what you see in Call of Duty, where new units and abilities are given to you based on how much you play. This is really stupid. When you start the game for the first time, you are given five units and one ability in each class. If you then join a multiplayer game against more experienced players, you are instantly at a disadvantage because you have less powerful units and abilities. Who thought this would work in a strategy game? I hate persistent unlocks that make a difference, and they make a huge difference here. Even more maddening is that fact that GDI and NOD unlocks are separate, requiring you to play the game twice as much to gain the same units and abilities for both sides. Idiotic. Additionally, you don’t even get to choose your unlocks, as the developers have arbitrarily decided what’s best instead of letting you choose what works for your tactics. Way to remove strategy and highlight tedium. Simply put, experience ruins the game experience. And the fun doesn’t stop there: Command & Conquer 4 requires a constant internet connection in order to play. Yes, this includes single player modes as well. Brilliant. So much for playing the game on a laptop on the road. Epic fail.

Remember the resource collection that was a staple of Command & Conquer games of old? Gone. Instead we have an interesting capture the flag method of resource collection: tiberium spawns at several locations on a map, and you must use a unit to carry it back to your spawn point. This unlocks more upgrades, but only if you’ve unlocked them through experience first (of course…we wouldn’t want a balanced game, now would we?). Upgrades include bonuses to range, speed, damage, repair, and more abilities for specific units. It’s too bad all but one of them aren’t available to new players. You can even detonate the tiberium on purpose to serve as a giant bomb, destroying your pursuers in the process. This is by far the most interesting aspect of Command & Conquer 4, but, sadly, it’s the only interesting aspect of Command & Conquer 4.

Also completely unlike previous games in the series, Command & Conquer 4 features a single unit serving as your mobile base. The crawler comes in three classes, which determines which units and abilities are available. Offensive crawlers get more powerful units, defensive crawlers get structures, infantry, and superweapons, and support crawlers get air units and spells. What this does is force you into a role and makes coordination more important. Having this mobile base does make construction easier, as all of you units will spawn from your crawler. In fact, you can even queue units while the crawler is moving, and they will automatically deploy when you set down. Command & Conquer 4 could use an infinite queue, however, as constantly clicking the button for replacement is tedious. There is no penalty for death in Command & Conquer 4: you simply respawn and keep all of your upgrades. In fact, the game wants you to die and pick a more appropriate class on occasion. The offensive class is the most traditional and subsequently least interesting: you just get lots of troops. The defensive turrets and bunkers are useful and the support powers are appealing, improving rate of fire, repair, bombardment, or armor for a short period of time.

Command & Conquer 4 does feature the classic counter system for determining maximum damage. You use guns on light units, cannons on medium targets, rockets for air assets, lasers on heavy things, and blasts on reinforced enemies. Each unit has its advantages (and disadvantages) and the key to the game is to produce the appropriate units for your enemy’s armada. The game features a decent interface that makes selecting all of your units easy, and you can place them in formation or order varied stances and abilities (which must be manually triggered, but you have such a low number of units it’s not that micro-intensive). Units gain experience through battle and gain improved armor and damage over time.

The actual gameplay of Command & Conquer 4 is poor. First off, the population cap is very small: you will never have more than ten units at a time, and since there is no economic cost for producing units (just time), everyone will always have the maximum number of units, resulting in a lot of stalemates and drawn-out battles unless one of the sides has the perfect counters. There is no strategy beyond simple countering. Additionally, the penalty for death is too minor: instantaneous reinforcements means losing units is no big deal, and extremely lengthy repair times and minor veteran bonuses makes units expendable. Even worse is the pathfinding, or more specifically when units are moving near other units. They run into each other almost constantly, and since units can’t fire and move at the same time (of course they can’t…what is this, real life?), units will get killed as they slowly jostle around friendly units, not returning fire. Brilliant. You lose units not because of poor tactics, but because they can’t stand still. This also impact the “guard” order: units that guard are always moving and, thus, never fire. So what’s the point? The enemy AI is only a roadblock, decent when in superior numbers but no match in skirmish games. Thus, Command & Conquer 4 will get its longevity through multiplayer, multiplayer that restricts content from all but the most experienced players.

IN CLOSING

Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight certainly does not suffer from “sequel-itis,” as this is a completely different game. This does not bother me, actually, despite the clear attempt to cash in on the Command & Conquer name without resembling Command & Conquer gameplay in any way. No, the game fails for many, many other reasons. First, the good news: class-based gameplay stolen from World in Conflict is nice (in theory) and I do like the “capture the flag” method of resource collection. The game is certainly easier to learn, so it’s clear the developers aimed for a larger fan base. However, the end result is that Command & Conquer 4 will appeal to nobody. The campaign is a completely linear affair that injects no innovation. Skirmish mode is worthless as you can’t coordinate with the AI (and coordination is essential in the game’s control-point-based mode). Almost all of the content is locked for new players, requiring a lot of play time to reach the more interesting stuff. The game requires a constant internet connection to play, even for the single player campaign. The population cap is so low that everyone is maxed out, making for equal fights that are only resolved by producing appropriate counter units. Units heal so slowly that preserving units because of experience bonuses is impossible. There is no penalty for death, as you will just churn out units as quickly as they die with no economic considerations whatsoever. Pathfinding is terrible, with units constantly running into each other and moving to arrange themselves, which is a significant problem since units only fire when stationary. The base game is flawed, and the experience features are flawed. If I come back and play Command & Conquer 4 after a month’s absence, I am at a disadvantage not because I am less skilled, but because I simply have not logged as many hours and unlocked as many gadgets as others. Screw that. Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight is not worth the effort.

Bob Came in Pieces Review

Bob Came in Pieces, developed and published by Ludosity Interactive.

The Good: Custom ship design, varied physics-based puzzles

The Not So Good: Must like platform and puzzle games, fourteen missions go by too quickly, linear enough to discourage replay, really only three ship components

What say you? A platform game highlighted by ship design used for puzzle solutions: 6/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

I’m really terrible at Super Mario Brothers. I can do the first couple of levels of the newest Wii version, but I have yet to get past the end of World 1. Yeah, so platform games are not my forte, but I do tend to review them assuming they offer some unique feature beyond simple running and jumping and death (I specialize in the third option). Bob Came in Pieces comes with one killer features to accompany some physics-based puzzle mayhem: custom ship design. Platform games notoriously suffer from repetitive, linear play, so one would assume that an injection of customization would prove to be beneficial. Is it?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

For an independent game, Bob Came in Pieces looks decent enough. The game features 3-D graphics, although the game is played in two-dimensions. The environments are varied, but the textures could use more detail than a simple solid color. Some of the objects have some interesting designs, but a lot of the in-game objects are blocky. The effects are few, although fire and the rockets glow convincingly. The sound design is also very basic, with no voiced dialogue and acceptable effects and music. Bob Came in Pieces doesn’t look as good as some other indie games, but graphics don’t make the game, so I’m not disappointed.

ET AL.

Poor Bob. Seems his ship done got blowed up, scattered all across a strange world populated with crates, boxes, seesaws, and fans. It’s your job to guide his ship, find the missing parts, and leave this exotic land. I’ll start out with ship customization, which ended up being surprisingly limited because you are only given three essential parts: pipes, rockets of varying power, and push and pull beams for moving objects. You can use these to make any kind of arrangement you can dream of, but more varied items and abilities would have produced a more interesting game in the end. You must balance your design (so you don’t tip over) and you can choose the keys used for each of your eight attachment points. Items are collected along the way, so you are restricted somewhat in how many pipes and rockets you can use. Still, I was expecting more diversity in this area of the game, especially because it’s the main draw.

Bob Came in Pieces consists of fourteen levels that are all well designed. You’ll progress through them quickly if you don’t intensively search each and every corner of each and every level. Each puzzle contains things such as burning twigs (obviously), seesaws, doors, crates, balls, conveyor belts, rocks, and fans, using physics to produce solutions. The key is to figure out what the puzzle wants and then go back in time and design your ship. As you can tell from my snarky comment, there is some luck and trail and error associated with making a successful design, and there will undoubtedly be some (a lot) of restarting before you clear a particular challenge. There is usually one clear way to accomplish a task, and it’s just a matter of designing your ship and then executing the design. This means there is little value in replaying a particular level once you have finished it, and with the small array of components at your disposal, coming up with a dramatically different solution is a rare occurrence. Still, Bob Came in Pieces offers gameplay above and beyond your typical platform or puzzle title, so there is certainly a reason to play it for fans of either (or both) genres.

IN CLOSING

Bob Came in Pieces offers some nice physics-based puzzles placed around custom ship designs to solve the various conundrums placed in front of you. Despite the premise of custom ship design, the limited number of elements (pipes, rockets, and push/pull beams) means most of your creations will end up accomplishing the same thing, just in different directions. There is also a lot of guessing as to what exact configuration you need for the next level: you might end up retrying levels several times before getting the setup right. That said, the game does feel unique, thanks to some innovative puzzles and full freedom to use your admittedly limited tool set as you desire. The fourteen levels are over too quickly, and future expansions (wink wink) would hopefully add more content for ship design. Most of the puzzle elements require one solution, so it’s a matter of making a good design and controlling your ship. This linearity tends to cut down on replay value, but Bob Came in Pieces is certainly fun while it lasts. If you like platform and puzzle games, the ship design of Bob Came in Pieces delivers $10 worth of unique fun.

Games Spring Fever Sale

2010-03-26T17:00:00.001-04:00

Games Spring Fever Sale

You can get 30% off on all games (except Collector’s Editions) on BigFishGames.com this Friday, Saturday, and Sunday!

Just enter the coupon code SPRINGFEVER in the “Have a Coupon Code?” box in the Shopping Cart.

Steps to get discount:

1. Click “Buy It” button.

2. Enter coupon code SPRINGFEVER into the box.

3. Click “Apply Code.”

Offer expires at 11:59pm on Sunday, March 28, 2010.

Game du Jour: Week of 29 March 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. March 29th: 50% off on Dark Souls

Tue. March 30th: 50% off on Dark Souls II

Wed. March 31st: 50% off on Kara’s Quest

Thu. April 1st: 50% off on Last Heroes

Fri. April 2nd: 65% off on The Serpent of Isis

Sat. April 3rd: 65% off on Miss Teri Tale 3 – Danger Next Door

Sun. April 4th: 65% off on 1 Penguin 100 Cases

Game du Jour: Week of 15 March 2010

2010-03-12T12:00:00.001-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 15 March 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. February 15th: 50% off on Born Into Darkness

Tue. February 16th: 65% off on The Clumsys 2: Butterfly Effect

Wed. February 17th: 65% off on Evoly

Thu. February 18th: 50% off on Many Years Ago

Fri. February 19th: 65% off on Farm Mania 2

Sat. February 20th: 65% off on Azteca

Sun. February 21st: 65% off on Green Valley – Fun on the Farm

Flotilla Review

2010-03-11T16:00:00.003-05:00

Flotilla Review

Flotilla, developed and published by Blendo Games.

The Good: Engaging simultaneous turn-based tactical battles with varied strategies to implement, randomized adventure mode and skirmish maps add replay value, upgrades provide ship roles, stylish presentation, nice interface makes 3-D movement easy to execute, $10

The Not So Good: Lacks remote (PBEM, Internet) multiplayer, inconsistent AI

What say you? Quick random campaigns and satisfying tactical combat highlight this turn-based space adventure: 6/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Some of us, frankly, don't have the time to spend on a marathon session of Sins of a Solar Empire; we need to blow space stuff up now! The hallmark of quick-and-dirty space exploration has been Weird Worlds, offering up bite-sized samples of extraterrestrial combat. In Flotilla, you visit exotic, distant lands, meet strange, interesting people, and shoot them with big freakin’ laser beams. The combat is not automated, rather relying on simultaneous turn-based executing of orders issued every thirty seconds, similar to the approach used in games such as Combat Mission. Is Flotilla a supernova of excellence, or just a black hole near Uranus?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

I like the style that Flotilla brings to the table. Independent developers know that they are working with limited resources, and Flotilla puts constrained funds to good use to produce a distinctive package. The universe is a simple map of planets and stars that looks slightly better than a typical 2-D space game as it incorporates some three dimensional effects. As for the battles, there are no textures for the ships or other objects in the game, just simple monochromatic colors. This cell-shaded effect is successful, in a futuristic minimalist way. The ship models are characteristic enough to identify classes based on looks alone. The special effects can be impressive (a slew of missiles, especially), and the explosions are decent enough. The orange backgrounds become repetitive: while they contrast well with the colors used for the ships, some more variety would be nice to promote the cheap showiness of outer space. Flotilla behaves better when windowed (running full-screen resulted in a blank display about half of the time) and the minimum resolution is high (1280 by 720), so low-res gamers beware. The sound design is also pleasing: I like the classical music that fits the deliberate pace of the game, along with a “ding” when you earn a critical hit and enthusiastic applause when you win. Overall, Flotilla delivers a great presentation, especially for the price.

ET AL.

The main method to enjoy Flotilla is through the adventure mode. A pilot with only seven months to live leaves on the promise of adventure and meeting rogue cats on the run. The adventure mode features randomized maps so each game is slightly different. The events and encounters are also randomized, although after about four or five run-throughs you’ll start repeating things. You’ll run into a lot of deliberately strange characters out in space, from chicken pirates (obviously) to a reference to Ren’s space madness. Encounters can grant upgrades if you are successful in combat or produce other side effects, like extra ships or battles down the road. Upgrades can be used to customize your ships’ roles, providing positive enhancements in armor, firing rate, and ship speed. The adventure mode is meant to be quite short (in the same vein as Weird Worlds): most games won’t last more than a half-hour, and most take around ten minutes to complete (and by “complete” I mean “die”). You cannot save your progress during the middle of an adventure, but because of the short mission length, it’s not really an issue. You won’t lose progress by dying (which happens frequently), and the game suggests starting anew with another adventure using a sequential numbering system. The downside to these short game lengths is that you never really survive long enough to control the big ships. There is also a lot of luck involved in determining which (and how many) enemies you encounter. Some battles are simply too imbalanced against you to survive, so it’s time to exit out and start another round. You can focus on avoiding the red, combat-guaranteed planets early on as you build up your fleet, but if you get unlucky with events, you can be dead after the first turn. Again, it’s not a big deal since a game is supposed to be quick anyway. The game keeps a record of your high scores (seemingly based on how many turns you survive), although it would be nice to save your journal entries along with the score for some historical flavor.

Apart from the adventure mode, you can take part in two-on-two skirmish matches against the computer or a friend on the same machine. You can customize the ship types involved, from missile destroyers to torpedo gunships to battleships (six in all), and have up to six ships for each side slugging it out. The skirmish mode features randomized tactical maps, extending the replay value of Flotilla. Unfortunately, Flotilla lacks multiplayer over the Internet or play by e-mail. The turn-based nature of the game would have been seemingly perfect for e-mail contests, where you can take your time overanalyzing the next move. While the population of the game might not support it, real-time online action through a server browser would work well too. Flotilla would be so great as a multiplayer game, and its lack of robust support in this area is deflating.

Flotilla is a simultaneous turn-based game, meaning that each person executes his or her (well, his) orders while the game is paused followed by thirty seconds of non-involvement. Orders are given in a stepped process that streamlines the process and highlights the well-designed interface of Flotilla. First, you choose a movement mode: a balanced attack, flank movement that trades fire power for speed, and a focus fire mode that offers the opposite. Next you plot your destination, starting with horizontal movement; the game shows the end as a circle on a flat grid, along with the positions of other ships. This makes moving in 3-D space very straightforward and eliminates the confusion inherent with complex movement. Afterwards, you can choose movement along the vertical axis. While it would be nice to have multiple waypoints in a 30-second interval (for circular or more intricate movement), the time interval is short enough where it never really becomes a significant issue. After you plot your movement, you can choose the orientation of your ship. The game automatically points your ship towards a designated enemy, but this actually isn’t the most optimal placement. More damage is suffered on the bottom and rear of your ships, so you’ll actually want to manually adjust your ship to keep the top towards the enemy.

The key to Flotilla is getting behind and below the enemy. It would seem that the best option would be to dive, dive, dive, but since ships can roll over, an opposing unit can quickly (during one thirty-second turn) put you “on top” (there is no “up” in space) and negate your strategy. You can also use obstacles as cover: asteroids and space junk is randomly placed around the map, and you can use this “terrain” for strategic purposes. It’s easy to win with the default ships you are given if you are up against beam destroyers: while a beam will kill you in one or two shots, you can stay out of range and pick them off with missiles. Once you discover this basic strategy, Flotilla becomes almost trivially easy. Battleships provide a tougher opponent with their mixture of short- and long-range weaponry, but as long as you don’t run your ships into each other (as I found out during one adventure), you’re good to go. The AI opponents are average at best: they will almost always attack your ships instead of using flanking maneuvers, and they will rotate on occasion, but it’s still too easy to get below and behind them for an easy kill. Although the AI rotates to shield vulnerable areas from incoming fire, it doesn't flank often enough, especially when it has superior numbers. Flotilla really only becomes difficult when they severely outnumber you, and even then you can escape with a victory more often than not. It took me about eight adventures before I fully learned the game and started dominating the AI, no matter how many ships they (or I) had. Online or play by e-mail features would obviously counter the AI shortcomings, so we are only left to wonder what could have been.

IN CLOSING

Flotilla is one of those games you fire up for twenty minutes for a quick lunchtime play session. It reminds me strongly of Weird Worlds, replacing robust space items with tactical battles. The adventure mode incorporates random maps and events to keep each game slightly different, although you will encounter the same characters once you’ve played a couple of times. The adventures are meant to be short (which negates the inability to save), lasting under half an hour and ending when you unluckily encounter a superior force. Upgrades and additional ships gathered along the way can ease the difficulty associated with bigger numbers of enemies. Skirmish games can involve up to six ships in hot two-on-two action; the lack of multiplayer is distressing here, as the tactical battles would be perfect for play by e-mail or online action. Sure, you can have two players on the same computer, but what PC gamers have friends? The tactical battles are interesting, turn-based affairs where you can plan your movement and orientation every thirty seconds. The time intervals are short enough where issuing only one waypoint per turn isn’t an issue. With randomized maps populated with space debris and the overall strategy of getting behind and below your enemies, the tactical battles involve a lot of maneuvering that play out like dramatic naval battles, except in three dimensions instead of two. What seems like really superficial gameplay actually turns out to be quite deep. The AI is OK, doing some smart moves like rotating their ships on occasion, but the computer rarely flanks your ships and they can be easily bested regularly with practice. Battles are tense affairs where your plans may or may not work out, and the turn-based nature gives you time to plan and places emphasis on strategy instead of quick reflexes and button mashing. The random elements really increase the replay value of Flotilla, and the graphics and sound are excellent for the $10 price tag. The AI provides acceptable competition for short bursts of enjoyment without online competition, but the thirst for human opponents remains unquenched. The game is fun, but I’m left wondering how much better the battles would be with humans scripting the on-screen action. The addition of play by e-mail and online battles would create a complete gaming experience and provide challenge that the AI simply cannot provide.

Diner Dash 5: Boom! Regular Version Released

2010-03-11T16:00:00.001-05:00

Diner Dash 5: Boom! Regular Version Released

The regular version of Diner Dash 5: Boom! is now available for $6.99. Here is the review of Diner Dash 5: Boom!

The Collector’s Edition includes:

Exclusive advanced levels for extra gameplay

An interactive strategy guide

Behind the scenes concept art

Animated screensaver and wallpapers

“Flo Over Time” historical retrospective

Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 Review

2010-03-07T12:00:00.001-05:00

Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 Review

Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943, developed by Graviteam and published by Paradox Interactive.

The Good: Turn-based operational and real-time tactical gameplay, genuine ballistics and damage, usually intelligent pathfinding and automated unit behavior, very large authentic map of the region, generally helpful interface, quick mission builder

The Not So Good: Limited operational strategies, no multiplayer, no tutorial, can't save a battle in progress, can't restart a campaign, poor performance when time is accelerated in large battles, unpleasant sound design

What say you? A very detailed World War II real time strategy game dripping with realism but slowed by a throwaway turn-based mode and a lack of multiplayer: 6/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

It’s been a long six weeks since we’ve tackled a World War II strategy game, and dare I say it’s time yet again! This time, the attention turns towards the Eastern Front and the quagmire that was (is?) Kharkov. We’ve been here before and Achtung (no, not “acting,” stupid Microsoft Word) Panzer: Kharkov 1943 highlights action the third time around, focusing on the battles outside of the city. The game goes the Total War route, combining both operational-level strategic gameplay with tactical battles involving squads of troops. Does Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 deliver some strategy gaming goodness?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 looks decent enough for a 3-D strategy game. There are some aspects to the game that look very nice, namely the terrain and foliage that dots said terrain. The game is reminiscent of World War II: General Commander, with realistically muted environments. The game successfully evokes a setting that is downright cold and generally depressing. Models look excellent from up close (especially armored units), with nice animations when guns are being reloaded and tracks are being laid. Explosions and damage are disappointing, with low-res smoke billowing from destroyed vehicles. Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 has deformable terrain and structures, and this produces an ever-changing landscape. Additionally, there are some nice weather and time-of-day effects. Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 does have poor performance while time is accelerated, though, so those of us with modest systems should be somewhat wary. Ironically, in some large battles 4X time acceleration actually goes slower than real time for me; time for a new processor! The sound effects are not the best: the weapon sounds are terrible and lack the punch required of powerful equipment. Additionally, Kharkov seems to be populated with a large amount of dogs, as that's the effects that dominates the soundtrack. Other effects, like running into fencing, repeat themselves too often and a grating. This aspect of the game could be a lot better. Still, Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 offers some nice visuals, and it’s certainly no worse off than similar competitors.

ET AL.

Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 takes place in Kharkov in 1943. See how well I can read the game title? There are six scenarios with different starting forces and positions that summarize the hot World War II action from March 2nd to 8th. Each scenario has between five and fifteen turns, during which you move your forces around. The game features some large maps, nine square kilometers at maximum, giving you room to make some interesting strategic plans. Automated saving in Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 frankly makes no sense: you can’t restart an operation (campaign) once you have begun, and the interface uses some weird lighting system to indicate progress. I can’t find the saved game files are stored, so once you start, you’re stuck with your decisions until you are done. Couple this with the inability to save during an hour-long battle and you have a strange, annoying, and eerily console-like system. Beyond the six scenarios, you can utilize the excellent quick battle editor, which allows you customize the troops involved, battlefield, time of day, and weather: pretty neat. This almost (but doesn’t) make up for the lack of multiplayer. That’s right: Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 features no competition against humans, either over a LAN, direct IP connection, or online. Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 gets the basics down, but the features could be more complete.

Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 consists of two game modes: a turn-based operational game and real-time battles. You’ll start out in the turn-based mode, with your troops scattered around Kharkov and the surrounding vicinity. The maps consist of square kilometer squares (not hexes? Blasphemy!) which puts a limit on your strategic options, since only one unit can occupy a single square at a time. You can move multiple units into a square for an attack, though, so battles can get large. Victory points are given out for occupied squares, and certain locations have more points assigned to them; surrounded squares only grant one-third of the points. The turn-based mode isn’t terribly interesting because you are limited to (a) movement and (b) repairing. Movement is restricted by the terrain as well, so there are many instances when you simply cannot move anywhere (since units cannot be stacked). Surrounded units cannot be repaired or refueled, so the general strategy involves encircling enemy units and taking important victory locations. The turn-based mode of Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 is more like a placeholder rather than an integral part of the game, and additional features would make this aspect of the game feel more complete.

Better are the real-time tactical battles, which add a heavy dose of realism to make for an authentic atmosphere. The objective is simple: kill more stuff. There are flags you can capture along the way, the proportion of which is used to determine who controls the area after the battle has finished. Most battles have a time limit of one hour, although the AI will submit a cease-fire request if things are unbalanced before then. You must play the entire battle in one sitting, as Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 does not allow you to save your progress. Because you can’t possibly have anything else to do, right? All Panzer, all the time! The first thing you’ll do is deploy your forces: you can place one unit in every 32x32 meter square. Each square indicates the type of unit that can be placed there and the amount of cover it offers. The maps are quite large (each deployment area is a square kilometer, and most maps consist of three to four of them, plus the middle area where most of the battle will take place), so there is a good amount of strategic freedom given to the player.

The interface of Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 does an excellent job displaying useful information and giving you quick access to all of your units. First, the game puts all of your units in a two-column hierarchical list in the upper right corner of the screen: extremely helpful. The game can also display tactical information on the map using a series of colored circles and lines, displaying command range, weapon range, movement orders, and current attack target. Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 also gives you a comprehensive assortment of orders: move, attack, fire, defend, target priority, mount/dismount, and firing arcs are all available. In addition, you can customize a formation, from the shape (line or column) to the width and height. You can also tell tanks to move at the front of a formation, move along roads or through forest, and spot targets for off-map artillery. There are a lot of options at your disposal, and Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 makes it easy to access all of these by placing them on the screen using large, easily identifiable icons. Confusingly, though, friendly units are colored red and enemy units are blue (a disturbing trend). Still, this is a minor complaint in what otherwise is a very helpful interface.

Because you can manually tell units to utilize roads during travel, pathfinding in Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 is generally good. Problems arise when issuing orders to many units along a narrow road, but nothing too terrible. The up-close battlefield camera reveals that infantry units do a poor job using buildings and cover, spreading out over a large area and exposing several units to untimely death. Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 features some realistic features when computing battlefield results, like line of sight, cover, and armor penetration graphs. The small command radii means that infantry units must be kept close to their commander to receive the morale bonus, which can (realistically) reduce your tactics somewhat. Damage is handled well in the game, with individual components (tracks, weapons, crew) being destroyed rather than the whole vehicle at once. The AI is fine, working better as a defender since large maps can mean a lot of waiting for an incoming attack. The computer usually goes for the objective locations and keeps units organized well. Units also behave nicely on their own, automatically engaging enemy units when appropriate (unless told to hold fire). There are lots of unknowns in the game, since the setup area is so large and there are usually multiple waypoints to capture and not enough forces to cover them all. You can hear the sounds but not see the units if they are not in your line of sight; I don't know if that is intentional or not, but it is helpful. Overall, the combination of realistic damage and unit attributes with large, varied maps produces some interesting tactical gameplay.

IN CLOSING

Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 has a remarkable attention to detail that permeates everything throughout the game. Everything, that is, except for the auxiliary features. The game comes with six scenarios detailing the struggle for in Kharkov; the battles take place across large maps that are rendered in high detail. Unfortunately, the turn-based mode never gets beyond “move” and “reinforce,” and further reduces potential strategies with extremely large map squares that can only contain a single unit. The long battles (an hour, usually) cannot be saved mid-conflict and progress in a campaign cannot be reset. The quick mission builder is very nice, offering a lot of flexibility for continued play. This feature is offset by the complete lack of multiplayer options. A strategy game without multiplayer is like a Southerner without moonshine: it just doesn’t work. The tactical battles are good fun, though, with a great attention to detail, from weapon ballistics (with armor penetration graphs!) to unit morale. The maps are large enough to allow for some variety in planning your attacks, and you are never quite sure where the AI is coming from. The interface makes finding units and other pertinent information a breeze, and the pathfinding is good as long as you keep units organized and tracked vehicles confined to roads. The battles rival the quality action of Men of War, minus direct control. Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 is certainly better than similar titles like Officers, and those willing to look past the occasional missteps will find a core game that is highly enjoyable in its realistic tilt.

Game du Jour: Week of 8 March 2010

2010-03-05T12:00:00.001-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 8 March 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. March 8th: 50% off on House Racers

Tue. March 9th: 50% off on New Star Tennis

Wed. March 10th: 100% off on Space Spy – Free Game

Thu. March 11th: 45% off on Azada: Ancient Magic

Fri. March 12th: 65% off on Youda Legend: The Golden Bird of Paradise

Sat. March 13th: 60% off on Shaman Odyssey: Tropic Adventure

Sun. March 14th: 50% off on Hidden Identity – Chicago Blackout

Wings of Prey Review

2010-03-03T16:00:00.001-05:00

Wings of Prey Review

Wings of Prey, developed by Gaijin Entertainment and published on yuPlay.

The Good: Excellent graphics, several interesting multiplayer modes, convincing flight physics, good AI pilots, range of realisms, decent number of scenarios

The Not So Good: Strictly linear campaign, “only” 44 planes, lacks editing software, déjà vu all over again

What say you? It's good, but no better than IL-2: 5/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

For my money, the best combat flight simulator of all time is IL-2 Sturmovik. It successfully combined authentic flight modeling, outstanding graphics, and large dynamically- generated scenarios to deliver a very enjoyable experience. For a while, we PC gamers had this gem all to ourselves, but then our greedy console brethren got an adaptation in the form of IL-2 Sturmovik: Birds of Prey. Now, the port has been ported back to the PC in the form of Wings of Prey. Got all that? The main crux of this review will focus on the following: Wings of Prey is $50, while IL-2 is $10. $40 better? Let’s find out together!

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

One of the two things that set Wings of Prey apart from IL-2 Sturmovik is the graphics: they are quite outstanding here. I don’t think it would be a dramatic exaggeration to say that Wings of Prey is the best-looking flight simulation on the market, thanks to impressively detailed terrain. The places you fly over look fantastic, dotted with hills, trees, buildings, and other structures that make for an almost photo-realistic setting. It’s impressive. The plane models remain very detailed and the damage effects are nice, especially fire and tracer rounds that dot the sky with glowing death. Surprisingly, Wings of Prey runs quite smoothly despite the nice graphics, a testament to a good engine. The sound design isn’t quite as impressive, though it is successful: engine sounds, guns, and damage all seem accurate enough. The advantage that linear campaign missions have is more location-specific dialogue, which helps to effectively immerse you in the battles. Overall, Wings of Prey offers up an impressive presentation highlighted by high-quality visuals.

ET AL.

The features of Wings of Prey are comparable with the first release of IL-2 way back in 2001, which is disappointing considering this game is nine years older. A tutorial is included to teach you the controls and flight mechanics, and it does a fine job. The campaign is very limited: twenty scripted missions unlocked in progression. You will fight in the skies above Britain, Stalingrad, Sicily, the Korsun Pocket, the Bulge, and Berlin (no Pacific stuff). The missions are predictable (at least in terms of objectives and enemy forces) after the first play, and there is no semblance of the two hundred dynamically generated missions that IL-2 featured. You are also given six single missions per campaign, and a training skirmish mode where you can customize the setting, difficulty, weather, time of day, and other options. Wings of Prey does not appear to be as friendly towards user modifications, as I could not find any editing software included with the game. The other key feature of Wings of Prey (in addition to the graphics) is multiplayer. There are four game modes to choose from: the usual dogfight (deathmatch) and team battle (team deathmatch), but two that are unique. Capture the airfield has two teams attempting to land a plane on a runway, and strike has a number of ground targets that must be destroyed. Both of these are pretty cool, and Wings of Prey also features in-game matchmaking with a server browser instead of relying on third-party applications. Nice, but not $50 nice.

Wings of Prey features 44 planes, such as the Messerschmitt Bf 109, Yak-1, Hurricane Mk IIb, and P51-D Mustang. This is a good number to keep you busy, but it’s no match for the 229 flyable aircraft in IL-2. They are modeled well and do provide some different experiences, from varied roles to diverse cockpits. The physics remain of the highest quality, providing a convincing experience of piloting a rickety plane that’s going way too fast for its own good. Flying these planes is a conventional affair for flight sim enthusiasts, though Wings of Prey did a terrible job setting up my modest joystick: it did not detect it automatically, so I had to set everything up myself. Wings of Prey features three difficulty/realism settings: arcade, realistic, and simulator. Essentially, the user interface becomes less informative and blackouts and stalls become more common as you stop being polite and start getting real. When the game starts out in third-person by default, though, you know the target audience. The AI pilots provide some good competition, using appropriate tactics and requiring skill to shoot down. Still, Wings of Prey is not a terribly difficult game, as the scenarios are usually balanced so that you fight fair. You can tell that this game was made with consoles in mind, as it provides a good but scripted and linear experience that doesn’t measure up to its predecessor.

IN CLOSING

Wings of Prey has better graphics and built-in multiplayer support, but is that worth an extra $40? The easy answer is: no. All of the good features this game has were included before, except for the more robust online options. The game does look darn good, but I doubt many people who frequent flight simulations will be distracted by shiny things, at least not to the tune of $50. Wings of Prey features a fine selection of over forty aircraft, but it obviously pales in comparison to 229 flyable aircraft. The campaigns are too linear, both individual missions and the unlocking order of said missions, to be enjoyed multiple times. The lack of dynamic campaigns and pilot careers really hurts Wings of Prey in terms of replay value. That said, you do get twenty-six action-packed missions and skirmish battles, so there is some value here. Multiplayer options are nice: four game modes including capture the airfield and bombing strikes deliver some distinctive features. Wings of Prey offers a range of difficulty and realism options, but so did IL-2. The quality AI and exceptional flight physics are quality and exceptional, but so were they in IL-2. You can probably see where I am going with this. Wings of Prey would have been more appropriate as a $20 (or maybe $30) game considering the competition, but alas it is fully priced. Luckily, we have choices on the PC, and my choice is to save $40.

PC Game Review: Diner Dash 5: Boom!

2010-03-02T20:00:00.001-05:00

PC Game Review: Diner Dash 5: Boom!

Advanced levels: Extra game play for those who love a good challenge.

Strategy guide: Walkthroughs to help you conquer levels and reach Expert scores.

Story comics: Review the story, which is divided into scenes. I wish it came with fast forward, previous and pause. The game plays the whole scene and repeats.

Wallpapers: Six screens for your background.

Screensaver: One animated screensaver, but it doesn’t let you preview how it looks.

“Flo Over Time”: Looks back to the history of Diner Dash.

Download iner Dash 5.

FTC disclosure: Review based on expired review copy received from publisher.

Game du Jour: Week of 1 March 2010

2010-03-01T12:00:00.001-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 1 March 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. March 1st: 50% off on Imperial City: The Crown of the King

Tue. March 2nd: 50% off on New Star Soccer 2010

Wed. March 3rd: 60% off on Knight of Dulcinea

Thu. March 4th: 60% off on Be Rich

Fri. March 5th: 45% off on Treasure Seekers: The Enchanted Canvases

Sat. March 6th: 65% off on Magic Maze

Sun. March 7th: 65% off on Escape From Lost Island

New Star Tennis Review

2010-02-27T12:00:00.001-05:00

New Star Tennis Review

New Star Tennis, developed and published by New Star Games.

The Good: Challenging AI opponents, assorted activities other than tennis matches

The Not So Good: New players require a lot of initial training and aren’t competitive, no novice tournaments, difficult control scheme, lacks multiplayer, repetitive free time activities

What say you? Similar to other New Star offerings, the tennis version has tricky controls, artificially high difficulty, and limited side activities: 4/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

It seems like it’s always tennis season, the minor diversion that only grabs our attention during a major or a local event. Yes, the green ball has waned in popularity, likely due to the decrease in male talent. In fact, women’s tennis has been more interesting for quite a long time, ever since the druggies left the sport. The world of New Star has invaded the tennis scene, previously conquering soccer and racing with consistently good (6/8) score. Those previous titles, as with most things, had room for improvement; has New Star Tennis delivered an improved experience?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

For $15, New Star Tennis offers a decent presentation. The game seems to use a slightly improved version of the 3-D engine from the New Star Soccer series, rendering the tennis environment in all three dimensions. The characters could be animated better, but the models themselves look good enough and the animations never negatively impact the gameplay. The game certainly does not have any fancy special effects, but it holds its own and New Star Tennis is definitely playable. The interface remains the same as before, and most pertinent information is easily accessible. The sound design is acceptable, with the same background music from previous games plus appropriate tennis sounds: balls being smacked and crowds reacting. Overall, New Star Tennis looks and sounds exactly as I would have expected.

ET AL.

In New Star Tennis, you start out as a wimpy fifteen-year-old with thoughts of grand tennis victory. You get to customize your name, date of birth, nationality, skin and hair color, and height. Unfortunately, you can only start the game as a very bad novice player, and this has serious negative consequences that we will delve into shortly. The world of New Star Tennis has almost-real players, using the one-letter-off mechanic done in previous games; you can tell who they are if you are familiar with tennis. In a sexist move, New Star Tennis does not allow you play as or against women; this would not have necessarily added anything different to the game, but the option should have been present. Apart from the career mode, you can partake in quick matches using any of the real/fake tennis stars included with the game. New Star Tennis does not include multiplayer in any fashion, either on the same computer (with a keyboard and a gamepad, for example), over a LAN, or on the Internet. The game also lacks doubles competition, a staple of tennis simulations.

During your wondrous career, you must maintain your energy, skills, lifestyle, and happiness. Energy is expended by practicing and playing in tournaments and replenished with old-fashioned rest. Your lifestyle is improved by buying things with the money earned in tournaments, a simplification that has interesting philosophical ramifications. New Star Tennis lacks relationship and family options present in previous titles, so they only way to enhance your life is to buy stuff. If it were only that simple in real life. You can get happy by betting on horses or in a casino, playing darts, or kart racing. The betting mini-games are simplistic with the usual options from previous games, darts uses the mouse and some semi-random targeting to increase uncertainty, and the kart racing is a poor replica of New Star Racing. You can choose up to three activities to do per week, but almost all of your time will be spend training.

Training comes in two flavors: manual and automatic. You can participate in sessions against the ball machine to improve your serve, forehand, backhand, volley, or spin. You must land the ball on a target and reach a predetermined score before you run out of balls (there is an inappropriate joke in there somewhere…). If you purchase gym equipment, you can improve your speed and stamina simply by clicking on an icon: working out was never so easy! The training is very repetitive, or guaranteed, so it loses interest quickly.

Ready to take on the world? Tournaments are offered almost every week, offering different prizes and surfaces (clay, grass, hard). Problem is that even the cheapest tournaments (in terms of payouts) are against the best players in the world, giving you absolutely no chance of victory until you tediously (and slowly) improve your stats. New Star Tennis lacks lower level tournaments, and I honestly have no idea why. Get ready to be pitted against the top seeds in the world and suffer defeat early and often. Talk about discouraging. Adding to the frustration is the control scheme. Tennis is an admittedly difficult sport to develop a control scheme for, and New Star Tennis tries its best but still comes up short. You can given four shots (normal, lob, slice, top spin) to execute, and you must hold the appropriate shot button well before the ball arrives so that you can use the arrow keys to direct it to an appropriate part of the court. This method attempts to give the player control over where their shot will go, but it’s honestly too much to do in a short amount of time. I had a heck of a time getting the controls down, and I play a lot of computer games. It might have been better to sacrifice some control and just direct your shot roughly in the direction you are heading when the ball is hit, instead of stopping your movement when the swing begins and making the player determine placement. On top of this, low stats (the ones you are forces to start with) make pulling things off even more difficult. Sigh. Unfortunately, the main way to maintain your character’s happiness and lifestyle is to earn money, money you can’t earn in tournaments because your stats are so low. It’s a vicious cycle. The quality AI players don’t help, as they can place difficult, quality shots with ease. So what we’re left with is a difficult game made even more difficult because of the unnecessary hatred directed towards newly created characters in the form of slow development and vastly superior opponents. Boo/hiss.

IN CLOSING

New Star Tennis has the same general structures as the previous mostly successful New Star games, but falters because of a couple of reasons. First off, your starting character is totally incompetent, and only after lots of repetitive training do they become more capable of winning a tournament. Novice tournaments are not included in the game, which means you will waste your time entering any competitive event without comprehensive training first. This is an unintelligent design decision that really discourages new players. There are other things to do other than play tennis, like gamble or darts, but these are only minor diversions that become repetitive quickly. The controls take some getting used to, as you must start swinging well before the ball arrives and place the target in the appropriate location while not moving. I don’t remember seeing real tennis players stop once they begin to swing. While this makes it possible to use real tennis strategy in the game, it’s not the most intuitive method. New Star Tennis lacks any multiplayer competition, either on the same computer or online, further reducing its appeal. Adapting the New Star universe towards a tennis simulation is a good idea, but this game is too hard for beginners and too repetitive.

Simplz: Zoo Review

2010-02-23T16:00:00.001-05:00

Simplz: Zoo Review

Simplz: Zoo, developed by South Winds Games and published by Reflexive Entertainment.

The Good: Specific goals for match-3 games, matched items used in zoo design, helpful interface, varied puzzle layouts

The Not So Good: Repetitive with a disproportionate focus on match-3 elements, shallow zoo simulation lacks strategic planning and doesn’t impact puzzle mode, trivially easy puzzles with an optional timer for no real benefit, linear unlocks decrease campaign variety, slow campaign progress

What say you? Marginally better than a traditional match-3 game: 4/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

How do you make a match-3 game more interesting? PC’s have been inundated with enough games that it's practically its own genre. More sophisticated gamers such as you and me (but not that guy over there; he’s an idiot) require more sophistication! Enter the egregiously misspelled Simplz: Zoo, which attempts to combine classic (meaning “tired”) match-3 gameplay with running your own zoo. Giving you another goal is certainly more interesting than tediously matching jewels, right? Let’s find out!

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Like most (but not all) puzzle games, Simplz: Zoo features low-resolution graphics that are best displayed in a window. How low? 800 by 600. Looking at the game full-screen at that low resolution caused my eyes to bleed. Just kidding: my face melted off, that’s all. Despite this shortcoming (the resolution, not the face thing), the game looks decent for a casual title: the visitors and animals are drawn in a cartoonish format and animated reasonably well, although your patrons appear robotic as they glide around the grounds. The game is 2-D, and while the art style and visual effects are not as distinctive as you would like, it’s functional enough. Performing far better is the interface: checks and stars are clearly displayed to indicate objects you own and can afford, and specific resource needs are shown in the bottom-right during match-3 sessions: quite helpful. Not as helpful are the cleverly hidden tiled squares that must be removed; they are occasionally highlighted, but they don’t contrast enough from an empty background. Rounding out the package is appropriate music and the occasional sound effect to accompany the on-screen action. Simplz: Zoo doesn’t provide an outstanding package of graphics or sound design, but it’s not terrible either. One could classify it as “average.”

ET AL.

As the title of Simplz: Zoo somewhat indicates, you are running a zoo; the resources to run said zoo are earned by playing a match-3 puzzle game. While you alternate between the zoo simulation and puzzle game during your progress through the campaign, most of your time will be spend puzzling. The campaign offers the single goal of creating the greatest zoo in the world, accomplished by purchasing more animals using the resources earned during the match-3 puzzles. Progress is very slow as you can only afford one item (at best) after each puzzle sequence. There are no mini-games independent of the main campaign, so you’ll spend all of your energy expanding your animal kingdom.

Your zoo requires several resources to remain in tip-top shape: food, personnel, money, material, and research. More animals means a higher monthly quota of resources (and thus better performance in the puzzle portion of Simplz: Zoo), and you will also have to accumulate resources to purchase new beasts in both indoor and outdoor exhibits. Additional species can be researched by making matches as well. Support structures, for monthly resource bonuses, can be built as well, in addition to beautifying your zoo with paths and foliage. Unfortunately, the zoo simulation is very basic: you can place buildings anywhere in order to gain their rating bonuses. Aesthetics sadly do not matter; people say suggestions about which objects to place, but I cannot observe any benefit in attendance or rating by doing so. Even if it does impact your attendance, the money you get from it pails in comparison to the cash earned from the match-3 portion of the game. There is no user happiness to maintain, so the zoo simulation lacks difficulty. The game also unlocks things in a very linear order due to the seemingly arbitrary resource requirements, meaning each zoo you build will have the same buildings appear in the same order. As a final insult, visitors completely ignore your paths and walk on the grass. The zoo simulation is very lightweight and needs further development to be anything of interest.

Match-3! Nothing strikes fear in the soul of the hardcore gamer like that haunting phrase. The game tries its hardest to make the puzzle elements somewhat interesting, and it succeeds to a degree. First off, there are specific goals for each match-3 game: there is a minimum amount of basic resources you need to match (derived from your zoo upkeep) and tiles what must be cleared (used for paths in your zoo). I do not understand why you need to clear so many path tiles when you don’t actually need them. The puzzles also have varied layouts and starting conditions, featuring some interesting components like locked tiles, paths that must be cleared for migrating animals, and crates that must be moved to the bottom. Matching the same resource three times in a row produces a special bonus as well. Regrettably, the match-3 game is far too easy. You can switch tiles diagonally and the game automatically highlights potential matches, making matches a trivial affair. There is a timer that can be used to impose some sort of difficult, but it is optional and there is frankly no reason to do so since the resource bonus for turning it on is so insignificant. Why handicap yourself? For three whole extra points? No thanks. It’s actually better to last longer in the match-3 game in order to accumulate more resources. It is sometimes tedious to get those last couple of tiles removed, but it's just a matter of time before you do since you can’t fail. There are too few resources to make the puzzles challenging beyond the first minute of unlocking tiles. The resources themselves are poorly balanced, with far too materials and not enough cash for the zoo management part of the game; I always have an unbalanced cache of resources, waiting several rounds of puzzle games for certain requirements to accumulate and unlock new buildings. Unless you are completely brain-dead or terrible at match-3 games, Simplz: Zoo will offer no challenge. And if you are, what are you doing playing this in the first place?!

IN CLOSING

Simplz: Zoo lacks the depth required for a notable title. While the match-3 elements are fine enough, if a bit too traditional, the zoo portion is very underdeveloped and subsequently disappointing in its lack of scope. You’ll spend almost all of your time in the match-3 part of the game, simply because there’s nothing to do with your zoo other than add a new exhibit after each puzzle round. I’m not looking for tycoon-level complexity, but there should be at least some impact on performance based on the layout you have designed. All you need is to have the buildings somewhere in order to reap their meager bonuses. While the match-3 game has a great influence on your zoo, since that’s where all of your resources and decorations are earned, the zoo does not influence the puzzles (other than minor bonuses), and that’s ultimately where the displeasure lies. The zoo is essentially a self-designed trophy case, never feeling like a simulated place, rather just somewhere to stick things you’ve unlocked. The linear campaign progresses very slowly, only allowing you to unlock one object after every puzzle round; you need to really love match-3 puzzles to get any enjoyment out of Simplz: Zoo. The puzzle portion of the game is much better developed than the zoo: there are specific goals to meet, varied layouts, and interesting situations like locked tiles or leading animals to a goal location. Even this, though, is not without problems: the game is way too easy, and enabling the optional timer doesn’t offer a significant benefit for doing so. Basically you can’t lose, and thus the game is never challenging. The promise of a puzzle-simulation combination is never fully realized. Only real fans of match-3 games will want to play Simplz: Zoo, since that’s where all of the actual gameplay is contained.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat Review

2010-02-19T08:00:00.001-05:00

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat Review

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat, developed by GSC Game World and published by Viva Media.

The Good: Large game world with many missions, realism requires tactics to survive, numerous weapons and items to modify and upgrade, less restrictive than previous titles, intelligent AI, nice use of the setting, multiplayer

The Not So Good: High level of difficulty in a lethal world, vague objectives, lots of walking, interface could be improved, inconsistent game performance, terrible flashlight

What say you? Another return to Chernobyl brings a tough but rewarding tactical first person shooter and role-playing game: 7/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

While America has been taken over by the plague known as consolitis, Europe is still a proud beacon of quality PC-first development. I always look forward to getting quality imports from across the pond. One such import is the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series of games (you are legally bound to use all punctuation), now in its third iteration with Call of Pripyat. Chernobyl has been a nice setting for the game, allowing for some radiation-induced craziness to surround the shooting and role-playing elements. The first version got reviewed almost three years ago and was typical of Russian-area titles: rough but some nice ideas. How has the game improved since then?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat features generally the same graphics as the original game: outstanding three years ago, but more average today. That’s not to say that the graphics are terrible, however, as there are some very bright spots to speak of: Pripyat is convincingly rusty and buildings can be quite detailed (especially if they are an important part of the main storyline). There are also some nice time-of-day and weather effects (especially lightning), and the anomalies are appropriately creepy. Character models are done well, though a bit repetitive as you are limited in how varied gas masks appear. S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat features a significant amount of stuttering during the game; this may be due to loading times and I never encountered the issue while in the middle of a battle, but it’s definitely present. The game continues to hold its own in the graphics department, although the competition has caught up. The sound design is what you would expect for a foreign: campy English dialogue. Each character gets some canned phrases, but S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat does not have fully voiced dialogue. Some of the original Russian dialogue is preserved in non-important banter between NPCs, adding to the immersion (and it’s more realistic that way). Most importantly, S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat delivers a plausible setting with no significant deficiencies in graphics or sound design.

ET AL.

In S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat, you are a military man assigned to investigate a helicopter crash in the Zone of Alienation. Or something like that; I skipped the intro movie. Apart from the main mystery in the game, there are tons of side missions you can (and must) undertake in order to make money and recruit people to your overall goal. Pripyat is a large area and traveling around involves a lot of walking. You can warp to a destination with an NPC character or pay for transport, but you’ll still have to walk back, encountering various beasts along the way like mutated dogs and whatever this thing is. The missions can have some very vague objectives, thanks to your PDA map that fails for show whether locations are above or below you. Because of the frequency of tunnels and multi-level ships and buildings in the game, confusion soon sets in. After you are done, you can continue to play the game in a free-form mode; unfortunately, there are no dynamically generated missions to keep you busy, which would have been cool.

There are several difficulty levels to choose from, ranging from “difficulty” to “impossible.” This high level of difficulty is exacerbated by the infrequent auto-save system; you will need to make liberal use of the quick save button (F5) in order to reduce reloading. It should also be mentioned that S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat offers no tutorial on the controls, assuming you either played the previous titles or read the manual (ha!). Multiplayer seems like an afterthought here, with unoriginal deathmatch and team deathmatch that doesn’t really lend itself to the game well. There are two variations on capture the flag, substituting an artifact (one per team or neutral that can be detonated) in its place. Weapons are acquired by purchase (similar to Counter-Strike) instead of pick-ups. You need a low ping in order to enjoy yourself, though, as the European servers introduce too much lag.

As I alluded to earlier, the interface could use some minor improvements to make accessing the game easier for new players. Your PDA displays objective locations, but doesn’t zoom in far enough to differentiate close things and doesn’t indicate whether locations might be above or below you. Your minimap counts the number of nearby humans using a PDA (but not monsters) so you can assess incoming threats, in addition to displaying your concealment and noise. Icons are displayed for nearby hazards like radioactivity and fire, and current warnings are shown (like hunger, damaged armor) so you can take care of them at your earliest convenience. You are also given four quick access slots for things like med packs and food for fast healing. Still, the interface alternates from informative to vague.

It’s important to equip yourself properly for ventures out into the radioactive unknown surrounding the town of Pripyat. First off, you might not want to die, so a sturdy armor is important for protection against bullets and other hazards like fire and chemicals. You might also want to dish out some pain using the assortment of weapons available: pistols, shotguns, assault rifles, grenade launchers, and sniper rifles. Each weapon is rated according to accuracy, rate of fire, damage, recoil, and condition. Weapons degrade quickly over time with use (due to the harsh conditions in Pripyat) and must be repaired to replaced often. S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat relies on upgrading your weapons and armor instead of simple stat increases like more traditional role-playing games resort to. There are extensive upgrades to purchase, like magazine size, recoil, weight, accuracy, and hazard protection, most of which require toolkits found scattered out in the field. Ammunition also goes very quickly, necessitating constant replenishment from the caches of fallen enemies. Most of the weapons behave quite conventionally, although grenades cause people to fly around (awesome) and the flashlight is complete garbage, shining all of two feet in front of you.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat has a number of features that add to the realism of the unrealistic situation. The game features a continuous 24-hour world, and your character is required to sleep and eat in order to stay in tip-top shape. Health is more exaggerated than in real life, though not by much; S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat really requires cautious and planned action to stay alive. The large game world must be traversed mostly on foot, except if you can afford paying for transportation; you can run fast but only for about ten seconds at a time. Important are anomalies, dangerous areas that can contain artifacts, which grant a bonus protection at the cost of being radioactive. Artifacts are randomly replenished after each emission event (don’t get caught outside!), so you can explore the same location multiple times. Artifacts are a great way of making money, using your anomaly detector to find interesting things in the game world.

Along the way to objective or anomaly areas, you will run unto a number of mutants that will attempt to eat you. They have distinct patters and behaviors and each offers a different challenge, whether it be invisibility, speed, or telekinetic powers. Humans can also be hostile, although they are more likely to be neutral here than in previous S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games. Human opponents will flank your position and split up in order to kill do dead: rather impressive and usually not scripted. Either type of enemy takes a ton of bullets to bring down, increasing the need for lots of ammunition and more choice shots. NPCs can also offer trades and they fight amongst themselves, producing a very believable setting that goes a long way towards making S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat a quality product. The realism of the game requires real tactics in order to survive, and fans of more challenging games will find a lot to like here.

IN CLOSING

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat is exactly what you would expect to find in the third game in a series: the most complete and polished experience. If you enjoyed the previous titles or have a desire to play a survival first person shooter with role-playing elements, than a trip to Chernobyl should be on the agenda. The setting of the game is fantastic, with lots of intelligent NPCs to interact with that have schedules of their own, creating a plausible game world. Radioactivity and other weirdness are also put to good use, producing artifacts that can reap profits or personal stat bonuses (with the unpleasant side effect of radiation poisoning) and emissions that kill anyone left out in the open. S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat also features the most varied assortment of side missions, far beyond the simple “kill this guy” assignments from the first game. The environment is also more open for exploration and discovery, extending the life of the game beyond the main campaign missions. Time of day and weather effects also make Pripyat a more realistic setting. The difficulty is still very high, forcing players to play more tactically instead of run-and-gun. S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat doesn’t have regular RPG character progression, instead opting for a more realistic method of upgrading your weapons with modifications and a less realistic method of holding artifacts. This is a challenging game, with good AI opponents that will utilize cover and ranged weapons and monsters with tricky abilities. The interface could use some work, specifically the map that shows vague objective locations (not indicating whether they are above or below you). Multiplayer is also nothing special, save for a variation on capture the flag where you can blow up the flag. Overall, though, S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat is a satisfying third edition to a quality unique PC franchise.

New Release: Diner Dash 5: Boom

2010-02-18T12:00:00.001-05:00

New Release: Diner Dash 5: Boom

Diner Dash 5: Boom Collector’s Edition blows up today, that is, it’s available for downloading for club members. Diner Dash’s Flo’s Diner is smashed to bits. Flo needs cash to renovate her restaurant within a week or deal with some serious repercussions. So help Flo seat, serve and save the day in the time management game that involves dealing with weird weather conditions in outdoor settings. You can also build a unique diner with 1000 combinations.

Can you believe Flo first captured customers’ stomachs five years ago? “Since the debut of the franchise in 2004, the Diner Dash series has been downloaded more than 550 million times,” says PlayFirst.

Diner Dash 5: Boom Collector’s Edition includes:

Five advanced levels of exclusive game play.

Strategy guide and walk-through to reach expert level.

Behind-the-scenes concept art book.

Animated screen saver and wallpapers.

“Flo Over Time” historical retrospective.

Not much information about the game is out there yet as people could not download it until today.

Kenny Shea Dinkin, PlayFirst’s Chief Creative Officer, says the company wanted to ensure the latest edition remains fresh and innovative without feeling like “the same ol’.” So what does PlayFirst do? Blow up the dinner and give players 50 levels of outdoor dining around DinerTown’s neighborhoods. Since her debut five years ago, Flo has found her way on iPhones, Xbox Live Arcade, Nintendeo DS, PlayStation Network and WiiWare. Wowii! Here are some of the Diner Dash games available on Amazon.

If you’d rather save the dough, a standard $6.99 version will come along later.

Mac fans! A Diner Dash 5: Boom Collector’s Edition Mac edition is available.

Download Diner Dash 5: Boom Collector’s Edition for Windows or Diner Dash 5: Boom Collector’s Edition for Mac

FYI: Big Fish Game Club is a monthly membership that lets you get the daily deal game for $2.99, credit every month to redeem for most games on the site and play “Tomorrow’s Game” today. The club costs $6.99 on a monthly basis and you can cancel membership anytime. I had no trouble canceling membership.

Social Games and Other News

2010-02-18T04:00:00.001-05:00

Social Games and Other News

: Image via Wikipedia

Howdy, all! Thanks for sticking with me. I know I have not reviewed a game in a while — for a good reason. I’ve had eye pain that interferes with playing games on top of the regular work I do on the computer all day, every day. So for now, I’m bringing you updates and what I think are good games. Does that work for you?

Social Gaming Survey

PopCap Games shares the results of a social gaming survey [pdf file]. I admit I used to be hooked on Facebook’s Bejeweled Blitz, but finally kicked the habit. It’s a great game to play when you need a stress break or can’t think. That is the only social game that has sucked me in. I avoid discovering new ones as I do not have time for this stuff! It’s easier with downloadable PC games because you generally have a start and finish.

The survey says that a population of about 100 million in the U.S. and U.K. play games on social media sites like Facebook and MySpace. And the cool news? The average social gamer is a 43-year old woman. That’s good news for PopCap Games because it’s the company behind the addiction of many of my friends: Facebook Bejeweled Blitz.

New Releases from Big Fish Games

Black Circle: A Carol Reed Mystery: Summer arrives and a neighbor asks English private detective Carol Reed to look into the discovery of a dead body that mysteriously disappears. In this hidden object game, Carol interviews suspects and helpful residents to get to the bottom of this stranger’s death. What starts as a routine investigation quickly becomes something more as Carol uncovers broken alliances and a cult long thought to be inactive.

Aveyond: The Lost Orb: Continuation of the popular Aveyond adventure game series. Mel’s wedding day isn’t going according to plan. Her worst enemy stole her man, and a mysterious ghost appears to tell Mel that her evil ancestor, Mordred Darkthrop, has passed down his most precious possession to her: a magical orb with the power of death. Wanting nothing to do with her wicked ancestor, Mel must now seek out the orb and destroy it, before someone else with the power to use it discovers its location.

Ancient Rome: In this time management game, you help grow the ancient Roman Empire by setting up cities and providing valuable resources throughout the land. Produce goods, construct new buildings and attract new workers as you expand the reach of the Roman Empire, a fast-paced strategy game. Meet your goals and accept valuable rewards from the emperor to set up your own piece of land and carve your name into the annals of history.

Awakening: The Dreamless Castle: After awakening in a mysterious castle it’s up to you to collect clues and valuable items needed to solve perplexing puzzles and escape. Listen to the fairy as she guides you towards the exit. The game comes with minigames and lock puzzles that lead you to the next room in the castle. In this hidden object game, you search for the next hint and discover a young Princess’ destiny.

Hot Games at Big Fish Games

Top PC Games sorted by Genre

Top Mac Games sorted by Genre

Play anything good lately?

Game du Jour: Week of 14 February 2010

2010-02-18T00:00:00.005-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 14 February 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. February 15th: 50% off on Born Into Darkness

Tue. February 16th: 65% off on The Clumsys 2: Butterfly Effect

Wed. February 17th: 65% off on Evoly

Thu. February 18th: 50% off on Many Years Ago

Fri. February 19th: 65% off on Farm Mania 2

Sat. February 20th: 65% off on Azteca

Sun. February 21st: 65% off on Green Valley – Fun on the Farm

President’s Day Sale: Big Fish Games

2010-02-18T00:00:00.003-05:00

President’s Day Sale: Big Fish Games

Image via Wikipedia

Big Fish Games is offering 30% off all games (except Collector’s Edition games) through February 15, 2010 in honor of President’s Day.

Use the code: PREZSALE

Social Games and Other News

2010-02-18T00:00:00.001-05:00

Social Games and Other News

: Image via Wikipedia

Social Gaming Survey

New Releases from Big Fish Games

Hot Games at Big Fish Games

Top PC Games sorted by Genre

Top Mac Games sorted by Genre

Play anything good lately?

Global Agenda Review

2010-02-15T16:00:00.001-05:00

Global Agenda Review

Global Agenda, developed and published by Hi-Rez Studios.

The Good: Extensive character customization, varied class-specific weaponry, strategic conquest mode where agencies can build support weapons using captured resources, several PvP game types, monthly fee is optional

The Not So Good: Tedious and repetitive and linear PvE with terrible AI, poorly balanced gameplay due to health spamming and overpowered turrets that are difficult to destroy, subscription portion only suitable for dedicated and organized clans, most interesting components locked from new players, can't fly and shoot simultaneously, central server performance issues

What say you? This class-based MMO third person shooter offers nothing better than the established competition: 4/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

There are two reasons why I do not play MMOs (an abbreviation for “where did my money go?”): I don’t have enough time (as I average two new games to review each week) or money (as I get no income from reviewing said games) to spend hours online going on “quests” for “loot” with “friends.” There is certainly an audience for them, as evidenced by the extreme popularity of World of Warcraft and many others, but they just don’t tickle my fancy (sounds sexy!). I do, however, enjoy non-subscription online games, as I can jump in for an hour or two and play some DiRT 2 or Section 8 or Demigod. The developers behind Global Agenda are trying their hardest to foil my evil plans, as their MMO game has an optional subscription (for certain features) in addition to the usual third-person action action. Two questions arise: is Global Agenda good, and is part of it worth a monthly fee?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Utilizing Unreal Engine 3, Global Agenda successfully conveys a futuristic setting gone horribly, horribly violent. While you will need a somewhat beefy computer in order to crank up the details to the max, the game’s level of detail is quite pleasing. Each of the classes in the game has fluid animations and nicely detailed textures, and the environments have a great sense of ultramodern shininess. The game is mostly played in third person, probably to show off the hard work on the character models better. The settings can get repetitive, though, as most battles take place in “Generic Metal Building 14.” The weapon effects are somewhat generic, punctuated only by the use of dyes for varied colors coming at you in high definition. Still, I was pleased with the graphics that Global Agenda offers. The sound design is decent enough: there is a small amount of voice acting in the game that is bearable, and the combat effects are chaotic. I found no glaring deficiencies in the presentation of Global Agenda, so that’s good.

ET AL.

Global Agenda has portions of an instanced MMORPG (like Guild Wars) wrapped around a third person shooter. The first thing you’ll notice is that you have to register the game through the official site (after installing through Steam if you bought it elsewhere) and create an account; why they couldn’t just use your Steam login is beyond me. The second thing you’ll notice is that you have to manually input your password every time you play; your login is saved, but the developers have made sure that people who brake into your home just to play Global Agenda won’t be able to. Take that, computer-savvy thieves! You can skip the boring introductory tutorials (which, sadly, aren’t quite as boring as the regular PvE games) and instantly warp to level 5, if you so choose. The central hub of Dome City involves no exploring: just a map with all of the shops needed to increase your character and just enough walking to make it annoying with repeated use. You can enter a queue and go shopping while you wait, although wait times I encountered were short (usually less than twenty seconds for either game mode).

Matches in Global Agenda come in two flavors: against other humans (PvP) and again the AI (PvE). PvP is far better, a ten-on-ten contest with several game modes: control (three points to capture), payload (an assault mode), demolition (capture the flag), scramble (control with one randomly changing point), and breach (linear control points). In addition to the normal game mode where you earn experience, you can test out your character attributes in the virtual arena for no real apparent reason. Matches are laggy because of the use of central servers; the game can’t really seem to be able to handle twenty players, which is a problem in a shooter. The conquest mode of Global Agenda requires a monthly subscription, and it’s really only appropriate for organized clans. Agencies fight over control of hexes on a game map, using several teams of four to fight breach matches. Leaders of an agency can construct support weapons (dropships, mechs, turrets) using resources collected from controlled hexes. Hexes can only be fought over during certain hours of the day, making sure that ground isn’t lost while you are sleeping or playing better games. You can also form alliances with other agencies to team and up and take on a superior competitor. You must request to become a member of a specific agency; there isn’t an automated system of placing people together with those from a similar geographic area (like Delaware or Kansas) and automatically choosing the leaders based on in-game experience. While established and organized clans might find a justification for conquest mode and the monthly fee, but nobody else will.

PvE missions in Global Agenda are awful. The game takes the usual grinding tedium of MMORPGs and adds a whole bunch of repetitive levels to make it even more monotonous. Four people take on a number of low-level enemies followed by a boss at the conclusion of the level. There are two or three map layouts in total, resulting in the same exact experience every time you play. Fun! Nothing is randomized: neither the map paths nor the enemy placements. Sometimes you encounter a different boss, but it’s a small consolation. The difficulty level is also quite low: the AI is completely dumb and you can respawn as often as you want without penalty. Adding to the problems is the fact that people do not start the game simultaneously: PvP has a countdown timer, but PvE does not, meaning your teammates may be far ahead by the time you spawn in the game. PvE is only difficult when you have numerous enemies to deal with, as individuals are not talented robots. This is a huge grind instead of offering exciting, compelling, varied gameplay. Unfortunately, you have to play PvE in order to earn parts to craft new weapons and armor. Boo/hiss.

There are four classes to choose from in the future world of Global Agenda, adapted (stolen) from other class-based shooters. The assault class is your typical soldier, built to kill. The recon class has a sniper rifle and can disappear. The medic heals. And the robotics class is the engineer that constructs turrets. You can have several characters per account, all using the same name to avoid confusion, to allow you to use all of the classes. Items and experience cannot be transferred, however. Appearance options are robust, and the personal favorite option of randomizing your looks is thankfully included. Global Agenda features a nice level of customization, rivaling those utilized in dedicated role-playing games. Each character gets a melee weapon, ranged weapon, specialty weapon, jetpack, boost item, and three thrown items. While Global Agenda features a large number of weapons and items to choose from, almost all of them are locked to begin with, severely limiting your strategies. You can choose which weapons to use, and each item has four levels of effectiveness. You are limited to fifteen total points divided between ranged, specialty, and offhand items, similar to the method used in Section 8. Since there is only a maximum of twenty points you could use, there really isn’t any strategic limitation and you can max out pretty much all of your weapons: a nice idea in theory but poorly executed. There are seven upgrades for weapons and armor you can purchase or earn in PvE (if you can stomach it) and three skill trees for every class that add small incremental bonuses to tailor your character towards a specific role: a nice RPG-like feature. You can also purchase better armor, weapons, dyes (to make your guns shoot all the colors of the rainbow!) in addition to increasing your stats, but all of those things must be done at specific shops in Dome City, instead of from a simple menu system. This wastes an incredible amount of time, walking around the game world instead of shooting people in the face. Additionally, all of the interesting weapons are locked from the start, reducing your tactical options for quite a while.

Typical for a shooter, the interface in Global Agenda has one added benefit: your health and energy are constantly displayed right next to your targeting reticule, reducing the need to look at corners of the screen while in intense combat situations. This is quite useful, although it can obscure enemies as it is not translucent enough. One interesting aspect of Global Agenda is the use of energy: it is used for all weapons and your jetpack and recharges automatically. While this eliminates the tedious need to search for ammunition, energy recharges way too quickly, resulting in a constant rain of bullets. You can also rest on the fly, rehealing but suffering a movement penalty. Coupled with the proliferation of medics, coordinated teams of players will rarely die. The game has a very fast pace and ultimately comes down to when to use your items. Each class has things that make them overpowered: shields, turrets, healing guns, and camouflage. Essentially, you just have to wait for the cool-down period to make any headway as none of these things have good counters: shields provide immunity, turrets are powerful and tough to destroy, healing guns are proficient, and camouflage is quite effective. In fact, two medics working in concert are effectively invincible. There are some nice things that the combat of Global Agenda features, though. Forward spawn becons, portable but also destructible, reduce the tedium of running from your base to the frontlines every time you die. Also, the game places an emphasis on melee combat (and blocking) that few action games do: it’s a viable tactic. But then we run into shortcomings yet again: while you are equipped with a jetpack, you can’t fly and shoot simultaneously, as the jetpack is treated as just another weapon. Finally, the AI is very poor, rarely using cover and only challenging because of superior numbers. There are too many problems with Global Agenda that make it yet another game with good ideas that are poorly executed.

IN CLOSING

The player-versus-player action of Global Agenda isn't better than the likes of Section 8, Enemy Territory: Quake Wars, Counter-Strike, Battlefield 2, and Team Fortress 2. Additionally, the player-versus-environment portion of the game is mediocre role-playing game drudgery and tedium. The game has a very bare MMO feel, with a central hub that cannot be explored but invokes tons of pointless walking. Global Agenda does have a ton of weapons and items, the game’s strong suit. However, all of the interesting things are reserved for higher-level players that have logged an arbitrary number of hours with the game, and there is very little loadout strategy since you can max out almost all of your equipment. Alas, things don’t get interesting from a character design standpoint until much later in your career. The PvP game is more interesting, featuring a fast-paced, chaotic race for control of a map. It is, however, not without its problems: energy recharges too quickly while turret and healing spam is the rule of the game. The PvE is horrible: tedious and linear, where you encounter the same enemies in the same order in the same couple of levels. The AI is terrible and everyone spawns at a different time, making coordination that much more difficult. When the tutorial offers more surprises than the normal PvE game, then you know there is a problem. The paid conquest mode is only appealing for organized clans, and server lag is an issue: twenty simultaneous players is about fifteen too many. But the game looks good, so shallow gamers will be pleased. Global Agenda reminds me of a lesser version of Fury; this attempt will probably suffer a similar fate.

Game du Jour: Week of 14 February 2010

2010-02-15T00:00:00.003-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 14 February 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. February 15th: 50% off on Born Into Darkness

Tue. February 16th: 65% off on The Clumsys 2: Butterfly Effect

Wed. February 17th: 65% off on Evoly

Thu. February 18th: 50% off on Many Years Ago

Fri. February 19th: 65% off on Farm Mania 2

Sat. February 20th: 65% off on Azteca

Sun. February 21st: 65% off on Green Valley – Fun on the Farm

President’s Day Sale: Big Fish Games

2010-02-15T00:00:00.001-05:00

President’s Day Sale: Big Fish Games

Image via Wikipedia

Big Fish Games is offering 30% off all games (except Collector’s Edition games) through February 15, 2010 in honor of President’s Day.

Use the code: PREZSALE

Game du Jour Discounts for Week of 7 February 2010

2010-02-14T04:00:00.003-05:00

Game du Jour Discounts for Week of 7 February 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. February 8th: 65% off on Vacation Mogul

Tue. February 9th: 60% off on L!ght Deluxe

Wed. February 10th: 60% off on Architect: Episode 1

Thu. February 11th: 50% off on Strange Cases: The Tarot Card Mystery

Fri. February 12th: 50% off on Habitat Rescue: Lion’s Pride

Sat. February 13th: 60% off on King’s Smith

Sun. February 14th: 60% off on Angela Young 2: Escape the Dreamscape

New Game Release: Nightfall Mysteries – Curse of the Opera

2010-02-14T04:00:00.001-05:00

New Game Release: Nightfall Mysteries – Curse of the Opera

With the weather bad in many places (we have snow in Texas) — it’s a great time to cuddle up with a fun adventure and hidden object game. If you enjoyed Mystery Case Files: Return to Ravenhearst and PC Game Review: Mystery Case Files: Dire Grove, download Nightfall Mysteries – Curse of the Opera and don’t bother reading the rest of this.

I haven’t checked out Nightfall Mysteries – Curse of the Opera because I’ve had to lay off games and using the computer in the evenings due to eye problems. But I’m hearing it’s the kind of game that fans of point-and-click adventures will want to play while waiting for the sequel of their favorite to be released.

Take on the role of a lowly stagehand in an opera company tasked with solving a deadly mystery! The Opera troupe is invited by the reclusive Count Vladd Vansig III to his small hamlet to perform a special Opera for him. Strangely, there are no villagers to speak of except for the Count and his caretaker. Over the course of the night, people go missing and are killed! Use your Hidden Object skills to find out the identity of the killer and escape the village alive in Nightfall Mysteries – Curse of the Opera!

Download Nightfall Mysteries — Curse of the Opera

New Game Release: Nightfall Mysteries – Curse of the Opera

2010-02-11T20:00:00.001-05:00

New Game Release: Nightfall Mysteries – Curse of the Opera

Download Nightfall Mysteries — Curse of the Opera

Virtual City Review

2010-02-11T16:00:00.001-05:00

Virtual City Review

Virtual City, developed and published by G5 Entertainment.

The Good: Robust resource chains, must balance income with pollution and resident happiness, unambiguous and varied scenario conditions, generally fantastic interface, clear objectives, sandbox mode, your advisor is pretty hot

The Not So Good: I don't care for the music, repetitive after a while

What say you? Don't let the $10 price tag fool you: this is a comprehensive economic city builder and resource transportation game: 7/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

City builders seem to come in two flavors: resident-focused games like SimCity and Cities XL and resource-focused games like Grand Ages: Rome. In the former, you concentrate on building houses and services for those houses (employment, police, schools, et cetera). In the latter, you attend to producing goods at certain businesses and consuming them at others, earning you fat stacks of cash in the process. Virtual City is a combination of both of those city builder types with a pinch of click management for good measure. If we can’t rely on traditional big-budget publishers to crank out quality city builders, then we must turn to the casual market with their low, low prices. How does Virtual City and its $10 price tag stack up against more expensive entries in the genre?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Virtual City resorts to an isometric 2-D perspective for its visuals, and it works well. This is due to a great level of detail that permeates throughout the game: all of the buildings, vehicles, and scenery look great. Items are also animated nicely, producing a great (albeit not realistic) setting for the game. Virtual City is low resolution, but running it in a window is just fine and dandy. The sound design is worse off: the effects are fine, but I immediately turned off the overly chipper music. Yeah, that’s personal taste, but since this is my review, you’re stuck with it! Ha! Overall, Virtual City certainly delivers $10 worth of value in terms of graphics.

ET AL.

Virtual City puts you in charge of communities across the nation, making money by transporting goods and residents. The campaign is very linear, unlocking new cities in a set order. The game uses real U.S. cities scattered across five states in such exotic locations as Michigan, although the in-game representations hold no similarities to their real-life counterparts other than name (in fact, the game recycles some maps for multiple towns). There are ten or so missions per state, producing a somewhat lengthy campaign. One of the best features of Virtual City is the clear, explicit, and varied goals: not only does the game explain exactly what needs to be done in order to progress on to the next town, but the actual objectives never become repetitive (although the core gameplay might). Instead of more open-ended gameplay like you would see in a city builder like SimCity, the specific objectives of Virtual City add a lot to the appeal of the game. Attaining an expert rating, accomplished by completing the objectives within a set time limit, is balanced well: I usually had less than a minute (and usually seconds) left. Unfortunately, Virtual City lacks randomized maps, but it does contain five large maps for open-ended sandbox play, one for each state, that are unlocked as you complete the campaign. While the longevity of Virtual City isn’t infinite due to the lack of random maps, the campaign is entertaining and diverse enough to keep you interested for a while.

One of the things that makes or breaks a city builder is the interface, and Virtual City thankfully has an excellent one with only a couple of missteps. The game tries its best to make the somewhat complex resource chains visible to the player: when you select a truck for a new route, icons above each business indicate whether their goods are currently being transported with a green check. Once an origin is selected, an appropriate destination is automatically highlighted; this makes creating efficient routes a breeze. In addition, all of your vehicles are shown in the bottom of the interface at all times, so you can see exactly what they are doing without having to scour the map. What Virtual City needs is a list of all of the buildings with all of their checkmarks in one spot, like the ledger in Europa Universalis. This would make resource transportation fool-proof; I know I always forget to transport one good that holds up production at all of my other facilities. Virtual City also has on-screen indicators for missing road connections, disease, fire, and garbage, making it easy to remedy those sticky situations. Two other minor complains: Virtual City lacks a mini-map (but maps are small enough to keep tabs on things) and placing buildings does not auto-bulldoze trees. Otherwise, though, I really liked the interface that Virtual City offers.

Most of your money in Virtual City will be made by transporting goods between businesses. The game features seven product chains, from pies to furniture to the horseless carriage. In order for the end product to be successfully produced, you need to transport all of the intermediate pieces. Example: magazines sold at the shopping mall come from a printing factory, which gets paper from a paper factory (which gets wood from a sawmill and salvage from a recycling plant) and paint from a paint factory (which gets oil from an oil derrick). Got it? While there are only seven finished products in the game, the chains are complex and the maps are small so it’s enough. An industry can be used in more than one chain, adding to the confusion, and you can transport goods to and from neighboring cities. Houses can be built for your residents; businesses actually don’t require population, but you can make money by transporting people to places of interest by bus like shopping malls and stadiums. The environment can be improved by placing fountains and plazas, and fires and disease can be countered with fire stations and hospitals, respectively (interestingly, there is no crime in Virtual City). An alternative for fires and disease is to click on them; this is the small click management part of Virtual City, and it’s kind of annoying, but it gives you something to do during the small instances of waiting for resources to accumulate. Buildings can be upgraded to increase production and (strangely) decrease pollution. There are three vehicles to choose from: trucks, dumpsters, and buses. A truck can only transport a single good between two businesses, so most of your fleet will consist of trucks. It is important to make sure that your trucks are upgraded to the same level as the businesses they service in order to maximize efficiency and profits. Dumspters must be used to transport garbage from every building to the recycling plant, and buses are used to transport residents to entertainment facilities.

In addition to satisfying the objectives and simply making money, you must also pay attention to the environmental and happiness ratings. Happiness is increased by transporting people by bus to entertainment locations (this is like the third time I’ve said this…pay attention!) and the environmental rating is increased by upgrading existing industrial buildings and building pretty things like trees and fountains. There is a huge cheat in the game for happiness: if you have a plaza and enough money, you can queue up fireworks (or hot dogs thrown from a balloon…seriously) one right after another, driving your happiness up to insanely high levels. This is a way to bypass actually making a good city and simply use all of your cash; I don’t like it, but it did help me beat a number of scenarios. Virtual City is well paced, as there is usually very little waiting, maybe a minute or two at the end of the game, which can be tense as the expert timer counts down. After each scenario, you can spend points earned by reaching a high score on new buildings and environmental assets. Unfortunately, you have no idea which ones you’ll actually need in the next level: it made me kind of mad to waste points on a better oil derrick when the next scenario didn’t even use one. But this is a minor complaint in what is otherwise quite an entertaining game.

IN CLOSING

Virtual City takes good aspects from previous city builders and combines them into an effective package. The resource chains are complex enough to keep the game interesting, but simple enough to reduce confusion of newcomers. The interface helps the learning process, clearly displaying what each truck is transporting and areas of the map that need attention. I’d like to have a comprehensive list of all buildings and auto-bulldoze trees when placing new structures, but these are minor complaints overall. The game succeeds because you have to make money while keeping the environmental and entertainment ratings high. This means you have to balance industry and the landscaping of your town so it doesn’t become a polluted craphole. The fifty mission campaign can get repetitive, but the clear objectives are varied enough to keep you interested for most of the game. Fans of economic city builder games will find great value for $10.

Magnetis Review

2010-02-07T16:00:00.001-05:00

Magnetis Review

Magnetis, developed and published by Yullaby.

The Good: Simple yet distinctive mechanics, planning required for maximum score, satisfactory increase in difficulty, online leaderboards

The Not So Good: No online multiplayer, repetitive

What say you? A unique but limited take on the block puzzle game: 5/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Magnets are fun! They help us decorate our refrigerators and, uh, magnets are fun! But even more fun would be a computer game involving magnets: that’d be like double the fun. Or something. Magnetis is a puzzle game in the vein of Tetris or Dr. Mario (also known as “a total rip-off of Tetris”), where falling blocks must be matched and matched quickly, or else. Or else what? You do not want to know, my friend. This particular puzzle game was released on the magic white rectangular prism known to laymen as the Wii way back in 2009 C.E., and now it’s the PC’s turn. Should puzzle enthusiasts be drawn to Magnetis, or do opposites, in fact, repel?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Magnetis features simple yet effective graphics. You’re not really looking for outstanding quality with a puzzle game, but you can still make a successful presentation as we have here. Magnetis thrives because of its use of bright, contrasting colors, making it very easy to make matches. The blocks are also large and easy to identify, so the older among us won’t have to squint. The special effects are not that spectacular, and the animated backgrounds work well and aren’t distracting. The music and sound effects fall in line with expectations: generic puzzle music and appropriate indications of on-screen action. Overall, Magnetis provides a functional package.

ET AL.

Magnetis features magnets. Weird, right? In this game, there are left-facing magnets, right-facing magnets, and blocks to place in the middle. The further the magnets are apart when you complete a connection, the more points you earn. The game always gives you two blocks in the center that can be switched in position. You place them by moving the conveyor belt along the bottom of the screen (as opposed to moving the falling blocks themselves). They key to earning a high score is to clear multiple lines at once involving lots of connected blocks.

Difficulty is increased in two ways: by adding more magnet colors and by increasing the falling speed. Both of these make the game harder and require much more planning to make the most effective matches. Magnetis isn’t necessarily difficult (at least until the speed increases significantly), but you do need to be efficient to rack up the best score. To help you out, unconnected blocks will disappear after a while, which tends to eliminate stupid decisions as long as they weren’t made right next to a magnet. Magnetis, like most puzzle games, is repetitive, made worse by the lack of special blocks that would change up the gameplay. All you have is magnets and non-magnets, and the only change you’ll experience is the addition of more colors: not that exciting. The game can be played in the normal mode (go until you die), or with a time or block number limit. Multiplayer features both competitive and cooperative modes for up to four players, but lacks online play. You can play on the same computer, but who’s really going to do that on the PC? A very disappointing limitation. Your single player mode stats are uploaded to a central server and compared against others, but this is a small consolation prize for the lack of real multiplayer action.

IN CLOSING

Magnetis takes a different take on the puzzle genre and attempts to ride it all the way towards victory, but ultimately the game lacks the long-term interest required to finish the journey. The mechanics are interesting, connecting magnets to remove blocks, and the vibrant display makes it easy to see what’s going on, but the lack of robust features and varied gameplay hurt the overall value of Magnetis. The game would have really been great with online multiplayer, but instead its restricted to a high score list and same-computer competition. In addition, there are no special items: just having magnets and standard blocks gets boring after a while, and it reduces your strategic options. The difficulty is balanced well and ramps up quickly, keeping you on your toes as more colors appear and blocks fall faster, so attaining a high score does require planning, skill, and a little luck. Ultimately, Magnetis only held my interest for a short period of time; for puzzle fans, though, its $5 price tag would likely be justified. I would simply like to see the neat core mechanic coupled with online play and more varied puzzle elements.

Game du Jour Discounts for Week of 7 February 2010

2010-02-05T16:00:00.001-05:00

Game du Jour Discounts for Week of 7 February 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. February 8th: 65% off on Vacation Mogul

Tue. February 9th: 60% off on L!ght Deluxe

Wed. February 10th: 60% off on Architect: Episode 1

Thu. February 11th: 50% off on Strange Cases: The Tarot Card Mystery

Fri. February 12th: 50% off on Habitat Rescue: Lion’s Pride

Sat. February 13th: 60% off on King’s Smith

Sun. February 14th: 60% off on Angela Young 2: Escape the Dreamscape

Starters Orders 4 Review

2010-02-03T16:00:00.001-05:00

Starters Orders 4 Review

Starters Orders 4, developed and published by Strategic Designs.

The Good: Financial gains through both betting and stable wins, very detailed horse attributes, robust training and breeding options, complete race simulations with optional direct jockey control, same-PC multiplayer, thorough documentation, editing features

The Not So Good: A very niche product, repetitive, limited betting options

What say you? An all-inclusive horse racing simulation, if you are in to that sort of thing: 6/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Horse racing is something that most Americans, I think, have a passing interest in right around the first Saturday in May. Apparently the sport is big business, mainly thanks to betting and rich people with nothing better to do. I am more accustomed to “ small horse” racing around these here parts, but them high-flautin’ (good luck with that one, spell check) horses are famous enough to spawn a number of computer simulations. One of those, currently in its fourth iteration, is Starters Orders, where you own, train, breed, and bet on horses, the kinds of things you would do in real life if you had a lot of money to spend/waste. Let’s all pretend, shall we?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Starters Orders 4 is primarily a text-based game, so most of the graphics you will encounter are fun, exciting things like menus. That said, the interface is decent enough and makes accessing most of the information in the game easy. There are some cumbersome instances, like accessing a horse’s fatigue and fitness (which should be shown on the main screen), but most pertinent information is easy enough to find and a lot of it is shown on the primary display. Starters Orders 4 also features some good filters that makes it very easy to find appropriate races for each of your trusty steeds. There are a good number of horse pictures to give a sense of attachment to your racers. The races are rendered in 2-D, with animated horses and jockeys that look good but are repetitive. The textures are blurry at high resolution (really evident during photo finishes), but we’re not expecting photo-realism here so we’ll let it slide. Sound consists of very quiet and very British commentary given during the races; the voices are not computerized, but they only refer to horses by starting position number instead of by name. Still, the graphics of Starters Orders 4 are functional, which is all you really need in a sports management title.

ET AL.

Starters Orders 4 features horse racing in the United States, United Kingdom (also known as “England Plus”), Ireland, and Australia, including both flat and jumps racing formats for those who crave variety. The game includes a lot of the real venues, including all the famous races (like the Breeder’s Cup) they could use without paying for an official license. You can begin a new game as an upstart trainer with only three very expensive horses to your name, or take your chances in the betting-only mode. Starters Orders 4 has same-computer multiplayer if you have real friends who are also interested in horse racing management games (and who doesn’t?!), or horses can be exported for online leagues, where the commissioner will send replay files back to show you how incompetent you really are. While Starters Orders 4 lacks a tutorial, the game does feature extensive in-game help and a robust manual for all of your consulting needs; the organized interface also helps to learn the game. Finally, there is a complete suite of editing programs that allow you to customize races, horses, and jockeys to your liking, perfect for those obsessive folk among us that must incorporate all of the actual horses into the game.

You are the trainer for a stable of horses, leading them on to victory (not likely). Each horse in the game is rated in several areas for performance: fitness, speed, stamina, acceleration, and fatigue. Fitness is increased by training the horses the days and weeks before each race: gentle training is for injured steeds, moderate for periods between races, and intense galloping for maximum race preparation. You can also focus training on speed or stamina or special abilities like jumping and starting races. It’s up to you to find your horses’ preferred tactics and events, as special preferences (like dirt tracks) will develop over time. This really makes the horses like RPG characters, as you do get attached to your racers. Successful horses can be bred to produce The Horse of Tomorrow, and less spectacular specimens can be auctioned off to the highest bidder. Those with a lot of money to spend can invest in additions to their stable, like swimming pools to improve stamina or increased capacity. You can also adjust the staff wages and feed quality to further customize your stable attributes. The options for horse management in Starters Orders 4 are comprehensive.

Now that your trusty steed is fully prepped, it’s time to go racing. Starters Orders 4 features a number of events to satisfy all horse quality levels. The winner of selling and claiming races is auctioned off, maiden races are reserved for horses that have never won a race, and handicap events are restricted to a specified range (like 0-60). For better horses, listed and group races are available with higher purses (and better competition). You have to declare for a race in advance, which makes planning your training appropriately important. Jockeys can be assigned from the global pool, or you can retain a jockey for personal use for a weekly fee. In addition, you can apprentice jockeys under a more experienced rider. For a race, you can specify an array of jockey orders, from go-easy to pacemaker. Sometimes, you don’t actually want to win a race (this is called “cheating”), and you can instruct your jockey accordingly. Additional instructions can also be given, like don’t lead or challenge later in the race. If this hands-off approach is too disconnected, you can take the reins yourself, opting for simple arcade controls using the arrow keys or the more complex standard mode using the mouse. In standard mode, you define your pace before the bell, time the start, and use the mouse to steer. The game also indicates whether you are near your horse’s cruising speed and optimal position. It’s nice to have the options to directly control the horses during the race, but I found that the AI jockeys do a good enough job and I never wanted to lose a race because of my personal ineptitude.

A large part of horse racing is betting, and Starters Orders 4 offers very basic betting options. Types of bets include win, each-way (which is a win bet coupled with a place bet), forecasting the top two finishers, and an accumulator for several races. I felt that the options here are surprisingly limited with several missing options: show, trifecta, and superfecta (among others) are simply not here. I guess it doesn’t pay to be in third place. I was also confused as to why the game lets you place an each-way bet on a race with less than five runners, since you need six or more horses in order for a place finish to count. Interestingly, you can bet on other horses racing against one of your own! What is this,the NBA? I did find the races to be somewhat exciting when you have large bets riding on the winners; I suppose this is the appeal of the real-life sport. Starters Orders 4 can get repetitive after a while, though, as the core of the game involves training, betting, and racing in a continual loop. The game can also become tedious because your stable can support up to sixty horses: that’s a lot of management! Still, horse fanatics will find a pleasing, detailed simulation of the sport.

IN CLOSING

If you are looking for a horse simulation, Starters Orders 4 is a good choice. The game features all of the options needed for a complete sports management game, only in equine format. The game covers the globe, featuring both flat and jumps racing in several countries and providing an infinite career mode where you raise horses from birth to glorious stud (awwww yeah!). Horses have a number of distinct attributes, like preferred length and surface, that makes each of them feel like individuals. You can tailor their training regimen for optimal performance, breed successful horses, and run a successful stable. There are a number of race types to choose from; there is always an option for every horse, no matter how young or untalented they might be. The race results are plausible, injecting uncertainty into the betting of the game. I like that money can be made by having winning horses or placing good bets (or a combination of both, of course): more options is always better. You can even take the reins yourself for a more interactive experience, although the jockeys seem to do a fine enough job on their own. For $30-$35 (depending on the exchange rate of the dollar, and the wind conditions), Starters Orders 4 delivers good value for fans of the genre. Yes, it’s getting a six mostly because it’s a horse sim with limited widespread appeal, but if that’s not a good use for the “buy it if you like the genre” rating, then what is? People not interested in horse racing will be bored to death here, but if the prospect of raising and racing a cavalcade of horses is interesting to you, then Starters Orders 4 wins the roses.

Game du Jour: Week of 17 January 2009

2010-02-02T12:00:00.003-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 17 January 2009

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Sun. January 17th: 65% off on Slingo Mystery: Who’s Gold

Mon. January 18th: 81% off on The Build-a-lot Game-Pack [Reviews Build-a-lot, 2: Town of the Year and 3: Passport to Europe]

Tue. January 19th: 45% off on Wedding Dash: Ready, Aim, Love [Review]

Wed. January 20th: 50% off on Collapse!

Thu. January 21st: 50% off on Marooned

Fri. January 22nd: 65% off on Tropical Farm

Sat. January 23rd: 45% off on Gotcha: Celebrity Secrets [Review]

Game du Jour: Week of 31 January 2010

2010-02-02T12:00:00.001-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 31 January 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. February 1st: 65% off on Mirror Mysteries

Tue. February 2nd: 65% off on 1001 Nights: The Adventures of Sindbad

Wed. February 3rd: 50% off on Simplz: Zoo

Thu. February 4th: 65% off on Boonka

Fri. February 5th: 65% off on Rasputin’s Curse

Sat. February 6th: 60% off on Passport to Paradise

Sun. February 7th: 65% off on Magic Academy 2

Game du Jour: Week of 31 January 2010

2010-02-01T08:00:00.001-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 31 January 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Mon. February 1st: 65% off on Mirror Mysteries

Tue. February 2nd: 65% off on 1001 Nights: The Adventures of Sindbad

Wed. February 3rd: 50% off on Simplz: Zoo

Thu. February 4th: 65% off on Boonka

Fri. February 5th: 65% off on Rasputin’s Curse

Sat. February 6th: 60% off on Passport to Paradise

Sun. February 7th: 65% off on Magic Academy 2

Cyber-Wing Review

2010-01-31T16:00:00.001-05:00

Cyber-Wing Review

Cyber-Wing, developed and published by Martian Arctic Games.

The Good: Neat and tactically interesting (though not original) mix of first person shooting and real-time strategy, Internet multiplayer, very inexpensive

The Not So Good: Limited number of commands and units, needs a longer respawn time for commander unit, tedious unit transport, short single player training campaign, only five multiplayer maps, can't save mid-mission

What say you? Basically a 3-D, online multiplayer version of Herzog Zwei, but there's nothing wrong with a good copy of quality game design: 7/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Remember Herzog Zwei? Yeah, me neither, but apparently it was one of the first real time strategy games, if Wikipedia is meant to be believed (and when has it ever steered us wrong?). Instead of being an omnipresent commander, you directed troops from a single unit, ordering additional support and transporting allies to the front lines. Frankly, it surprises me that more clones haven’t cropped in the past 20 years. The cool thing to do nowadays is combine different genres into a cohesive product, so that’s exactly what Cyber-Wing attempts to do here. This title can be thought of as a remake of Herzog Zwei, but with 3-D graphics and online multiplayer. That’s enough to get me interested: how is it?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Maybe it’s because I play so many independent games, but I found the graphics of Cyber-Wing to be decent. Sure, the game lacks cutting-edge fancy of high-budget first person shooters, but it does deliver some nice varied environments with detailed terrain. The units have some nice models and the textures are certainly done well. The effects are where the game lags behind: unit animations are erratic (especially death) and weapons and blood are simplistic at best. Still, for $5, you definitely get your money’s worth. The sound design is less impressive, as non of the in-game dialogue is voiced, save for the occasional order, and the effects are quite basic. I did find the background music to be decent enough in a campy sense, though. But, hey, what do you want for $5? Candy? Me too!

ET AL.

In Cyber-Wing, you control a transforming mech-jet thing, purchasing and ordering units from a first- and third-person perspective to assist in your assault on the enemy strongholds. To learn the game, Cyber-Wing features eight single player training missions (which can be completed in any order) that gives you a new ability each mission, from your weapons to the abilities and the units. The game doesn’t say it gradually unlocks things, though, so I was trying to order units around in the first mission when that ability was disabled. Most of the missions (except for one defend mission) involve taking all of the enemy bases, but the gradual introduction of new units makes them play out differently enough. The game saves your best scores for each level (time and casualties) for future comparison. Cyber-Wing does not allow you to save your progress mid-mission, however, so once you sit down you had better finish. While the game does not give explicit directions on how to do things, the single player missions serve as a good introduction to the game’s mechanics. Cyber-Wing lacks off-line documentation, but there is an online manual to peruse. You can also engage in skirmish matches against the AI: “hard” AI is faster and does more damage and actually offers a good challenge. But the real focus of Cyber-Wing is multiplayer. The game offers one-on-one and two-on-two matches on any of five maps. While a larger selection would be nice, the linear nature of the map layout (necessitated by the simplified command system) means that most maps play out the same anyway, so additional maps wouldn’t really increase strategic variety. Regrettably, there is nobody playing the game online, essentially negating this important aspect of Cyber-Wing. That’s too bad, because the game is quite enjoyable.

You control Cyber-Wing from within your mechanized robot plane called a “ZOG”. Movement uses the traditional WASD keys, and additional keyboard controls are used for ordering and commanding troops. Most importantly, you can transform into a plane: this is useful for covering ground quickly and it’s required for transporting newly constructed units. To balance its usefulness, fuel is required to fly, replenished only while near a friendly base. Fuel appears to be time-based rather than usage-based, so quick movement is important. The game is balanced to give you just enough fuel to proceed to an enemy base and back to a friendly one, so smart planning is required. As I mentioned earlier, you need to fly units from any base to wherever you want them; this process is tedious to be sure, but at least the unit counts are small and it does slow the quick pace of the game down some. It also leads to some anxious waiting while your forces recover. There are a couple of oddities with the interface: friendly units are red while enemy units are blue, which is the total opposite of every other game (except, of course, for Herzog Zwei). This is only true half of the time in multiplayer, but it is always the case in the tutorial missions; it would be nice to always have the enemy red to keep things consistent. Red means dead. Oh, and the mini-map is too small, both in actual screen size and range: a scale option would be nice.

There are eight units you can build in Cyber-Wing, each suitable for a specified purpose. Four infantry are required to capture any base, and their fragile nature means better units must protect them. Mechs (cheap) and tanks (expensive) provide most of your firepower, SAM launchers combat enemy commander units, boats can float, and support vehicles heal. Stationary gun batteries can also be purchased, and moved to other locations if needed. Finally, commandos are faster, more robust infantry units that learned how to swim and climb rocks. You don’t actually control any of these units directly, instead issuing one of four orders: attack the nearest unfriendly base, defend, destroy the enemy headquarters, and retreat. You pick one order at a time to use, which can be issued to newly airdropped units or any surrounding forces. This system does not provide the precision desired in true RTS games, but it actually works pretty well and allows you do put together some interesting strategies. Units are produced using resources that are automatically collected according to the number of outposts and refineries you control: more is better. The friendly AI is smart enough to follow the simple orders, and the enemy AI is good at efficiently producing troops and attacking undefended bases. The enemy is not as aggressive as I would like, but on “hard” difficulty, they do put up a good challenge. Cyber-Wing does have some pathfinding issues, though, with units blocking infantry from entering neutral or enemy bases; this can be countered by manually airlifting the roadblocks, but this shouldn’t be necessary.

On the surface, Cyber-Wing looks to be simplistic due to the limited unit count, but it does offer some interesting strategy. The main strategic decision is when to assault the enemy base: when do you have enough troops? It need to make sure you have enough infantry to flip the base, or the enemy commander will respawn and easily dispatch of all of your units. There is certainly a tense build-up of units after a major fight, especially since units must be individually and manually deployed onto the battlefield. The unit cap of twenty-five units isn’t that low since it takes so long to build up a significant army. You cannot queue units even if you have the resources; I'd like the game to automatically start building the next unit in a queue one once you've picked up the previous one. Cyber-Wing is similar to control-point based first person shooters, where it is important to control bases for resources and more troops, which tends to concentrate the action around the linear set of outposts. My main (probably) fixable complaint has to do with the respawn times for the commander unit: instant respawn means a lot of spamming (seeing the enemy commander over and over again) if you are one outpost away from the enemy base; the enemy commander can dispose of a lot units on their own, so if you don't have overwhelming force, you can lose forward bases quickly. I think making adding a respawn time and making it proportional to how many bases you have left (the more bases, the shorter it is...especially since you'll be further away from the action) would remedy this. Still, this is a minor complaint in an otherwise entertaining hybrid game.

IN CLOSING

Cyber-Wing is successful at what it attempts to do: bring Herzog Zwei into whatever century this is with 3-D graphics and online multiplayer. The 3-D graphics are quite acceptable for a $5 independent project, and so is the gameplay. Commanding all of your units from within your transformer is quite effective, issuing simple commands to take enemy bases or defend against incoming attacks. One could argue that the commands in Cyber-Wing are no less complicated than any mainstream RTS, and it’s quite fun to fight along side your troops. This method is far more interesting than simply controlling a random unit, as your flying abilities and powerful weapons make you a force that can turn a stalemate less stale, much like the demigods in Demigod (actually, Cyber-Wing is similar in several respects, although here you get direct control over subordinate units). Transporting units back and forth can be cumbersome, since you cannot queue unit production and you must pick up every unit individually from your base or a friendly outpost. Still, this results in some tense gameplay as both sides build up their forces and wait for the other to attack. Despite the roster of only eight units, they do give you some strategic liberty with their varied uses. You will spend most of your time using the flying mode, since it is required to transport units from bases to their destination; I do like the feeling of changing from a plane to a mech, guns blazing as you transition to the ground. The AI provides a competent yet cautious opponent, taking undefended bases and providing good training for online matches. There are some pathfinding problems with the AI, namely with infantry getting stuck on other units, but you can airlift stuck units manually as a solution. Unfortunately, multiplayer, the real focus of the game, is not populated with human opponents, but hopefully this review will change that. Cyber-Wing features a training campaign of eight missions and only five multiplayer maps, but it certainly has a fantastic foundation on which to build. Those looking for a more action-oriented approach to strategy gaming should check out Cyber-Wing.

Professional Football Simulator Review

2010-01-28T20:00:00.001-05:00

Professional Football Simulator Review

Professional Football Simulator, developed and published by Barcode Games.

The Good: Accurate game simulations, good multiplayer league support, NFL-like injury system, robust statistics, easy to import real teams and players

The Not So Good: No in-game documentation, non-interactive games, needs more offensive formations, no penalty for being over salary cap, easy to acquire quality free agents, low injury frequency, occasional interface quirks

What say you? A text-based football simulation that needs a bit more polish: 5/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

With the Super Bowl only a week away, now is a good time to evaluate another text-based football game. Ever since Madden pushes all of the contenders out of the market, the only real alternatives have been Maximum Football and a host of text-based sims like Football Mogul. I certainly don’t mind the removal of 3-D graphics for a more complete and customizable game, so titles like the very generically-named Professional Football Simulator fit the bill. This particular game is designed for multiplayer leagues (they are quite popular) but can also be enjoyed by lonesome people with no friends (like me!). How does this title stack up against the other text-based sims?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Because this is a text-based simulation, there's not much to talk about here, so we'll delve in to the interface that Professional Football Simulator offers: it’s OK. Most of the information is accessible by the main menu at the top of the screen, while the remainder is found through the team pages. It should be easier to get to your team page: there is no option along the menu to instantly warp to your team’s data. Since almost everyone will only control one team, the lack of this feature becomes annoying once you get in to the game. There are also some assorted inconsistencies in the interface: for example, overall skill rating is displayed in most, but not all, player lists, the free agent data being one that is missing this useful summary. Still, despite these minor (but accumulative) annoyances, Professional Football Simulator features a usable interface that makes it easy to access most, but not all, of the pertinent data. Oh, and there is no sound. Next!

ET AL.

Professional Football Simulator puts you in the general manager’s role of a professional football team. You can play both offline and as part of an online league, and Professional Football Simulator has nice support for leagues: data can be automatically uploaded to your FTP server, and other players can download the data from within the game. You can also send a message to other owners, all from within the game. In addition, you can export data in CSV or HTML format if you want to have a more manual approach, and players from Bowl Bound College Football can be imported to continue those legacies. While Professional Football Simulator does not include an NFL license, the author has provided real rosters on the forums and you can download the real teams and real players from the 2009 season (and they are pretty accurate, too). You can customize the schedule and teams when a new league is created, or expand an existing league between seasons. Picking a particular team is overly complicated: you must select the team (after you have created the league), choose “config,” and unselect “AI controlled.” I had to e-mail the developer to figure that out, as Professional Football Simulator lacks both a tutorial and documentation, either in-game, offline, or online. Boo/hiss.

The first thing you’ll do with your new team is free agency, since the draft has already been conducted without your consent. But I’ll start there since it’s first chronologically in the off-season endeavors. The draft is a fairly typical procedure: pick people. You can import a list of players (from Bowl Bound College Football or any other CSV file) if you so choose. Players are given overall ratings, and, like most games, some positions are given relatively higher overall ratings (tight ends and fullbacks, specifically), but you can easily filter them out. I like being able to see the team recap, which displays your draft picks and the team position analysis, during the draft. However, drafts run out of premium positions far too quickly: all of the quarterbacks are gone by the end of the first round, which should never happen as there is always more talent to choose from. I think the AI drafting procedure is partially to blame for this, as they put a large premium on certain spots. The result is the ability to choose better players at other positions, as the AI is more concerned elsewhere. I also bemoan the lack of potential ratings: a player may be bad now but good later on, but Professional Football Simulator just assumes all players will develop at the same rate from their initial ratings. Thus, there isn’t any uncertainty in the drafting process like there is in real life. The other way to make your team better is through free agency, and unfortunately this aspect of Professional Football Simulator has one major problem. There is an entire free agency bidding period like there is in real life, but you can actually go over the salary cap without penalty, making acquiring talented players a real problem. Of course, the real NFL won't have a salary cap next season, so maybe this isn't a big deal, but if you are going to have a cap, enforce the cap. Any free agents remaining after the initial period can be acquired for the minimum salary, even if their ratings suggest that they should be paid more. The AI is inconsistent enough in their handling of free agency that you can stock up on cheap, veteran talent very easily. Extensions are automatically negotiated: players want a set amount and you either agree or not.

Professional Football Simulator does have extensive statistics and record keeping. League leaders, top performers, draft results, pro bowl history, playoff results, and historical stats are all kept for current and future reference. Team stats (passing, rushing, defense, et cetera) are kept for the current year, and team records are meant to be broken. Players get their stats through their ratings: an overall summary, plus things like strength, agility, speed, accuracy, blocking, and run tackling. You have to guess which categories are best for which positions (which is why the overall rating is quite useful), but all of your ratings seem to be the actual numbers so there are no scouting errors involved to make for a more uncertain (and interesting) game.

Once you have acquired your players, most of your contact with Professional Football Simulator is finished. This is because all of the actual games are completely simulated: you can only watch the text-only play by play after the game is over (and after you see the final score, unfortunately). The simulation results are actually quite accurate, but those looking for a more interactive experience will be disappointed. You can customize the team’s approach somewhat though the play calling, which is a nice feature. You can set offensive (run versus pass) and defensive (blitz versus coverage) tendencies, in addition to how often you use certain formations. Offenses choose from the I, pro, shotgun, and spread formations, while defenses get the 4-3, 3-4, nickel, dime, and cover 2. You can designate the depth chart for each of the formations, allowing you to tailor your gameplan towards your team’s strengths. While the defensive formation selections are complete, I would like many more offensive possibilities to take advantage of multiple tight end or receiver sets. As it stands, the I and pro are the same (2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE) and the shotgun and spread are the same (1 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE): rather limited, I would say. You do have to pay attention to injuries, as Professional Football Simulator uses the NFL system of out/doubtful/questionable/probable (I like that). However, injuries are not as frequent as in the big leagues (I rarely used injured reserve), so there are never teams decimated by injury like in real life. Once you have your roster set during the offseason, there is really nothing left to do. Just like a real GM! Because Professional Football Simulator doesn’t let you play the games, the AI only crops up during the draft and free agency, and it seems to provide competent opposition to your dynasty.

IN CLOSING

While not the best football text simulation out there, Professional Football Simulator has the potential, with additional development, to be a good title. As it stands now, though, there are too many rough edges to make it a fully recommended title. It starts with the interface, which does a good, but not completely good, job giving you access to all of the important statistics. And there are a lot of statistics to access, as Professional Football Simulator provides a good amount of detail for both individual and team stats for the current and past season, satisfying the urge of any armchair general manager. This game is designed for multiplayer leagues, and it has good support there, too: you can have the game automatically upload your data to an FTP server or download the latest standings and results whenever you load the game. Drafting is simple, although the game is deficient in the number of players it provides for key positions: good luck finding any quarterback after round one. Free agency can be exploited, as you can sign any left-over quality players (of which there are typically many) to a minimum contract after the free agency period. There is also no penalty for going over the salary cap, so you can overspend and have great success. Sure, you could be a good boy (or girl?) and not cheat the system, but the fact that the game allows you to do so shows the rough nature of the product as a whole. You do not interact at all during the actual games (meaning you are in a GM role rather than a coach), so you are given some very basic formations to use in place of calling specific plays; I like the approach, but more formations are needed for a more complete feel. The AI-controlled teams are good enough; since all they do is sign free agents and draft, their importance is minimal. In the end, Professional Football Simulator gets the basics right, but it needs about another year of work to iron out the bugs and inconsistencies.

World Empires Live Review

2010-01-26T00:00:00.001-05:00

World Empires Live Review

World Empires Live, developed and published by Firepower Entertainment and Noble Master Games.

The Good: Automated research, decent music

The Not So Good: Single expansion-through-combat strategy, trivial economics, inactive AI opponent, no tutorial and useless manual, only one map and no game customization options, rough mix of turn-based and real-time play, can't host games if behind a router, absent online population, low resolution graphics and limited windowed mode support, can't save the game, subscription fee

What say you? A simplified multiplayer Civilization game stuck behind many issues: 2/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Civilization IV was the first game I gave a perfect score to because it was good. The turn-based global domination series has certainly inspired its share of copycats and clones among the PC strategy genre. Speaking of, here comes World Empires Live, an online centered approach to leading your feeble city towards world notoriety, fame, and fortune. This title strips down the genre to its basics and chooses more streamlined approach for faster online game. Does it work? Well, looking at the score, I'd say no. No it does not.

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

World Empires Live takes place on a 2-D map of the world, featuring graphics that are not much better than Civilization II. The game features some very basic unit animations (two frames, typically) on a very bare map of the world. In addition, the game is displayed at a low resolution. This isn't a big deal, but windowed mode is dreadful: it's always in the upper left corner of the screen, and World Empires Live does not play well with Windows 7, requiring the Aero features to be turned off in order to run. For how basic the graphics are, I was obviously surprised at how poorly the game runs. There are performance delays all over the place especially when attempting to scroll the map. In a game that plays out in a turn-based, real-time hybrid where actions must be completed within a time limit, this is a grave problem. It should also be noted that you cannot save your progress, and quitting the game has about a 50/50 chance of success. It's clear that World Empires Live is not ready for an official release. On the bright side, I did like the music, so it has that going for it, which is nice. Of course, the sound effects were abrupt and repetitive, so that grounds the audio package. I want to make clear that I am not disparaging the 2-D graphics, but the performance thereof: the game approaches an unplayable condition.

ET AL.

In World Empires Live, you lead a meager one-town civilization towards global domination. As the “Live” in the title indicates, this is intended as an Internet game, though you can play against the AI. World Empires Live provides some very limited options for setting up games: you can have anywhere between two and eight players, but there are no choices for rules, technology or economic rates, or even starting position, as the game just assigns you a random city. World Empires Live takes place on only one map (the world) with no randomization whatsoever. Though the game does come with a server browser, multiplayer features are otherwise disappointing: the game does not save your login information and you can’t even host a game if you are behind a router (a limitation I haven’t encountered with any other online title in recent (or even distant) memory). In addition, I’ve never seen anyone else online, probably because of all the issues with World Empires Live. Learning the game is also a difficult chore, as World Empires Live lacks a tutorial (really?!) and the online manual is really bad and doesn't explain game basics, like how to deploy units. The manual is also poorly organized to boot, so you will most likely be completely lost starting out, as I was. It should also be noted that World Empires Live uses a subscription model: three months for $9 or a year for $25. This is not exorbitant, but it’s not like World Empires Live features anything better than your typical online strategy game.

You start out a game of World Empires Live with only one city, and since you can’t build any others (seriously?!), you will need to expand quickly. Towns need raw materials, luxury items, and researched technologies to allow for city upgrades, which in turn produce more manpower (for military units) and victory points as cities grow. You will collect the main resources by sending out a prospector unit to a potential mine. There is only a 20% chance of actually being successful, and since everyone is only given two potential resource sites, most games you will be stuck having no resources whatsoever. That’s simply bad game design. You can use cash income (from taxes, mostly) to offset these resource deficiencies, but it still really dumb. If you are lucky enough to actually get a resource site, once you have enough money you can activate it. Negotiators can be sent to foreign resource locations to “steal” their resources (the manual, of course, doesn’t tell you this at all; I had to e-mail the developer). Another source of income is fishing: research the tech, build a sea port, and any naval unit next to a fish hex will produce money.

There is one good thing about World Empires Live: automated research. Spend money on scientists and assign them to four fields of study: combat, mining, economy, and infrastructure. Three different projects are concurrently researched in each group, although you can choose one to focus on. It’s nice to have this part of the game taken care for you, instead of having to choose a new project every couple of turns. New technologies are used for better military units, structures, production, and upgrades. Diplomacy in the game is very simple: declare war (though you can have truces or non-aggression pacts, but why?). In order to do so, you need to have at least one military unit on their border (which makes it trivially easy to scout incoming attacks) and not have too many wars going on at once. Simple enough.

Each era in the game, determined by your technology rating, has a couple of units divided into normal (ground), ranged, mobile, siege, and special types. Units are ordered in one menu and (of course) deployed using a completely other interface button; the manual (of course) doesn’t explain this at all. Combat is done by using offensive (ground, anti-ranged, anti-mobile, effectiveness) and defensive ratings (survivability). It’s all quite predictable.

World Empires Live uses a mix of turn-based and real-time play that doesn’t work. Essentially, a time limit is imposed for completing each turn, and the default of 10 seconds per turn is way too short for the middle and end of a game when you have lots of units and wars going on. Slow clickers will definitely be at a disadvantage, and the slow and unresponsive interface doesn’t help matters at all. I suppose this is how you adapt a turn-based game for multiplayer, but it’s just a mess; it would have been easier to just add in “end turn” buttons or a limit that dynamically adjusts based on how far along you are in the game. In the end, though, World Empires Live is a game about combat: since you can’t found any additional cities and successfully mining resources only happens about 20% of the time, you will need to expand quickly. This means World Empires Live only has one strategy: military. Economic or diplomatic victories are all out of the picture, as the only way to accumulate enough victory points is to add new cities and increase your tech level (which means you need more resources “borrowed” from your neighbors). As a result, World Empires Live lacks the depth of other world domination titles and becomes quite repetitive. There are no difficulty settings for the AI, as they are permanently set to “dumb.” Your AI opponents hardly do anything other than producing the occasional units. You won’t be playing for long, however, as World Empires Live will pound you into submission with its inept interface, performance problems, questionable design, frivolous strategy, and limited features.

IN CLOSING

World Empires Live probably sounded like a good idea at the time, but the execution is so appalling that the game has no appeal. The game’s lone feature of merit, automated research, is lost among a sea of ineptitude. First off, the game is barely playable as the performance of the 2-D game overall is awful. The game options are lacking as well: you are given no choices for game rules, there is only one world map, you can’t even host if you use a router, and you can’t even save or quit the game. Learning the basics is difficult as World Empires Live lacks a tutorial and the online manual isn’t organized at all and leaves out several important game concepts. The economics model is basic, and acquiring these resources is next to impossible thanks to the low success rate in mining potential sites. Because of this, and the fact that you cannot make any new cities, you must expand and expand quickly, declaring war on your neighbor with the fewest military units. This military-only approach makes World Empires Live only have one real strategy, which means every game plays out the same. The game’s use of time limited turns makes playing the game confusing and needlessly hectic. The AI doesn’t help either: it usually does nothing, occasionally building military units or upgrading its city, but never providing a capable opponent. While World Empires Live is designed for online play, I can’t imagine anyone putting up with this long enough to renew their subscription.

Officers – The Matrix Edition Review

2010-01-21T16:00:00.001-05:00

Officers – The Matrix Edition Review

Officers – The Matrix Edition, developed by Game Factory Interactive and published by Matrix Games.

The Good: Impressive map scale with truly enormous battles and strategic freedom, devastating support options, units gain experience, automated transport of supplies

The Not So Good: Unpolished with pathfinding issues, high level of difficulty, unrealistic generic combat, lacks Internet matchmaking and skirmish games, annoying camera, long load times

What say you? Absolutely huge maps are a significant highlight in an otherwise generic World War II real-time tactical strategy game: 5/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Most real-time strategy games take place on a small map, representing a single town, village, swamp, or recycling center. It's all a bit restrictive, not letting you truly use actual tactics on a large scale. Well, no more! Officers – The Matrix Edition combines what would normally comprise four or five scenarios into one giant map of death and destruction, allowing you to attack the scenario from many different approaches. This game actually originally came out a year and a half ago and has received some touch-ups at the request of new publisher Matrix Games (so the Matrix Edition does not involve Neo and Morpheus, then). The large map size is enough to make for a notable title, so, in my 600th review (!), let's see if it's a one-trick pony or king of the race track (I lack good horse analogies…sorry).

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Officers: The Matrix Edition looks decent for a real-time strategy game, considering how large the maps are. The game lacks the detail of Men of War or Theatre of War: most of the environments have few, repetitive buildings, but the vast terrain is a hallmark. The textures and the units could also be more detailed, and the result is a game that looks like it came out five years ago. One impressive facet of the graphics is the explosions: they are not at the same scale as World in Conflict, but they are more realistic and successfully convey the high amount of destruction that artillery provides. The time of day effects are a nice touch, but Officers “The Matrix Edition” still looks old-ish, similar in style to Rush for Berlin. The sound design is passable at best: some good explosions and vehicle effects, but there are no voiced instructions or dialogue whatsoever, meaning you must resort to written instructions for objectives. And we all know reading is for suckers. The background music is fitting but instantly forgettable. Officers (The Matrix Edition) looks out of date, simply put, but the graphics will be acceptable by those gamers used to 2-D hexes and NATO counters.

ET AL.

Officers !The Matrix Edition! takes place during (surprise!) World War II, when the Allies decided enough was enough and invaded France. The game features a linear campaign (all scenarios are locked in order) consisting of six missions (plus one for Germany). This initially seems like a really low number until you realize that the maps are absolutely huge. Easily the best part of Officers ^The Matrix Edition^, each map is like three or four “normal” scenarios put together. The benefit is more strategic freedom in attacking your objectives. Most single player RTS games usually have one (maybe two) optimal solution in approaching an objective; in Officers $The Matrix Edition$, you have the liberty to take things from many different angles. It’s a nice feature that’s more than a simple bullet point. Of course, because the maps are so large, there are some long load times to endure here, so be prepared. Unfortunately, the features essentially end with the campaign: there are no skirmish matches against the AI and multiplayer is limited to LAN and direct IP matches only, which means enjoying Officers %The Matrix Edition% with others is essentially out of the question. The lack of matchmaking is a baffling omission in today’s multiplayer-driven gaming environment. There is a beta patch that adds an editor to the game, so that might produce some small amount of replay value, but the lack of content beyond the scenarios is troubling.

Officers +The Matrix Edition+ features a fairly conventional interface and controls for a real-time strategy game: left-click select, right-click move/attack. Right-click is contextual, meaning that right-clicking on a trench or a set of bushes will put your units behind cover (at least in theory…more on that later). Additional orders include repairing vehicles, laying or sweeping mines, embarking vehicles, or using roads: the typical stuff in any military game. Your units can also be set to aggressive stance in order to automatically engage incoming enemy units. A game of this scale needs an efficient way of getting information, and sadly Officers |The Matrix Edition| lacks this important requirement. First off, the messaging system compiles almost all alerts in an interface that’s always one click away; you do get on-screen notifications of units and strategic locations being attacked, but additional information (like objectives) are stored away from the main screen. In addition, it is extremely difficult to find units because the maps are so huge: Officers {The Matrix Edition} desperately needs an order or battle that’s permanently displayed on the side of the screen. The game also suffers from camera problems: the game doesn’t zoom in and out quickly enough, and using the minimap resets the camera to some weird, unusable angle.

Officers =The Matrix Edition= has a typical selection of units to choose from: infantry (equipped with submachine guns, rifles, anti-tank guns, and rocket launchers), tanks, artillery, recon and transport vehicles, and aircraft. Units gain experience with combat, improving their rate of fire, accuracy, repair attributes, or movement speed. Regrettably, you will rarely have a unit survive long enough to use these benefits, as death is quick and painful in Officers /The Matrix Edition/. There isn’t any resource management here: just capture locations and more units will become available. Gaining ground is also important to get additional supplies: fuel, food, and ammunition. These supplies are periodically transported by trucks out to your troops automatically: a neat system where you can destroy enemy resource chains to gain an advantage. You will typically deal with these by using the impressive support options: bombers, paratroopers, fighters, artillery, and reinforcements can all be called in. You have a limited number of each, so manage your options wisely.

Officers ]The Matrix Edition[ has some very generic combat. The main problem lies in the fragility of each unit: things die very quickly, and since units are very accurate at even long ranges, you will lose troops and vehicles long before they can accumulate the experience points to matter. There is a lot of cannon fodder here, which is in stark contrast to contemporary RTS games where conserving your forces is important. Part of this has to do with the broken use of cover: infantry squads typically have a large number of units (eight or so) and the game does an extremely poor job hiding them all. It’s not even close to Company of Heroes’s intuitive use of cover. The game consists of “move and shoot,” and since the units automatically engage at extremely large distances and are highly accurate, the unrealistic combat is almost trivial. There are pathfinding problems when negotiating around obstacles (trenches, buildings), and units (especially infantry) are truly dumb when moving as a group (which they are required to do), splitting up and moving from behind buildings out into the open. The AI, usually a competent enough adversary, has the habit of running across open fields towards and objective. In fact, Officers _The Matrix Edition_ only becomes challenging when the scenarios designers hide units in pre-scripted locations, instead of through clever tactics by the AI. Combat simply seems “off.” When you compare Officers *The Matrix Edition* to Men of War, you can easily see how archaic this real-time strategy game really is.

IN CLOSING

The gimmick of Officers &The Matrix Edition& actually works pretty well, giving you a huge battlefield on which to wage massive battles involving lots of units. It’s too bad, then, that it isn’t surrounded by a more interesting game. Although the campaign consists on only six missions for the Allied Forces, a single scenario quite literally takes many hours to complete, thanks to the immense size of the maps. Beyond this, however, there is little to recommend. The combat of Officers *The Matrix Edition* is quite unrealistic, as units are highly accurate from large distance but cannot sustain much damage before dying: a poor, unbalanced combination that results in plenty of frustrating losses. Sure, units gain experience over time making them more effective, but a single unit will rarely last long enough for this feature to make any real difference. I do like the simplified resource collection (just control territory) and supply model, where trucks automatically carry resources to the areas that need them the most. Artillery is an impressive support option, easily clearing the way for your troops. However, it is all downhill from here. Units have pathfinding issues, especially infantry units around trenches and cover: units will commonly stay in exposed areas, which tends to get them killed. The large maps lead to long load times, and the game lacks skirmish games and Internet multiplayer, killing the long-term prospects of Officers ~The Matrix Edition~. There are also the occasional bug or quirk with the interface, an inefficient message system, difficulties involved with finding units on the mammoth maps, and a problematic camera. The AI can be worthy foe, but only because of pre-scripted placements rather than good tactical play. The large maps are impressive, but Officers ---The Matrix Edition--- simply has too many limitations to make it a recommended title.

Irukandji Review

2010-01-17T16:00:00.001-05:00

Irukandji Review

Irukandji, developed and published by Charlie's Games.

The Good: Chaotic, six distinctive ships with varied attributes and strategies, fitting musical score, cheap flexible pricing, multiplatform, online scoreboards, a giant crab

The Not So Good: Only one level, repetitive, lacks difficulty settings, no mouse control, no multiplayer

What say you? A tough, repetitive arcade shooter that can be inexpensive disorderly fun: 5/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

After devoting hours to strategically enter a personal union with the Principality of Achaea, sometimes it's nice to play a less complicated game. You know, one where you shoot first and never ask questions, all in a neon-bright space setting. Hey, look, it's Irukandji (a type of jellyfish), the latest arcade shooter from Charlie's Games, most known for producing games where you shoot erect, ejaculating penises. Nice! This time around, you fighting in an underwater setting, hoping to best a giant crab, in this score-based shooter. How does it stack up against similar competition?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Irukandji uses the minimalist glow effect that’s mighty popular in recent arcade games. The game takes place underwater, but you could easily replace this setting with space or a cavern and not really notice any difference in the visuals. Irukandji uses procedurally generated enemies, probably to cut down on file size, that look nice but become repetitive upon successive plays (which will be a common occurrence, since the game consists only of a single level) because they are not randomly generated. The game does do a fine job putting a lot of stuff on-screen at once, and it’s not terribly difficult to see enemy fire in order to dodge it during the most frantic moments. The game is displayed in a lower resolution but can be windowed if so you choose (and I did). The effects are pretty typical for a frantic shooter, but still have a nice chaotic quality to them. I like the music as it fits the game well, and the sound effects do their job. I especially appreciate the semi-orgasmic “yes!” when you collect something. In all, Irukandji features acceptable graphics and sound for a cheap, indie arcade shooter.

ET AL.

Irukandji has you fighting off a series of underwater creatures on your way to taking down a giant crab. There is only one level in the entire game, and it takes about three minutes to complete the whole thing, assuming you defeat the crab (which is admittedly difficult to do). I do think it’s funny that the only level in the game is titled “Level 1,” since there isn’t a “Level 2.” There are six different ships with varied weapons and attributes that are unlocked when you beat the game with the previous ship; this is the major motivation to keep playing. There is also an online high-score table so that you can see how inept you are at the game, providing some additional incentive. This somewhat compensates for the lack of multiplayer, something you’d think would be standard in any arcade shooter. Lastly, there are achievements unlocked along the way, but they do not provide any in-game bonuses. Irukandji is available on all three major computer platforms (Windows, Linux, Macintosh) and you can name your own price when purchasing the game, which is a good benefit for a game with a small amount of content such as this.

The primary goal in the game is to destroy as much as possible and score a large number of points by killing everything and not dying, preserving your multiplier. The six ships do actually provide dissimilar strategies, as they shoot in varied fashions (straight, angled, sideways) in different ways (missiles, lasers) at different speeds. You’re always shooting things, but the overall strategy on which enemies to attack and when to use your special weapon does change a bit when you use a different ship. Controls are simple, using a gamepad or the keyboard to shoot left, shoot right, shoot straight, or deploy the special weapon; the exact controls depend on which ship you are using, but they are generally the same. Irukandji lacks mouse control, though, limited your input somewhat. Each ship has a special weapon that destroys a bunch of enemies at once; it has a rechargeable meter (filled by killing stuff) to prevent overuse.

In order to get the elusive high scores, you will need to collect power-ups and later multipliers. Power-ups send more bullets into the abyss, and once you are fully powered-up, they convert into multipliers that increase your score significantly. When you lose a life by running into an enemy or their bullets, you lose your multipliers and some power, which definitely sets you back in the score department. You are limited in the amount of lives you are given and there is also a time limit (no idea why, since you can’t really slow down the pace much yourself), adding to the difficulty. Irukandji is a tough game: there are a lot of enemies and a lot of bullets coming at you. It is commonly impossible to avoid everything, causing you to lose lives on a regular basis. It definitely requires skill to avoid the plentiful enemy fire, and using your particular ship’s advantages is a must. Irukandji is clearly a game designed for arcade shooter veterans, as the difficulty level cannot be adjusted and the one-note gameplay becomes quite repetitive if you are not unlocking additional ships or competitive on the high score list. Still, the freedom to pay whatever you want for the game means you only need to invest a couple of bucks, which I feel is a fair price for what you get.

IN CLOSING

Irukandji has a couple of things going for it and a couple of things going against it. I definitely like the ship variety, each of which gives you a slightly different approach to dealing with all of those pesky enemies due to their strengths and limitations. The game also has good music, availability on all major operating systems, online scoreboards, and a flexible pricing scheme, offset by a lack of mouse controls and no direct competitive multiplayer action. What Irukandji clearly does not have, however, is variety: you play the same level over and over again, with a predictable roster of enemies coming in the same order each and every time. The different ships do mean you'll play somewhat differently, though, but even this motivation wears out its welcome after a while. You are playing Irukandji in order to get on that high score table, so if you find that appealing and a possibility, you'll like the game. Irukandji is probably a good $3-$5 worth of fun, and since you can name your own price, those interested in the genre will probably invest at least some time with it. Ultimately, only those people who like arcade shooters will find Irukandji attractive: it is a one-note game, although that note can be quite addictive as you chase the high scores.

Game du Jour: Week of 17 January 2009

2010-01-17T08:00:00.001-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 17 January 2009

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Sun. January 17th: 65% off on Slingo Mystery: Who’s Gold

Mon. January 18th: 81% off on The Build-a-lot Game-Pack [Reviews Build-a-lot, 2: Town of the Year and 3: Passport to Europe]

Tue. January 19th: 45% off on Wedding Dash: Ready, Aim, Love [Review]

Wed. January 20th: 50% off on Collapse!

Thu. January 21st: 50% off on Marooned

Fri. January 22nd: 65% off on Tropical Farm

Sat. January 23rd: 45% off on Gotcha: Celebrity Secrets [Review]

Game du Jour: Week of 3 January 2010

2010-01-14T16:00:00.003-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 3 January 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Sun. January 3rd: 60% off on Jojo’s Fashion Show World Tour

Mon. January 4th: 60% off on Fantastic Farm

Tue. January 5th: 50% off on Sunset Studio: Love on the High Seas

Wed. January 6th: 65% off on Virtual City

Thu. January 7th: 65% off on Tory’s Shop ‘N Rush

Fri. January 8th: 65% off on Murder, She Wrote

Sat. January 9th: 65% off on Sushi To Go Express

PT Boats: Knights of the Sea Review

2010-01-14T16:00:00.001-05:00

PT Boats: Knights of the Sea Review

PT Boats: Knights of the Sea, developed by Akella and published by Battlefront.com.

The Good: Mix of first person action and tactical strategy, nice graphics with detailed ships, lengthy campaign, unique focus

The Not So Good: Repetitive linear campaign, lackluster AI, lacks random engagements and scenario editing, neither a deep simulation nor an exciting action title, pointless to directly control ships, tedious tutorials, can't save mid-mission

What say you? This World War II naval simulation has little replay value, lacks a competent opponent, and doesn’t strike a good balance between simulation and action: 4/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

World War II has been simulated so many times in PC gaming that’s it’s simply too much work to link to every review I’ve done on the subject (plus, I am tired). One aspect that usually goes on the backburner is naval combat, as the kids seem to be more interested in land-based infantry warfare where you can shoot people in the face. Indeed, even the naval theater of World War II is typically simulated from a grand scale in games like War in the Pacific. We have had out share of close-quarters naval combat, from the hardcore simulation Dangerous Waters to the more action-oriented Battlestations: Midway. PT Boats: Knights of the Sea highlights a forgotten part of World War II naval combat: the torpedo boat. Others can control those big, powerful ships with extremely large guns, but we shall control the fast and elusive PT boats and take them all down. Take that! How does PT Boats separate itself from other naval games?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

I like the graphics of PT Boats. The ships are quite detailed, looking startlingly real down to the smallest detail. They are complete with neat (though repetitive) sinking animations and explosions. The game engine also displays some nice waves (always an important aspect of a naval simulation where all you see is water) and smoke and weather effects. The poorest aspect is the sailor animations: watching seamen jump overboard looks robotic and silly against an otherwise effective graphical presentation. PT Boats: Knights of the Sea competes nicely against any other naval game. The sound design is less impressive, with passable music and appropriate sound effects for all of the mayhem that ensues. The voice acting has apparently been re-recorded for this English language release, but it is still hackneyed and not very good. It might have even had been better to retain the original voice work since then we could just chalk the shortcomings up to the Russian language barrier. Still, PT Boats: Knights of the Sea is a looker due to its pleasing graphics.

ET AL.

PT Boats: Knights of the Sea features (surprise!) PT boats, the fast-moving torpedo boats of World War II. This alone is a unique focus of a naval game; typically you are given the keys to the largest, most expensive ships available. The single player campaign consists of five missions in each of five chapters, and you can play the same scenario from both sides of the conflict. This is a pretty good amount of content, except that the scenarios are linear and heavily scripted, in addition to having the same objective (engage the enemy while escorting larger ships) over and over again. The matches are also arbitrarily drawn-out, pitting the ships far apart for no reason other than to waste your time. This is really apparent during the game's tutorials, where you are quite literally sitting there for minutes at a time staring at your boat doing nothing but moving forward. At least the game features time acceleration to speed up the process somewhat. The extended mission times are made worse by the lack of a mid-mission save system. Have to go do something? Too bad, all progress is lost. Boo/hiss. The only options given towards customizing the experience have to do with the game's difficulty: enemy accuracy, damage, and realism (damage of radar or crew, infinite ammunition, reloading times) and be tweaked to make for a more challenging game. Sadly, PT Boats does not have any skirmish options for quick battles against the AI, which drastically reduces the long-term appeal of the game. PT Boats does have multiplayer, featuring very traditional deathmatch, team deathmatch, and humans versus AI modes of play on five maps, but the game lacks cooperative options, not that there was anyone online to play with or against anyway.

PT Boats is controlled in two modes: a more action-oriented first person mode and the RTS-like tactical mode. If you want a more direct approach to command, then the first person mode is right for you! Movement is done through the now classic WASD keys; since boats are controlled through engine throttle rates (full, half, one-third), you thankfully do not need to hold down the W key to continue forward. In addition to simply controlling the movement, you can also commandeer any of the light weapons, using the mouse to aim and mouse buttons to shoot and zoom. There is no toggle option for zooming, however, so you do need to keep the right mouse button depressed in order to have any semblance of accuracy. Manually using torpedoes is slightly more complicated, as you need to first spot the ship using the binoculars (using the “4” key) and then aim your ship towards the target in the torpedo view (also, confusingly, using the “4” key) and press fire. Orders can be issued to other ships using Alt+C (obviously) and then one of the F-keys for follow, attack, guard, and report commands. Unfortunately, ships automatically attack and the AI is typically more accurate then you ever could be, so the usefulness of the first person mode is greatly reduced, essentially to nil.

Since you will normally be given control of multiple ships, most of your time in PT Boats will be spend in the tactical mode, which is presented in the same fashion as a typical strategy game. You can box select any of your units or select them from an icon list of all ships: useful. The game uses contextual right-clicks for movement, guarding, and attacking, depending on what exactly you are clicking on. Ships can also be organized into formations: lines, circles, columns, or a custom arrangement of your making. The game clearly shows sighting ranges for easy scouting, and there are no outstanding shortcomings in terms of the game’s interface in this aspect of PT Boats.

Most of the time, you will be controlling torpedo boats, but other ships will be placed under your command: cruisers, destroyers, raiders, transports, mine-sweepers, sea hunters, submarines, and assorted aircraft. The main crux of PT Boats involves getting boats into range and then blasting away. Damage is very simplistic and linear: more hits equals more damage until a threashold is reached. You can individually damage the radio, radar, engine, and crew if you have those options selected, but it’s still not an advanced model by any stretch of the imagination. This is also exemplified by the repair model, as significant real-time repairs can be made during battles. I don’t recall sailors applying duct tape and welding the sides of boats in the middle of a firefight, but apparently there were according to the world of PT Boats.

The AI has a number of significant problems that hinders the single player portion of PT Boats. They rarely provide a challenge outside of having superior numbers (a cheap strategy often employed here), as the computer will perform questionable tactics and just open fire once you are spotted. The fundamental problem of PT Boats has to do with the way the game handles combat: once you can see the enemy ship, all of your weapons are in-range, meaning that fights are just a matter of who is more accurate, rather than subtle maneuvering into firing position like in older Age of Sail simulations. Torpedo boats can take on any size ship with their allotment of torpedoes, and they are at such an advantage due to their fast speed and small size. The combat of PT Boats is simply not that interesting. The AI is highly inaccurate to boot, and clearly does not use formations, instead sending a random lot of enemies towards you, typically one at a time, ready to be slaughtered. The computer opponents of PT Boats are not even at the same level as the questionable opponent in Distant Guns, lagging far behind the curve in naval simulations and adding another contribution to the overall mediocrity of the game as a whole.

IN CLOSING

PT Boats is not hardcore enough to satisfy the simulation crowd, and it's not simple enough to satisfy the action crowd. The tactical mode plays out like a simplified real-time strategy game, where you can direct ships around in formations and assign targets to attack with specific weapons. It is easy to select specific (or all) ships and assign orders, but the depth is lacking. You can also take the helm of a ship directly, although since ships will attack automatically anyway (and typically more accurately than you can with the control scheme), your time of first person action will be limited. The problems don’t stop there, however. There is only the single player campaign; while lengthy, it doesn’t provide near the replay value you need in a game such as this. PT Boats desperately needs some randomized or customized encounters to extend the life of the game as each of the scenarios are linear, predictable, repetitive, and arbitrarily lengthy. The last comment becomes an issue since you can’t save in the middle of a mission. Nice. Multiplayer includes the usual options, deathmatch and team events, but no cooperative features, not that there is anyone to play against. The damage of PT Boats is very simplistic and the sub-par AI is not a challenge, which makes the game less appealing to veteran simulation players. Really, PT Boats is a lighter version of Dangerous Waters, without all of that interesting depth. In addition, Battlestations: Midway did the whole direct-control thing better if you want a more arcade slant. PT Boats: Knights of the Sea doesn’t do anything that previous games haven’t in one form or another, and coupled with its numerous shortcomings, it is simply a forgettable title.

PC Game Review: Gotcha: Celebrity Secrets

2010-01-11T12:00:00.005-05:00

PC Game Review: Gotcha: Celebrity Secrets

Celebrities. Blogging. It’s a dream come true for some who would love to write about famous people and their lives. Gotcha: Celebrity Secrets is your chance to get a taste of that. As Gaby, you start working as a blogger and doing whatever you can to break the news so you can drive up your blog traffic. In this hidden object game, you search for people instead of things — a nice twist that unfortunately feels monotonous after a little play despite 40 scenes and 1200 characters.

When you first meet Gaby, she’s in a job that she hates (familiar to many). She begins receiving text messages letting her know where celebrities will appear. A chapter consists of following a celebrity and getting the story. Events include a wedding, a birth, awards and others. Every scene also has bonus objects, which includes finding Gaby, five stars and another person or thing. The game gets harder as you advance by adding more people and creating more crowded scenes. You can also challenge yourself to reach the expert level by finding everyone before time runs out.

The game tells you who you need to find by giving clues. Sometimes you see the person’s image, sometimes you receive a clue like “wearing a t-shirt with a heart on it” and sometimes you see a silhouette. After playing a couple of chapters, you’ll notice the people start repeating and before long, you know exactly what you need to find. Though the scenes grow more crowded, the cues will help you see through them.

One of the things going for the game is its vibrant colors and cartoon-style graphics. Although it offers a creative twist in the hidden object genre, Gotcha: Celebrity Secrets just doesn’t grip you long enough to want to play the whole game. The free hour of play is more than enough to give you an idea of the whole game. If you play to see how it ends, this one’s ending doesn’t satisfy. It’s a shame because this offers an original story and game play that could’ve gone further with the right treatment.

Download the game from your favorite site:

Big Fish Games

Playfirst

FTC warning: Game received from publisher.

New Releases: Farm Frenzy 3: American Pie and Ice Age

2010-01-11T12:00:00.003-05:00

New Releases: Farm Frenzy 3: American Pie and Ice Age

This is the third Farm Frenzy 3. I appreciate the developer for keeping the numbering at three because it shows there’s not much difference in terms of game play. The main difference is the setting, so there’s no misleading anyone claiming it’s a whole new game with enhancements. The series has many fans who are happy to keep playing the same game with new challenges.

Farm Frenzy 3: American Pie: Manage five different farms around the world and try your hand at penguin breeding and jewelry making in Farm Frenzy 3! Enjoy outrageously fun levels, wacky animals and more upgrades than there are ears in a field of corn! Grow crops, feed animals, collect produce and manufacture goods, while you enjoy zany animation! Help Scarlett become the president of the Farmers` Union by earning the votes of the people she helps.

Farm Frenzy 3: Ice Age: Join Scarlett as she leaves sunshine and warm temperatures behind and travels to the North Pole to check out a farm she purchased through a newspaper ad. When she arrives, she not only finds the property in a state of disrepair, she also meets two brothers who could use her help making ice cream. While whipping up chilly treats in 90 levels of frosty fun, you’ll breed and care for penguins and other arctic animals, manufacture new products and enjoy a parade of visual gags. You’ll also meet a surprise guest who will show his appreciation for your hard work in a special way! Who is it?

Here’s the list of all the Farm Frenzys.

Farm Frenzy

Farm Frenzy 2

Farm Frenzy Pizza Party

Farm Frenzy 3

Farm Frenzy 3: American Pie

Farm Frenzy 3: Ice Age

Farm Mania 2 is also out. Anna of Farm Mania is back again! This time she is even more enthusiastic, active and full of great ideas! Wanna have your own farm? No problems! Fruits and vegetables, animals and fishes, dairy plant and bakery – you can have it all with in Farm Mania 2! By the way, Anna got married to a strong and charming farmer Bob and now all their dreams are coming true! You can help them!

Game du Jour: Week of 10 January 2010

2010-01-11T12:00:00.001-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 10 January 2010

First, Big Fish Games is offering 20% off all 19 of its customer favorite award winners.

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Sun. January 10th: 65% off on Iron Roses

Mon. January 11th: 45% off on Valerie Porter and the Scarlet Scandal [Review]

Tue. January 12th: 65% off on Farm Frenzy 3: American Pie

Wed. January 13th: 60% off on Tourist Trap

Thu. January 14th: 65% off on Nat Geo Games: Mystery of Cleopatra

Fri. January 15th: 50% off on TextTwist 2

Sat. January 16th: 65% off on Princess Isabella: A Witch’s Curse [Review]

City Rain Review

2010-01-10T16:00:00.001-05:00

City Rain Review

City Rain, developed by Mother Gaia Studios and published by Ovolo Entertainment.

The Good: Neat concept, tougher in later levels, special buildings

The Not So Good: Repetitive, limited normal building count, superficial strategy, lacks online play, not challenging for most of the game

What say you? Part Tetris and part SimCity, this puzzle game lacks long-term appeal: 5/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

With the high level of success shown by the SimCity series of games, I’m frankly surprised there isn’t a proliferation of city builders on the market. Sure, there’s the City Life/Cities XL games and Haemimont’s series of historical titles, but other than those examples, the genre has largely been played out: how many different ways can you zone roads and residential sectors? Using the city builder game as a base is City Rain, which infuses the extreme excitement of placing houses with puzzle games like Tetris. That’s the kind of out-of-the-box thinking we appreciate here at Out of Eight, and it deserves some reviewingness! Take that, spell checker!

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

City Rain features acceptable graphics and sound for a $10 casual game. The title is rendered in the classic isometric perspective, and each of the tiles has an average amount of detail. Your towns never really “come to life,” as the game lacks vibrant animations or even realistic transit to make City Rain anything more than a simple collection of buildings. I do like the dynamic, changing backgrounds that have time-of-day effects. Still, the visuals certainly lean more towards the simplicity of Tetris rather than the detail of SimCity. The music is good listening the first couple of times you play the game, but after that it’s tiring. The sound effects are sparse and action-based; none of the instructions from your advisor are voiced, not that I would expect them to be for a $10 price point. In all, City Rain does not surprise in terms of the presentation.

ET AL.

In City Rain, you are attempting to construct environmentally-friendly towns by placing falling buildings in optimal locations: just like real life! The campaign consists of twenty levels, but since each individual map only takes two or three minutes to complete, adept players will complete the campaign very quickly. There are a series of objectives you must complete within a time limit for each level, usually involving placing a specific building (nuclear silo, sewage treatment station, garden, et cetera) or reaching a certain profit level. The difficulty arises from having very specific objectives that must be completed within short time limits, like having all green attributes and pollution cleaned up in only two minutes. Also, pieces start falling faster as you progress through the game, requiring faster decision making. Unfortunately, this level of challenge doesn’t develop until much later on in the campaign: early levels are much too easy, and I suspect most players will tire of the tedium before they reach more demanding content. After you are done with the campaign, you can enter “quickplay” mode, where you select a difficult level that determines game length, speed, and the frequency of city blocks, along with the board size. You cannot fully customize the “quickplay” games, selecting lots of blocks but a short game length, for example. This is partially because scores are recorded online, I suppose, but more freedom is always a good thing. Finally, City Rain has a “blockmania” mode that is identical to Tetris but less interesting. City Rain does not feature any sort of competitive or cooperative multiplayer, either on the same computer or online.

City Rain is primarily controlled with the mouse, as it’s the best method to quickly move across the map and select buildings. The overall goal of the game is to have good ratings in six areas: sustainability, jobs, health, leisure, security, and education. This is done by placing specific buildings: factories for jobs, police stations for security, hospitals for health, schools for leisure, and so forth. There are four groups that will magically appear from the top of the screen, and you can scroll through the various buildings to choose the one you want: residence/shop/factory, school/landfill/square/police/hospital, power plants, and set blocks of buildings that can be rotated. City Rain always has the same buildings grouped together, which results in some very predictable and uninteresting gameplay: you know that schools and police and hospitals are always together, so when you see one, you know all the others are readily available by simply turning the mouse wheel. It would have been better to have a random selection of buildings to at least inject some anxiety into the game.

Money is earned from the buildings: houses make cash (presumably from taxes) while most other things cost money. Money is used to purchase special buildings that grant a wide variety of bonuses: alternative fuels, reforestation, gardens, nuclear waste facilities, stadiums, subways, and a big tree. There is one special building unlocked in each campaign level (for a total of twenty), and they are available any time thereafter. This is a nice feature of the game that helps to break up the predictable monotony of the “normal” buildings. Buildings can also be improved by placing the same type on top of it; this helps to conserve precious space.

You lose the game if you destroy too many buildings (by placing different types on top of each other) or place trash outside of landfills, in addition to simply not completing the objectives. Unfortunately, the long-term appeal of City Rain is pretty small for a couple of reasons. First, the game lacks variety: the constant influx of special buildings is nice, but the normal structures remain static and easily anticipated. There is also a very linear relationship between needs and buildings: there are no complicated resource connections in City Rain: if you need security, just build a couple of police stations. This means success is less about city planning and more about thinking faster than the buildings scroll down the screen. Thus, City Rain is more of a casual game than a more advanced city builder and people who expect more depth will be disappointed. Of course, the game is only $10, so exactly how much depth do you expect for that price tag?

IN CLOSING

City Rain takes an interesting and unique premise and makes a passably interesting game out of it. Taking two successful genres, puzzle games and city builders, and combining them is a neat idea, and this is enough on its own to make City Rain appealing for a little while. The problem lies in the repetition of the title, more specifically the limited number of buildings you have to play with. The game becomes an exercise in simply placing a variety of buildings that will increase the stats of your town; since the relationships are very linear and fixed (police increase security, hospitals increase health, schools increase education, et cetera), there isn’t much strategy involved in designing your city. As long as you don’t spam a single building type, things will be fine. Things get more difficult later on as you get more set blocks of buildings and pieces fall faster, but it takes quite a while to become more engaging. The objectives inject a minor amount of purpose into the title, buth you will generally meet the requirements by designing an efficient layout anyway, except for the more obscure location-based requirements. The twenty-level campaign is over very quickly, as most levels are completed in two minutes. The quickplay mode does offer more longevity, requiring you to survive for a specified amount of time against the onslaught of incoming structures, but it’s only marginally engaging because of the lack of multiplayer modes and the inherent repetition. City Rain can be good fun once you advance past the slow, easy introductory levels, but I doubt many people will stick around that long and the game is over too quickly after that.

Game du Jour: Week of 10 January 2010

2010-01-10T12:00:00.001-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 10 January 2010

First, Big Fish Games is offering 20% off all 19 of its customer favorite award winners.

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Sun. January 10th: 65% off on Iron Roses

Mon. January 11th: 45% off on Valerie Porter and the Scarlet Scandal [Review]

Tue. January 12th: 65% off on Farm Frenzy 3: American Pie

Wed. January 13th: 60% off on Tourist Trap

Thu. January 14th: 65% off on Nat Geo Games: Mystery of Cleopatra

Fri. January 15th: 50% off on TextTwist 2

Sat. January 16th: 65% off on Princess Isabella: A Witch’s Curse [Review]

New Releases: Farm Frenzy 3: American Pie and Ice Age

2010-01-08T12:00:00.001-05:00

New Releases: Farm Frenzy 3: American Pie and Ice Age

Here’s the list of all the Farm Frenzys.

Farm Frenzy

Farm Frenzy 2

Farm Frenzy Pizza Party

Farm Frenzy 3

Farm Frenzy 3: American Pie

Farm Frenzy 3: Ice Age

Empires of Steel Review

2010-01-06T16:00:00.001-05:00

Empires of Steel Review

Empires of Steel, developed by Atomicboy Software and published by Battlefront.com.

The Good: Simple game mechanics, helpful interface clearly indicates idle buildings and units, good support for Internet multiplayer, randomized maps, robust editors for game worlds and rules, streamlined research

The Not So Good: Limited units and technologies reduce strategic variety, pricey, difficult to find a multiplayer game

What say you? A decent simplified strategy game: 6/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Released for the PC in 1987, Empire was a strategy game that predates the Civilization franchise that offered a more military-focused approach in taking over the world. It was more straightforward and less confusing than more detailed wargames, and served as a good introduction to the genre. Empires of Steel is an update/remake/rip-off of that classic title, tasking you with taking down all those opposed to your supreme rule. I had early beta access to the game and posted some initial impressions, but the full version is now released and ready for scrutiny. Will simplicity make for an approachable strategy title?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Empires of Steel has a nice cartoon style for the visuals, starting with the map: it looks hand-drawn, which is a nice touch to make a unique looking game. The units could use some better animations, as turning clearly shows that most units are only animated from a couple of angles. The battle effects are simple as well, but since you’ll be playing from a distant perspective, detailed effects are frankly unnecessary. Empires of Steel plays quite nicely in a window, always a nice feature for games that aren’t computer-intensive. As for the sound, there are only minor, abrupt effects that accompany the battles and some background music that I muted in favor for some jammin’ MP3s. Empires of Steel is better than a typical 2-D wargame in terms of the presentation, replacing the bland hexes and NATO counters for a distinct visual style.

ET AL.

Empires of Steel is a turn-based strategy game where you capture resources and cities, build armies, research improved units, and take over the world. The game supports between two and ten players on random maps that are designed well. There is also a map editor for creating your own layouts, and you can actually download other people’s maps from within the game. Games can be customized with different production or research bonuses to handicap certain players (or the AI). Rules can also be changed, and the rules editor is impressive in its scope: you can change everything in the game, from units to the tech tree, quite easily. While the base game only includes two rules sets, custom options will most likely be available soon once the modders get their grubby little hands on it. Empires of Steel is really designed for Internet multiplayer, but sadly the game is quite unpopular and it’s terribly difficult to find others to play against unless you coordinate in advance. The real-time multiplayer of Empires of Steel, as opposed to being play by e-mail and completed at your leisure, probably decreases the potential opponent list.

One of the positive aspects of Empires of Steel is the user interface: the game clearly displays idle things (units, buildings, research) in a list along the left side of the screen, making it easy to keep tabs of all your units and construction matters. A typical problem with strategy games is losing track of units or forgetting about doing things, and the interface makes it easy to stay informed. Cities are useful for one thing: building stuff to capture more cities. Unlike most (if not all) other strategy games, cities actually cost resources, rather than producing them; in fact, it’s a good idea to hold off on invasion if you can’t sustain the upkeep. Resources are a very important part of Empires of Steel: you must balance your use of money, steel, oil, and food. Luckily, most units use a set amount of resources (like infantry needs one food), so it’s relatively straightforward to plan ahead for future resource use. You can also trade resources with others to compensate for shortcomings. Still, the early game is a scramble for resources as you scout the map, and the resource points serve as good chokepoints for future conflict. You can construct forts and airfields to assist in defense away from cities, useful for tending to the aforementioned resource locations.

Despite covering over 100 years of conflict, Empires of Steel has a bland selection of units. All of the unit types are there: infantry, tanks, artillery, bombers, missiles, destroyers, battleships, submarines, et cetera. However, more advanced units gained through research are given terribly generic names like “Infantry 3” instead of having unique, period-specific names like Rise of Nations did. To be fair, I clearly remember how “Tank 2” won World War II. You can, of course, use the rules editor to easily alter the names, but this detail should have been attended to already. Researching these new units is very simple: just click on a unit and the game will automatically queue up all of the prerequisites. Units can be issued generic orders: move and attack. You can stack units together to move more cohesively, use the interface to load units onto a transport craft, and assign field orders if units encounter an enemy in the middle of a turn. Empires of Steel is turn-based, but each turn consists of ten real seconds, similar to the Combat Mission mix of real-time and turn-based strategy. You can issue units additional orders if their current instructions end in the middle of a turn; while this works most of the time, it’s usually just easier to load units between turns instead of in the middle of one.

Since Empires of Steel is all about war, diplomatic options are few: there are alliances and teams (permanent alliance), but most of the time you’ll just declare war on others. Trade can be important if you do not have a self-sufficient economy, so you probably don’t want to declare war on everyone at the same time. Essentially, Empires of Steel boils down to three phases: scout for resources, build units, and attack. Strategies tend to be a little bit limited because of the heavy focus on military combat and the single victory condition of conquest. Still, Empires of Steel offers some nice, basic strategy gaming. The AI is an OK opponent: they are competent once you declare war, though they generally prefer a defensive position. The AI does tend to throw single units at you instead of mixed forces, though, so fortifying against an attack can be too easy.

IN CLOSING

As strategy games seem to increasingly favor more complexity, it’s nice to play a game that is a bit more straightforward. Of course, this simplification comes at a cost of game depth: there’s only a limited suite of units to choose from that use generic, non-historical names. This is really a game of resource management: you must carefully monitor your expenses and avoid over-building and over-colonizing, as cities actually cost resources instead of producing them. You scout resource locations, capture those goods, produce an army, and use that army to inevitably fight the enemy. Empires of Steel is that clear-cut, and the turn-based game is a good choice for novices. The interface is effective, clearly indicating idle units and buildings, while the graphical style if nice to look at. The game does come with some nice customization features, like editors for maps and the game rules, and randomized map layouts always increase replay value. The AI is a competent opponent, though typically not terribly aggressive. The game is really designed for multiplayer, so it’s too bad that there aren’t very many people online to play against. I would feel a lot better about recommending Empires of Steel if it were $30 instead of $45, but there are still some things to like that strategy gamers will appreciate. The editors will play a large part in determining whether the game will have long-term longevity, but as the game stands now, it’s a bit too limited in scope to endorse to all.

PC Game Review: Gotcha: Celebrity Secrets

2010-01-06T12:00:00.001-05:00

PC Game Review: Gotcha: Celebrity Secrets

Download the game from your favorite site:

Big Fish Games

Playfirst

Game du Jour: Week of 3 January 2010

2010-01-04T12:00:00.001-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 3 January 2010

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Sun. January 3rd: 60% off on Jojo’s Fashion Show World Tour

Mon. January 4th: 60% off on Fantastic Farm

Tue. January 5th: 50% off on Sunset Studio: Love on the High Seas

Wed. January 6th: 65% off on Virtual City

Thu. January 7th: 65% off on Tory’s Shop ‘N Rush

Fri. January 8th: 65% off on Murder, She Wrote

Sat. January 9th: 65% off on Sushi To Go Express

Hammerfight Review

2010-01-02T12:00:00.001-05:00

Hammerfight Review

Hammerfight, developed by Konstantin Koshutin and published by KranX Productions.

The Good: Definitely different, varied mission objectives, customize vehicles with weapons and items, inexpensive

The Not So Good: Terribly difficult, learning curve for the unique control system, no multiplayer, technical issues

What say you? An unusual physics-based combat game that's mighty hard: 5/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Technology has made it so that we can destroy things from increasingly larger distances. Clubs, swords, pistols, rifles, cars, planes, and missiles have all allowed us to be further and further away from our target, making death much less personable. Well, Hammerfight has had enough! In this physics action fighting game, you pilot a flying craft cleverly equipped with a giant hammer of sorts, and you use the mouse to move your ship and swing the hammer onto unsuspecting foes. Although I suppose they would suspect it since you have a GIANT FREAKING HAMMER. This idea caught my attention, so let's find out together if this theory works well in practice.

GRAPHICS AND SOUND

Hammerfight is a 2-D game living in a 2-D world, and I am a 2-D girl. Or something. Anyways, the game looks OK. The theme of Hammerfight is executed well, with a nice steampunk plus historical flavor that fits the admittedly exotic game mechanics well; it’s reminiscent of the Vinci race in Rise of Nations, if that game took place entirely underground. There are some nice lighting effects, but the game is low resolution (it runs in a window). The vehicles are small but detailed, and the various combat effects are quite understated. The sound design is along the same lines: just a handful of combat sounds that, while suited for the game, don’t create enough of a chaotic atmosphere. None of the story is voiced, and the music is usually so subtle that you won’t even notice it during gameplay. But, Hammerfight is only $10, and I reckon the game’s production values fall in line with that price point.

ET AL.

In Hammerfight, you control some flying contraption, attempting to knock competitors out of the air by swinging your mouse and using the angular momentum of your hammer to smash some skulls. The game is single-player only, a disappointment since the competitive nature of action games lend themselves towards online matchmaking features. The story takes place over a number of levels; there is a developed back-story involved here, although I personally try to click through the dialogue as quickly as possible. Too much reading, not enough smashing! The levels themselves have a variety of objectives to accomplish, from escorting friendly units to engaging certain enemies to large conflicts in an arena-like setting. In the end, though, all you’re really doing as smashing things, as the different objectives don’t change up your strategy at all.

Hammerfight is controlled exclusively with the mouse: move and your vehicle will move. Since the hammer is attached to your ship with a chain, if you move quickly in a circular motion, your hammer will as well, delivering blows to the enemy. Or so goes the theory, as it takes a good bit of practice to figure out how to most effectively deliver some damage, maintaining hammer movement while not running into things. You can accumulate additional vehicles and items throughout your journeys, like swords and boulders and shields and guns, which can lead to some customization options later on. The interface just tends to get in the way, especially since the less-than-helpful camera view does not pan very much, routinely allowing enemy units to go off-screen or behind the displays. Most importantly, Hammerfight is extremely difficult, partly because of the learning curve for the control scheme, partly because of the low amount of damage you can sustain, and partly because of the number of enemies you will typically face. This insane level of aggravation could have been easily countered by adding difficulty settings that could increase your health. A change as simple as that would have greatly improved the frustrating game experience. It’s too bad because Hammerfight is really fun when you land a perfect hit, using the terrain to your advantage and crushing the enemy to smithereens. There are additional problems other than the lack of difficulty settings: the game has crashed on several occasions, the AI has a lot of trouble not smashing into things on their own, and the aforementioned obscuring interface. Going in the favor of Hammerfight, though, is the low, low price: this game is likely worth $10 of fun, although the high difficulty and other limitations send to subdue my recommendation for buying it.

IN CLOSING

Hammerfight takes a unique idea and makes a game out of it that would have succeeded if not for the unflinching difficulty. It’s hard enough to get a handle on how your craft flies and attacks, but to combine that with numerous AI opponents and low levels of health is poor game design. All they needed to do was add a difficulty setting and most would have been fine: just increase the health of your vehicle so that you can not constantly die as you are learning the game. When Hammerfight works, it works very well: it is quite satisfying to swing your mouse in a circular motion, successfully landing a perfect crushing blow on the enemy. This mechanic is simply not paralleled in any other game, and for that Hammerfight deserves some attention. The problems, however, do not stop with the difficulty: crashes and interface issues (where enemies are constantly obscured if they venture near the screen edges) are also present. Also, Hammerfight lacks any sort of online multiplayer, which would have been really fulfilling. You can apparently hook up two mice to the same computer and have at it, although I am not sweet enough to have (a) two mice or (b) any friends to play with. The broad storyline fleshes out the game world well, but the seemingly endless streams of dialogue honestly get in the way of smashing time. Despite the difficulty, the AI is not the sharpest hammer in the fight, routinely running into walls and placing themselves in compromising positions. Still, for $10, getting varied mission objectives and a number of weapons to customize your ship with is nice, and if you can overcome the initial learning curve, Hammerfight does deliver some enjoyable fighting when it all comes together.

Games on Sale for Holidays

2010-01-02T00:00:00.003-05:00

Games on Sale for Holidays

Playfirst Original Games for $6.99. Expires December 21.

Save 50% on all downloadable Mac Games from PopCap.com

Five Cake Mania Games for $19.99.

10 Reflexive Games for $54.99.

Coming Soon: Cradle of Rome 2

2010-01-02T00:00:00.001-05:00

Coming Soon: Cradle of Rome 2

Cradle of Rome is one of my all-time favorite match three games. I played it for days and hours trying to get the last trophy and finish the 100th level. I never reached either goal. Alas, I had to move on as games needed to be played and reviewed.

Of course, I am excited about the upcoming release of Cradle of Rome 2, which is due out in the spring of 2010. Here’s a preview from Awem Studio:

Awem also posts its developer’s diary for those wanting details.

Coming Soon: Cradle of Rome 2

2009-12-31T12:00:00.001-05:00

Coming Soon: Cradle of Rome 2

Of course, I am excited about the upcoming release of Cradle of Rome 2, which is due out in the spring of 2010. Here’s a preview from Awem Studio:

Awem also posts its developer’s diary for those wanting details.

Game du Jour: Week of 20 December 2009

2009-12-29T20:00:00.005-05:00

Game du Jour: Week of 20 December 2009

The following games will be discounted next week on Game du Jour, the first ‘one-deal-a-day’ website dedicated to indie and casual games:

Sun. December 20th: 50% off on The Clockwork Man

Mon. December 21st: 45% off on Gemini Lost

Tue. December 22nd: 65% off on Nat Geo Adventure: Lost City of Z

Wed. December 23rd: 50% off on Little Shop – Memories

Thu. December 24th: 50% off on HdO Adventure: Secrets of the Vatican

Fri. December 25th: 65% off on Farm Frenzy 3

Sat. December 26th: 50% off on Zuma’s Revenge! – Adventure

PC Game Review: Mystery Case Files: Dire Grove

2009-12-29T20:00:00.003-05:00

PC Game Review: Mystery Case Files: Dire Grove

Anyone looking to finish the year off with a bang and lots of fun should head straight for Mystery Case Files: Dire Grove. This point-and-click game tells the story of four friends who are graduate students filming their adventures only to run into trouble. The friends have disappeared and you find their movies dispersed throughout the captivating game.

In England, you run into a snowstorm where you come across an abandoned car with a video camera just outside of Dire Grove. Naturally, you can’t help but become curious and investigate the four friends’ claim that the legend of Dire Grove is real. While you won’t see a big leap between this one and Mystery Case Files: Return to Ravenhearst, it takes on a whole new story that comes together nicely with a satisfying ending. I wasn’t too happy with the ending Mystery Case Files: Ravenhearst. Return to Ravenhearst is good, but it’s not a stand-alone story like Dire Grove.

Some scenes require you to find items that appear in the list — like in hidden object games, but then you’ll be rewarded with something you need for your travels. One of the strengths of the series is that you can go any place you wish. The only time “order” matters is when you need to find something before you can move forward. You’ll see sparkles appear in scenes, which indicate you need to explore the area.

The setting goes far and wide, although it won’t look that way in the beginning. Then you discover openings to bigger areas as you explore and check everything possible. For the longest time, I made no progress because I had overlooked a barely noticeable door in one of the rooms. You may get stuck at times when you have everything and yet, can’t progress. Do not give up. Keep looking around and touching everything or ask for a hint. Sometimes you just miss a step. Hints are almost always available, but you’ll need to give the hint meter a few moments to refill.

I’m not a fan of horror films, so I can promise you that those who feel the same won’t have a problem with this one. The films only make up a part of the action and I’m grateful they came with closed-captions. When I first heard about the game and its use of video, I freaked because my experience has been that most things don’t come subtitled.

A couple of short phrases that didn’t have captions, but you can find out what was said with a little research. These little quotes aren’t detrimental to the story. Do pay attention to the videos because they give you clues that can help as does your casebook, which captures your notes of what you’ve seen. The film also has some jerky action, not too agreeable for this gal who gets dizzy easily.

Considering the Mystery Case Files: Dire Grove takes place in England, the actors also have a British accent adding to its authenticity. The whole production reels you in making you feel a part of the game. A Collector’s Edition is available, which offers bonus game play, challenge and achievement system, tracking down 50+ objects that change shape and a strategy guide.

Mystery Case Files: Dire Grove is a superb game that will entertain you for a full day, a wonderful way to spend a winter day huddled around the computer and staying warm even though the most of the scenes are frozen.