Stavros StevieGreek Dimou's Profile - Destructoid

Game database:   #ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ         ALL     Xbox One     PS4     360     PS3     WiiU     Wii     PC     3DS     DS     PS Vita     PSP     iOS     Android


I have been a Nintendo fan for as long as I can remember playing video games. My first console was a SNES,and since then I got all of Nintendo's home consoles except the Virtual Boy. Personally I preferred the old Nintendo,the one who focused on providing beefier hardware,but that's just me.
So I wasn't so satisfied for the Wii,but so many years later it matured,and my view for it matured too.
Up until recently I was excited and I could say interested in WiiU,but now I don't think I'll be buying.
Or at least until later on,after the other new consoles have come out and I've seen what they can do, their prices,and a possible price drop on WiiU.

You see while I always liked Nintendo's own games like Mario and Zelda,and Metroid,and I'm their fan, Wii couldn't fulfill my gaming desires,because there where so many inventive and cool games coming out that weren't on that system. Actually the gaming platform I decided to have for all these multiplatform games became my PC. I added a graphics card to my general use PC to make it just able to play multiplatform games,but once I got in to PC gaming I came to try out PC exclusives too like Crysis,S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and many other series that I came to like as much as Mario and Zelda.
Right now my computer is in the wonderful position of being able to play all games that are coming out, and most of them in the highest settings. Note that I already had bought a computer because I needed it for general use,as I believe most modern houses need a computer,it's something so mainstream as TVs and Ovens by now. So the only thing I had to do to turn this general purpose machine I had to a gaming platform that could also depict better visuals than others,was to buy a 150€ Graphics Card. So to me jumping to PC gaming was a rather inexpensive move.

But while my primary platform now is a PC,I don't turn my back completely to consoles. So I saw the WiiU and what it can do,and what it can offer to me is something different than what my computer can. WiiU's philosophy isn't based on progressing graphics,but machine-human interaction by showcasing a new input device. And I thought that perhaps the kind of different experience I could get could justify me spending some money for it.

Now let's talk about games,the most powerful and solid reason for me to buy a new Nintendo console is so I can play Nintendo's first party games,the Marios and Zeldas. Good third party games perhaps will come out too,but I have many reasons to believe that as bad as games usually get ported from xbox360 to ps3 or from xbox360 to PC,that will also be the case for many games that will get ported from xbox360 to WiiU. Meaning,that most multiplatform games probably won't make proper and decent uses of the possibilities presented by each different platform,but instead usually ports come with platform-specific problems that doesn't exist on the base platform the developer developed the game for. Considering that being the rule,I doubt any multi-platform games will make as good use of WiiU's extra features as they should,so probably if I actually get a WiiU I will end up still buying multiplatform games for my PC,as this is more convenient for me,usually offers me more options and better visuals, and usually purchasing a PC game is less expensive than purchasing a console game.

So after we cleared that out, the only motivation that remains to me for buying WiiU is just so I can play the new Mario and Zelda games. Actually the new Mario and Zelda games that couldn't have come out on an older console like the Wii. And I'm saying that because there will be Mario game available for WiiU on launch day,but I really haven't seen something groundbreaking about it,having something unique that a new Mario game on Wii couldn't have. Well you might say that New Super Mario Bros U will be playable at 1080p,and this is enough of a selling point,but it isn't. Because NSMBU except from the screen resolution change doesn't look any better than New Super Mario Bross Wii. And I can testify to that,because I tried out this Wii game on an emulator on PC,where it played at 1080p,with also ridiculous amounts of Antialiasing and Anisotropic filtering, and this game looked as good as NSMBU looks if not better already. The thing is that while everything with this new game will be displayed on higher resolution,most of the models,animations,and the rest of the assets of this game are straightly ported from the Wii game. Perhaps you can't realize that if you played NSMBWII on a blurry Standard Definition TV,but someone who have played it on 1080p and have also seen NSMBU,can clearly see it. Of course other Mario games will come later on,and surely there will be some 3D ones too that hopefully will feature new models,appropriate for the new generation of Nintendo hardware.So,the point of this paragraph is that there won't be games for me to buy for this console at Day 1. But hey,this can still turn up to be a wonderful console with fabulous games,right ?

Except from already having a gaming platform that can play all multiplatform games and perhaps at better visuals than the other platform's versions,and perhaps even more than that,and beside that there are not really games that I'd like to play for this console at launch,could there be something else that hinders my motivation for buying this console ? Well there is. And that is its price. You see eventually the local shop price of WiiU for my country was revealed today,and I had a not so pleasant surprise. I live in a European country,and specifically Greece,and the local prices for the console turned up to be 320€ for the Basic Pack,and 370€ for the Premium Pack.
That's higher than what I had calculated on a past blog I wrote about what would be the worst case scenario for European Union prices. You see,the Basic version of the console in Japan costs 26,250Ą which is the equivalent of 335 US dollars. The American price for the same version is 300 US dollars. Which means that the difference between these 2 markets is 35 dollars. On my old blog entry I analyzed two possible pricing scenarios that could be true for the European prices of the console. The best case scenario would be,that the worth of money that the console would cost would be somewhere in between the Japanese and the American price,basically the closest rounded price to these two prices. The worst case scenario though,would be that European prices would feature the exact same numbers of the American price,without taking in to consideration the exchange value. Reality though proved me wrong,and the actual price for WiiU in my country is even higher numbers than the American price. The actual price of 320€ for my country is the equivalent to 417 US Dollars,and that's just for the Basic pack. It staggers me that only the Basic package in Europe costs more money than what the Premium package plus another game cost in America, because the Basic pack in Europe is priced the equivalent of 116 dollars more than it is priced in America.

Paying about 35% more than the other guy for the same product does feel a bit like a rip-off, and while I'm annoyed that this happens,it isn't the major factor that acted negatively on my motivation. I mean I wouldn't mind if I paid 35% more for a sandwich. But when it comes to more expensive things that happen to cost hundreds of currency units,things get more serious. To be honest I never cared for the Basic version from the beginning,so if I ever buy this console I'll buy the complete 'Premium' package and not the one that will make you to spend even more money later on to acquire the things you missed. But with this version costing 370€... It's hard for me to justify this purchase,as this would be the most expensive console I ever bought,and at the same time the only one that doesn't have games I feel that I must play. If I think more general what I could do with 370 euros,I could buy a complete new PC,well perhaps not a beefy one,but I could. Or I could just invest these money on upgrading my current rig,and making sure it will be able to play all games that will come out in the next 5-6 years,and it will take long until I can't play a game on its highest settings. And don't get me started with how I could spend this money for non-gaming things. From my standpoint it's really hard to justify this purchase. Sure I'll be missing a couple of good Mario and Zelda games,but if I don't miss them,then I guess my rig won't be able to play games that will come out in 2017 at good settings.Well except if I pay about that amount of money once more. I really want to play the new proper Mario and Zelda games,I really do,but if they all have graphics that are already considered old for PC,and the new WiiU based features are nothing more than replacing plastic buttons with digital buttons on a touch-screen,it is hard to me justify paying that price,while with that money I could make sure that I will be able to play more games that I like in the future,which they will also look better.

Closing this long blog,the main message I'd like to share is that first of all Nintendo should make better tries to raise up the motivation for someone to buy their system and justify the investment of buying WiiU,and secondly that charging specific costumers with considerably higher prices doesn't make these costumers feel so nice. I read on Wikipedia that the average monthly income of an American is 2000 dollars,and since the American WiiU price there is 300 dollars, it means WiiU costs Americans about 1/6 of the money they are making in a month. Yet in countries of Europe like Slovakia,Portugal,Greece,Lithuania,Estonia,Hungary and others where the average monthly income is 700 euros,it means that a WiiU ends up costing to them about 1/2 of the money they make in a month.And if the difference between salaries wasn't enough you just inflate the price you sell your product in countries like these and ask them to pay 35% more than what an American pays.

How should I say this ? I have mixed feelings after playing this game.
The positive side of it,is that the game can keep me playing it,and it's not as boring as other games I played recently that I gave up playing... It is a good game,and perhaps some people can have great fun out of it.

Before playing this game I was excited that I'd get to play a new 2D Mario game,I thought it would be nice to play something that would remind me of good moments. The problem I found though,was that maybe this game reminded of old games more than it should...

Yet not all that remembering is good. Because when I play the same mini-game I played on Super Mario Bros 3, with the cards that when you find two matching you get that item,and I try the memorized pattern that I used on that other game I played on SNES about 19 years ago,things get to feel too much the same... So they added some Koopa cards,and when you find 2 Koopa cards the mini game is over. Ok. But except from that,it isn't only the same mini-game,but the way the cards are spread out follow the same pattern they followed on SMB3. I didn't even had to guess where the right cards where, I instinctively earned all the items one by one. At that point I felt like something wrong was happening here.

Moving on I noticed that the worlds also follow the same pattern. They have the same themes,and they are also lined in the same order except from 2 worlds that each replaced the other one's position. I came to expect what I'll find next. "So now I'm on the Water World,so the Giant World will be next".

Later on I realized that the Koopalings had the same attacks and weaknesses,and the way to beat them was the exact same as in SMB3. "Well OK" I said."That will make them easier for me,so it is convenient". But then Kamek,the old magician that existed in Yoshi's Island just to throw dust on bosses come back again,and what does he/she do ? Throws more magic dust to bosses. Do you see where this is getting ?

I suddenly realize that the only new things on this game are some power-ups. Everything else this game has,I played it before.

Now there had been many occasions where a sequel of a game came out and was too different from older games,and the fanbase got disappointed because their once original game now copies Call of Duty or some other game...
But Nintendo seems to be in the extreme other side of this.

OK, we got used and accepted that the story in all Mario games will be that Princess Peach gets kidnapped by Bowser,and Mario has to save her.
But also reusing the same bosses,and have them attack and being attack with the same way ?
And reusing the same mini-games that are supposedly based on luck and randomness,and reusing the exact same patterns on them that existed on an older game ?
And featuring worlds with the same themes,in the same order ?
And using a map feature to move between levels,exactly as the older game did ?

You know what ? Some of the things Mario games introduced in the past were very cool,but back then it was 1993 and 1995. Bringing cool things from 19 and 17 years back without enough change or any enhancement won't bring back the 'wow factor' they had back then.
I think Nintendo went to far in trying to make us "remember the good old days".
If their idea for that is to take some features of their past games and mix them together as they where,without any change,well guess what,I can play these game too and have the same experience.

When you buy a new game,you expect it to be new. Now if a game has the same mechanics,the same story,the same goals,the same world(s),the same protagonists,the same enemies,and they all act and are as they always where,it's starting to feel more like a remake of an older game than a new game.
Perhaps if you are generous you might say it doesn't feel like a remake,but like a reboot at best.
But then why do they say it's a NEW game ?
I will play NSMBW to the end,I won't give up on it,but my opinion worsens about Nintendo after I played this game. Not that the game itself is bad and that someone can't have fun with it,it might blow the mind of someone who never played past 2D Mario games.
But for a Mario veteran like me,this game started giving me an unpleasant feeling after some time.
Could Nintendo have gone out of ideas ? Could they just started being too lazy that they just copy features from their past games and add them to newer ones because they are too bored to build new things from ground zero ?
I honestly don't know. But I feel like Nintendo's modern games are shadows of the company's older ones.

I was very interested to learn when the new console will be released in Europe,and what its price will be. Yet Nintendo Direct didn't unveiled any price points for the old continent. Of course the blame for this is on EU's policy which forbids producers of goods to set prices for their products,and retailers have all the freedom regarding pricing goods.

But usually most European countries end up pricing electronics on about the same price points,with maximum difference around 30 to 50 euros from country to country. But what will the average price point for WiiU will be ? This is open to speculation. There are two schools of thought however,those who say that the European average prices will be set based on Japanese prices,and will be as close to the worth of 25,000 yen and 30,000 yen to Euros,and the other school of thought thinks that the European prices will be based on the numbers of America's prices without taking in consideration the exchange rates.
Let's analyze these two scenarios,and see if one of them is more fair than the other.

Scenario 1: European prices will be as many Euros as Japanese prices are,but rounded.
In this case:

[color=darkblue]WiiU Basic:[/color] 25,000 Yen which equal to 247 Euros which equal to 321 Dollars
[color=darkblue]WiiU Premium:[/color] 30,000 Yen which equal to 296 Euros which equal to 383 Dollars.

If this scenario is true,it's certain that the European prices will be rounded upwards,to 250 Euros for the Basic version,and 300 Euros for the Premium version,which makes the European prices equal to Japanese,but still higher than American prices.

Scenario 2: European prices will have the same numbers as American prices,without taking in consideration the exchange rates.
In that case:

[color=darkblue]WiiU Basic:[/color] 300 Dollars are turned to 300 Euros which equal to 389 Dollars
[color=darkblue]WiiU Premium:[/color] 350 Dollars are turned to 350 Euros which equal to 454 Dollars

If this scenario is true,Europeans end up paying more money than everyone else in the planet,specifically 89$ more than Americans for the Basic version and 104$ more for the Premium version.
At the same times Europeans will have to pay 6,898 yen more for the Basic version than the Japanese,and 8,062 more yen for the Premium version.

My opinion is that the first Scenario should be the one that is actually true,as it makes it so all people from around the world pay about the same money for the same product.
Scenario 2 was popularized by Apple products,and unfortunately it was the case too for the Nintendo 3DS.

After so many years,with a brand new console incoming,you come up with this ?

Call it a reboot,or a sequel,or a prequel,or a remake,however you want. You know that Nintendo games doesn't have story progressing and they are either all happen in alternate universes,or Nintendo essentially re-releases the same games again and again with few differences.

But this ladies and gentlemen is Balloon Trip, which is the new Balloon Fighter,perhaps a game that you never heard of before,because it took Nintendo 25+ years to remember that it had that franchise.

Well the new one is supposed to show off the console's new features.
So lets start counting them:

#1 IMPROVED GRAPHICS!!! Graphics are clearly improved,and in particular they forward jumped 2 console generations,as from NES graphics now you get PS1 graphics.

#2 NO MORE CHARACTER!!! Yeah I now,it is hard for Nintendo to give personalities to its characters,so instead of playing the old little someone with blue hair,now you play as your Mii.
Do you feel the innovation already ?

#3 TOUCH SCREEN CONTROLS!!!! Which means you are moving your character not by d-pad,not by control stick,neither even with motion controls. You now move your character with a stylus pointing at your controller's screen. Have you played Zelda: Spirit Tracks ? You know how it is...
(sarcasm)The most amazing and innovative experience ever! (sarcasm)

#4 TWO SCREENS AT THE SAME TIME!!!! And of course for the grande finale we have the biggest innovation yet gaming has seen. You can see your character and the game's world on the screen of your controller,as it would be weird to control him using the stylus otherwise,but at the same time you see him on the TV too!
So in case you get bored of watching the game on one screen you can watch it on the other!
The innovation of being able to watch the exact same thing on 2 different screens is amazing.
But I wonder where the race of people with 2 heads and 4 eyes lives,because I for one,can't watch both screens at the same time.

WiiU is bringing the biggest innovation in gaming to your house!

I just saw that New York Times has an article that reveals what is the mysterious piece of hardware Valve is working on. It turns out to be a Virtual & Augmented Reality Goggles system.

The article states that Valve is generally looking on improving and making Wearable Computing a mainstream to be used in future PC games.

I find this new piece of tech and thought to be exciting,but I doubt if game developers will spend time utilizing such 'exotic' tech as this goggles system,seeing how there is already very small support for innovative systems when it comes for games for PCs,judging by the utilization of other clever accessories like Razer's Sixense.

The truth is most developers are already too bored to even make a PC specific GUI,or provide proper mouse and keyboard support for their most games which are ported from consoles.
But who knows ? Perhaps things can change in the future.
But what I get is that the next generation of platforms will heavily depend on new ways to play games,than just improvement of visuals.

To read the original article of New York Times,click the link:

Unfortunately as time passes I realize that the classic old-school gameplay system of FPSs is dying.
I'm referring to the game design that was common in the FPSs of the 90s,and basically the very pure and first realization of the genre. My first contact with the genre was with Wolfenstein 3D,that I randomly picked off a self when I was a kid for my Super Nintendo console.
What a different game than the rest I played this was... There was no player's character in it. You could only see him on the game's box cover or during the statistics screens of each level.
There where a few other games that tried the First Person Perspective before,but they weren't shooters. The first FPS that I happened to play,also was the first FPS ever. I grew up playing games with a similar style to it. Then Doom came out,which was far more popular than Wolfenstein 3D,and people started calling everything FPS as a "Doom clone" after it. But eventually people realized that there where so many games imitating Doom,or should I say Wolfenstein 3D,that a new genre was born,the genre of FPSs.
As FPS as a genre came up because some developers decided to copy the formula of id Software's games,the genre kept evolving the same way. It seems that imitation played a big part on the evolution of this genre. Yet with some games bringing something new to the table every now and then,and with the majority of developers imitating every new mechanic they find in new FPSs,the modern FPSs have evolved in to something that has become quite different than the original formula.
Let's track how the genre evolved from its birth in 1992,to today.

The formula of Wolfenstein 3D
Wolfenstein 3D was the game that set the very basic formula everyone else copied from.
The game featured an optical numerical meter that displayed the player character's health,with the maximum being 100%,and where at 0% the character dies. The main weapons where guns,and the player was able to see only the hand and the gun of his character. It was a game that featured secret rooms and secret levels that acted as Easter eggs,and added replay value to the game. It also featured collectible gold pieces that the player would be awarded with extra lives if he founded all the hidden pieces in a level. These basic mechanics became the standards for every FPS,and games like Doom and Quake where based on this formula.

Duke Nukem 3D: mobility,immersion,and destructible scenery
Perhaps after Wolfenstein 3D,the immediate most influential game for the genre was Duke Nukem 3D. Duke Nukem 3D accepted all the mechanics of the basic Wolfenstein 3D formula,and added to it a variety of new features that many of them where to become genre standards.
Perhaps the most important thing was the ability that was given to the player's character to jump,duck,and even fly with the use of jetpack! It was so the first time in an FPS game that you could travel not only horizontally ,but also vertically. Things like that are considered standard and basic today,but back then players felt that this game gave far too much more freedom than other games of its time. Another thing that we can credit to Duke Nukem 3D was its obsession to immersion. For immersion DN3D decided to have far more interactivity than the other games,so the developers made it so if you would hit a gas pipe,gas would come out it. If you shoot a toilet,water will sprinkle out of it, if you shoot a large crack on the wall with a rocket launcher,the wall will break. DN3D enhanced mobility and added expanded 3D movement and exploration. Most of these features where adopted by the industry and became genre standards.

Half Life: Scripted scenes and linearity
Here is where some new school elements started appearing for the first time,even if the industry decided to adopt them much later on. Half Life was the first game that was introduced as a "cinematic" game,and its design was unique.It featured linear levels with many scripted scenes and cut-scenes,as well a lot of focus on puzzles.The game was specifically praised for its physics.
Half Life's features though didn't became standards immediately,but long after,2 console generations later.

Goldeneye 007 (N64):Mission based campaign
This was another unique game that refined the genre. Goldeneye introduced split-screen multiplayer for the first time,and it also introduced mission-driven gameplay. Before Goldeneye all you had to do in FPSs was to travel from point A of the map to point B alive. Goldeneye changed that by providing missions to the player,things he had to do before exiting a level. Missions could be anything from stealing data from a computer,to protect an NPC, (escort mission) to shut down a computer system. It was clear that gameplay suddenly became much more sophisticated and complicated for the FPS genre. Note that what Goldeneye brought added to the classic formula,and didn't replaced any core game mechanic. There might have been things you needed to do inside a level before exiting,but levels still started you and ended at a specific point of the map.

Halo:Health regeneration and weapon limit
Perhaps Halo is the most influential game on the "new school" FPS design.
It was a critically acclaimed title that made Microsoft's Xbox console relevant,and brought some new features like health regeneration and a limit on the weapons you can carry.
These two features started getting adopted by the industry though after the even bigger success of Halo 2. What makes Halo differ from most of the past influential games that are featured in this list though is that one of its features,namely health regeneration wasn't adding a piece to the old formula,but instead replaced. Up until now most new features where adding new abilities and mechanics that complemented the old ones,but Halo's feature was such that it replaced an already existing of the old formula. Halo also didn't featured the full list of the classic formula,as secret areas and rooms,and other replayability factors where absent in it.

Call of Duty:Iron sights and cover-based shooting
Call of Duty embraced Halo's unique features that replaced some features of the classic formula,and add a new feature which was the Iron Sights. Up until CoD you could successfully aim and hit an enemy in FPSs just by pointing at him.Call of Duty introduced the artificial inaccuracy your player would have if he didn't used the iron sights of his weapon,forcing you to have to press a button in order to properly aim enemies. Another thing Call of Duty introduced was cover-based shooting. If you tried to just walk and shoot down enemies while moving,you would die pretty quickly and easily in that game,and you had to always use cover points in fire fights against enemies. These features also started to get adopted by the industry,but as with Halo, Call of Duty's new features also replace features of the old FPS formula instead of adding to it.

The FPSs of today.
Today's FPSs have embraced the replacement of old school features with new ones. The industry moved from improving and adding to a classic formula to replacing and removing parts of it. FPSs of today feature the health regeneration and weapons limit from Halo,the cover-based shooting and iron sights from Call of Duty,and the linear level design and scripted scenes of Half Life.
They have replaced Healthbars,medkits,unlimited weapon carriage,and true player's accuracy of the classic formula with substitutes,and they scrapped things like collectible items,secret areas and secret levels that acted as factors for the promotion of exploration and replay value. In fact modern FPSs condemn exploration as something evil and as such they show you floating arrows to point to your linear direction (in case you get lost in a single straight line) ,and punish you with death when you try to leave the pre-determined path. As for replay value,you can get it as an extra with DLCs.
Modern FPSs aren't just different than classic FPSs. It's not just like they do things different,they actually punish you for trying to play them the old way. If I try to run and gun I'll die because I was out of cover,and if I try to explore the game's world I will get a message on my screen telling me that if I don't want to go the pre-determined way,it will kill me!
I'm not having fun with this guys... I loved FPSs for what they offered me,now they refuse to give it to me,and they punish me for asking it.

The problem is when the old franchises forget what they where.
I would have absolutely no problem if new franchises came up and embraced the new school of FPSs. In fact I wouldn't even care if every single new franchise was only new-school. What does disappoint and depresses me though,is the fact that the classic franchises,those who invented some of the unique features that got adopted by the industry,turn their back to their original features and mechanics to embrace those of newer franchises,ending up unoriginal imitations.
It is saddening seeing how once innovating franchises now fall so low to scrap their foundations and originality so to copycat other games.
First we got Perfect Dark Zero,a prequel of a Nintendo 64 game,to scrap everything that made Perfect Dark a diamond to become a below average imitation of Halo. Then we saw the very first FPS franchise ever,the one who started it all,Wolfenstein,to loose its dignity and pride and dare to imitate Halo and Call of Duty and include health regeneration and iron sights. Disappointed from that,the next savior of classic gaming that we all waited for was Duke Nukem Forever. But oh,Duke you too had to scrap all the things that made your past game special and awesome, to copy Halo, and to make things worse you even spilled irony against it.

Is there still hope ?
And after the last hope for an old FPS franchise to respect its own originality and keep improving on the classic formula instead of copying other games died,we suddenly got.... Serious Sam 3!
Let me tell you something about Serious Sam,this series wasn't considered "serious" at all back then. Serious Sam came up on the early 2000's as a parody of classic FPS. It adopted all of the features of the classic FPS formula,at a time Halo was coming out and developers started thinking about moving in to new school formula. Serious Sam games played well,but because of their humor everybody considered them to be... too much of imitations of the current game franchises,so most people saw these game very light-heartedly or didn't even played them because they thought they where copying other games too much. So Serious Sam 3's trailer in E3 2011 stroke as a thunder in a day with clear forecast. The game wasn't even announced until then and nobody knew it would come out.But even so,everybody was thinking that if a Serious Sam game would have come out,it would be the absolute imitation of current (new school) FPSs. Yet SS3 surprised everyone by being the one and only FPS franchise staying true to the old-school formula. Sam isn't parodying new school shooters for being new school,he is parodying old-school shooters for not being old-school,with a trailer which is slogan is "NO COVER,ALL MAN" just 1 month after Duke Nukem Forever's disappointing release. And suddenly all the people who grew up in the 90s with games like Wolfenstein 3D,Doom,Quake,and Duke Nukem 3D get shocked by it. But unfortunately we see that the industry doesn't want games like Serious Sam 3 anymore. It is a shame that such a nice game didn't found a publisher and the developers had to publish the game themselves. Which made SS3 to be only available as a digital download for computers. In fact,I realize how much the industry hates me. How much they hate it to be there games that I enjoy to play.
In the modern games that publishers publish,their games punish me for trying to play the way I like. And when one game comes out that allows me to play the way I like,they punish this game too by not supporting it and publishing it. Well screw you modern game industry. If you hate me so much,if you hate it so much that I can have fun by playing a game,then I hate you too. My beef isn't with games like Halo and Call of Duty. I don't hate these games. They just do their own thing. What I do hate is that everybody else is copying these 2 games,and that the industry thinks that if something isn't imitating these two games too much,it's not worth it.I hate that the industry hates originality and requires all games to be the same,look the same,and play the same. It not only kills creativity,it also kills the gameplay I personally enjoy so much to play. Closing this large blog post,I'd like to recommend Serious Sam 3 to everyone who grew up in the 90s playing FPSs. It's a must play game,as it's the only game the past 7-8 years that stays true to the original gameplay formula we loved. Will there be new franchises in the future that will have the classic gameplay that we loved ? Unlikely but plausible. Will the old franchises like Duke Nukem and Wolfenstein return to their roots and provide us with pure old-school gameplay on their next installments ? I don't know. What I do know is that at least we have Croteam and Serious Sam.