hot  /  reviews  /  videos  /  cblogs  /  qposts


KingSigy's blog

10:17 PM on 10.04.2015


11:49 AM on 10.02.2015

Any AVGN fans out there?.....Wow, you're a touch crowd. Well, I have a code for a Steam copy of AVGN Adventures. First come, First Serve. F5HFH-BHLCV-3VPKK


7:59 AM on 10.01.2015

Who wants Beta access for Rainbow Six: Siege?.....No one? Well, whatever. Here are four codes for the PS4 version. 3CGF-GLN8-DEJL B6AC-2AND-74P7 TAEF-C5NT-CBQT FM6D-26NJ-HNP9 First come, first serve (obviously).


8:27 PM on 09.30.2015

I'm really digging Volgarr The Viking, but the game is not fair. Jesus christ, so many bridges that break with no notification.


10:30 PM on 09.28.2015

Metal Gear Solid V tackles a lot of serious issues. The biggest is how to properly train your staff. You just slow-mo punch em and morale goes up!


8:09 PM on 09.28.2015

Forever Alone?

After playing the Rainbow Six: Siege beta for a few hours, I'm not quite convinced that Ubisoft's decision to axe a single-player campaign was the best choice. This has nothing to do with my own preference for campaigns, mind you, just that the netcode is pure garbage.

My memories of the Rainbow Six series are almost entirely dedicated to the online portions. I loved Rainbow Six: Raven Shield for it's open-ended structure. It fit perfectly into co-op play and gave great competition to Counter-Strike for competitive play.

I played the hell out of terrorist hunt in Rainbow Six 3 on Xbox with my friend, Corey. He and I eagerly anticipated the expansion, Rainbow Six 3: Black Arrow, and continued to bounce between the two games in co-op campaign and terrorist hunt for a few years. We just loved experiencing that game style together.

As for the plotlines, I don't really even recall what any of them were about. A tactical shooter is more about replicating a tense, life and death situation then it is about presenting any thought provoking questions to the player. Just take a look at how muddled the plot is in Rainbow Six: Vegas.

The sequel to that game was almost entirely a prequel. Apparently the first game didn't make enough sense to enough people, so Ubisoft had to detail where the villain came from (I guess being Russian/Chinese wasn't enough for Tom Clancy fans).

The Tom Clancy universe of games aren't really tailored around being solo excursions. Splinter Cell was the first time that going alone made sense. Sam Fisher was a better ghost then the Ghost Squad and his mission was to leave as little a trail as possible. Bringing another player, while fun, wasn't a requirement.

Even that series got expanded into a multiplayer affair. In the latest game of the series, Splinter Cell: Blacklist, the game is markedly improved when in co-op (since the AI is brain dead). It feels excellent to coordinate your attack with a friend.

Even with pointless BS like this.

Enough with Ubisoft games, though. How about the fact that the last gen versions of the upcoming Black Ops III don't feature a campaign? Well, if not for the price tag, I wouldn't see this as an issue. From my times working at GameStop, most people didn't even know Call of Duty had a campaign.

People used to tell me that they would tinker a little with it or plow through the thing on Easy and then forget it existed. Why Activision keeps trying to bolster the campaign is beyond me. Instead of wasting money on putting Kevin Spacey in the game, I think Activision should be boosting the MP up with a larger map count and more modes.

I'm also thinking of one of my favorite shooter franchises, Unreal Tournament. It's new pre-alpha just released and it's extremely fun. What doesn't it have? Any kind of extensive single-player mode. There are bot matches, sure, but nothing in the way of story or character development; the game is focused on delivering the most fast paced and finely tuned multiplayer experience possible.

Having a game forgo a single-player campaign isn't that big of an issue. To use Hollywood as an example, two of the biggest film releases this year were Max Max: Fury Road and Pitch Perfect 2. Both movies didn't try to appeal to anyone outside of their target demographic.

Men wanted a more action focused film and got just that with Fury Road. Women were dying to have an all female cast be represented in a way that wasn't sexist or objectified and got that with Pitch Perfect 2. Funny how disregarding a huge portion of the general population worked in those films favors.

There is nothing men can relate to, so let's just cancel the whole thing. - Stupid Movie Executive, 2015

With Rainbow Six: Siege excluding a single-player campaign, I think Ubisoft is realizing that the main attraction and lasting appeal of the series is online. Now, I'd agree with them under normal circumstances, but this is Ubisoft we're talking about. They tend to abandon support for their games a few years after release, leaving online a wasteland.

Also, as I mentioned earlier, the netcode is currently horseshit in the beta. I'd join matches and the entire game would be littered with pings of 380. I have a 50 MBPS download, so my ping shouldn't be higher then 40.

I've seen this happen time and again with a lot of newer releases; developers rush the game out to meet some arbitrary release date and the lasting appeal suffers. All conversations focuses on the horrible launch and how disappointing the online experience ends up being.

With a single-player mode attached to Rainbow Six: Siege, I think gamers would be more forgiving of any online deficiencies. The game truly marks an arrival of next-generation style gameplay. Destructible environments and particle effects not only make the game look expensive, but have a tangible impact on the gameplay.

With a strong internet infrastructure, I feel that Rainbow Six: Siege could be a game changer. Without that (which is more then likely going to be the case), I don't think gamers will stick around. That lack of single-player is going to feel like a wasted opportunity.

For the most part, I feel that a lot of developers should focus more on the strengths of their game's concepts then on ticking off some checklist for marketability. Just like Unreal Tournament doesn't need a campaign mode, Rainbow Six: Siege shouldn't require one.

Remeber how this game had a campaign? Yeah, I don't either.

Games don't exist to cater to everyone at all times. If you don't fit into the mold of what Rainbow Six: Siege aims to do, then just skip the game. Don't complain that Ubisoft made a bad decision to eliminate single-player. Don't nag EA to provide an offline option to Star Wars Battlefront when the entire concept was designed with multiple players.

It's pointless to want every game to be the same. Not all shooters need a campaign mode, just as how not every fucking game needs tacked on multiplayer. We need to stop having developers split their teams into single and multi-player offsets and combine their powers to make the best possible experience they can. If that happens to be multi-player only, so be it.


5:49 PM on 09.17.2015

MGS V: Our Story

There are going to be MASSIVE spoilers in this blog. If you have not finished Metal Gear Solid V or are only part way through it, come back when you beat it. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

Lots of discussion has been going on since the release of Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain. People seem to be pretty upset with the ending. An entire Kotaku article was written about how disappointing the whole affair was. (Then again, it is Kotaku)

I think people have the entire plot wrong. It may not be well written (in fact, I'd go so far as to say it's outright bad), but it has a bigger symbolic meaning then we realize. For the first time in any games plotline, you (the player) are the most important figure in it.

The big twist at the end of MGS V is that you were never actually playing as Big Boss. At the end of Ground Zeroes and leading up to the opening of Phantom Pain, Zero and Ocelot concoct a plan to fool the world and keep Big Boss' enemies off him.

This leads to you getting a face lift and becoming "Big Boss". In actuality, you are Punished "Venom" Snake, who was once a field medic and the best soldier of MSF. He had such a dedication to Big Boss' philosophy that, when in the coma, his mind was easy to trick in believing he was Big Boss.

Thus kicks off a game where, without the twist, nothing big really happens. You get revenge on the man who destroyed Mother Base and the plotline just kind of peters out of existence. The credits roll, you lose a buddy and that's really it.

It's when you consider the twist that things start to get interesting. I won't defend it's place in the Metal Gear canon (as I think it makes no damn sense), but as a standalone game, Phantom Pain's plot is pretty emotional.

For starters, it's basically a gigantic thank you to every Kojima fan. Without us, he would never be the superstar developer he is today. By making us Big Boss, he is saying that no Metal Gear would be possible without our love of the series.

Or without *sob* David Hayter!

The shift in gameplay to an open-world also echoes this. Since we are now the most pivotal character in the plot, our choices are what Venom Snake goes with. There are multiple ways to accomplish any task, so the story is dependent on the player.

There are obviously some bits from Ground Zeroes thrown in to make some kind of connecting thread, but you could skip that game and not miss much. The ending might make less sense, but you wouldn't initially feel shocked at how you were deceived.

In the aforementioned Kotaku article, the writer goes on about how Mission 43 becomes mess gripping once you learn you aren't Big Boss. I actually think the opposite effect occurs; once you learn you're not actually Big Boss, you begin to realize that you are the one making all the shots.

You walked into the quarantine zone on Mother Base and shot the soldiers that you extracted. Everything was done by you and has to be undone by you. If your character were Big Boss, it would be an emotional moment for him. Since it's actually you, the impact becomes two-fold.

I probably would have cried more than strike a dramatic pose.

The Phantom Pain works wonders when it comes to player involvement. I do wish the narrative were stronger (or that Konami didn't cut out the damn real ending), but I can't think of how else to really get a player invested in an open-world style game.

A lot of sandbox adventures suffer from unfocused plotlines. Grand Theft Auto IV and V have really bad stories. Each one starts with an intriguing premise before falling into rote execution and repetition. In both of those games, the actions done are by your characters, first, and then you.

Assassin's Creed III is another perfect example. The whole game is built around the growth and struggles of Connor, not you. Not only do I not care to see his story unfold, but the game takes so damn long to even do so that the gameplay simply acts as a distraction more then anything.

With the Phantom Pain, every bit of gameplay is story. Regardless of what you're doing, those moments are a part of Venom Snake's history. You decided to make it happen and it will be your own personal conclusion to Metal Gear's legacy.

The previous entries in the Metal Gear series were all about how much of a bad ass Solid Snake was. Even with Metal Gear Solid 3, it was less you and more Naked Snake doing things. He was the one who got the glory and who had to put that final bullet into The Boss.

I just can't help but think people missed that with the Phantom Pain. We were so used to games giving us a clear narrative and actual purpose that we were left disappointed. That's not to say that every story beat is good (because that isn't even close to true), but the whole of the Phantom Pain is bigger then it's individual pieces.

Kojima has stated that the amount of player freedom in Grand Theft Auto V had made him depressed. He was positive that the Phantom Pain couldn't reach the same heights as Rockstars latest blockbuster.

In all honesty, I feel that MGS V has the most freedom of any game I've played this year. It's also more open ended then a lot of sandbox games claim to be. You're given tools, a general location and then told to get at it. If anything, it echoes more of Far Cry 2 then it does Grand Theft Auto.

I truly think that Kojima was inspired by what FromSoftware have done with the Souls games. While those are a bit more linear then the Phantom Pain, they don't beat the player over the head with exposition or cutscenes. You enter a world and rarely (if ever) lose control.

But I can't control this! WHY?! WHHHOOOOOO?!

The cassette tapes were a decent idea with MGS V, just the execution of them didn't truly work out. We may never know how much Konami's decision to drop Kojima may have effected the game, but I do get the feeling that the story could have been grander if Konami just believed in their output.

Still, Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain is deeper then we all think. It probably won't go down in history as a classic or even the best of the series, but it certainly deserves to be called a masterpiece. If nothing else, I believe we have a best new character of 2015; us.


4:04 PM on 09.17.2015

Hmmm. Just posted a blog, but it is failing to appear in the CBlog feed. Weird.


4:51 PM on 09.15.2015

Now, sure as the sun will cross the sky This lie is over Lost, like the tears that used to tide Me Over!


11:54 PM on 09.11.2015

It's interesting to read the reaction to MGS 5's big twist. While I think the story is a fucking mess, the message to fans is deeply personal. I just wish Konami allowed Kojima to finish the damn game.


10:50 PM on 09.09.2015

Mission 47 in MGS 5 can go rot in hell. Jesus, I can't stand repeating past missions.


5:45 PM on 09.09.2015

Extreme Mode in MGS 5 isn't really that extreme. If anything, it's just less forgiving.


Back to Top

We follow moms on   Facebook  and   Twitter
  Light Theme      Dark Theme
Pssst. Konami Code + Enter!
You may remix stuff our site under creative commons w/@
- Destructoid means family. Living the dream, since 2006 -