Quantcast
Community Discussion: Blog by VGFreak1225 | VGFreak1225's ProfileDestructoid
VGFreak1225's Profile - Destructoid




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




About
So, you've found me. Welcome to my residence on our fair site. I'm your local ADD/Asperger's Syndrome-affected former Nintendo fanboy. Computer Science student (major pending) and adamandant Wii supporter. (Not that I don't love my other consoles)

(There'll be a photo of me here at some point.)

Franchises I love:
Mario
The Legend of Zelda
Metroid
Kirby
Professor Layton
Pokemon
Gears of War
Half-Life
Left 4 Dead
Team Fortress
Portal

Games I'm playing now (Several of them on and off):
Tatsunoko VS. Capcom: Ultimate All-Stars
Deadly Premonition
Ikaruga
Left 4 Dead 2
Team Fortress 2
Mega Man 2,9
Cave Story
Bit.Trip Beat
Golden Sun: The Lost Age
Lost Odyssey
New Super Mario Bros. Wii
Fallout 3

VGFreak1225 on Twitter



Badges
Following (26)  




With Max Payne 3 on the horizon, I brought myself to play its predecessors for the first time over the last month or so. In an attempt to both get back into writing about my favorite hobby and practice my pathetic attempts to mimic Sam Lake and his amazing corny metaphor skills, I decided to write a retrospective on the games in monologue form, as per request from Xzyliac. Also, spoiler warning.

They were all dead. Lying down with their gunshot wounds lay bare; bullets pierced through them like cavities in the mouth of a child with no real self-restraint on Halloween night. After so many long hours, Max had escaped the trap that had been laid for him back in 1998. His journey through the night hadn’t ended, but he could finally wake up from the nightmare, down a few painkillers, and have a brief moment of respite before going back to the inevitable sleep that waited for him.

Then I clicked on the “Quit” option on the main menu and took a breather, mulling over the experience that had been presented to me, and what I would face next month when Max Payne falls back into his bed of lies and misery as his bad dreams bring him to Sao Paulo for the next chapter in the life that has become a miserable, meaningless existence. I had the two games residing in my Steam account for a while; they were bought for $2.50, like a cheap prostitute whose glory days were long gone and spent their remaining time doing whatever job they had the privilege of being offered. Unlike that whore, however, Max Payne shows its age, but does so with enough style and grace to be classified as an archaic, but still appreciated experience.



Max refused to talk in the beginning, like a gangster who couldn’t comprehend the gravity of his arrest, and just how hard the officer’s fist was in the interrogation room. A patch “convinced” him to open his mouth, and I was swiftly introduced to the neo-noir New York that Max came to know as his own personal Hell; provoking him into firing every bullet into the hearts of the criminals protecting the source of the drug known as Valkyr.

Max stood there over the dead body of his wife, standing over her like the cold, brutal storm that would come to stand over New York as he slowly worked his way towards the truth about the drug and freedom from being framed for the murder of his partner in the DEA. As the temperature dropped, so did the empty bottles of health-restoring painkillers, the countless magazines of bullets, and the bodies of hundreds of loose lipped mobsters (The kind who couldn’t pull off a stealthy ambush if a gun was pointed in their faces and their groin at the same time.).



As Max performed his brutal ballet of bullets barreling into brains, I found myself almost as taxed as the English settlers under King George III. Max frequently found himself quickly losing health at even the slightest bullet graze. Precious Bullet Time was a commodity I soon found that I could not waste, and I found myself degrading myself to find every bottle of painkillers possible. The cruel flow of time had deemed it too long since I played a shooter unafraid to send regenerative health out on the street, leaving the player to own up to their mistakes, and I made more mistakes than General Custer on a bad day. I found it refreshing like a beach breeze, even if that breeze occasionally brought its fair share of annoying flies along with it. And yet, soon the game clicked faster than my fingers could click the left mouse button. The slow-motion opera was choreographed with the precision of a needle and thread, while I watched the bodies cascade in a crescendo of chaos.

As the bullets flew, so did the awful one liners and metaphors. Max’s monologues never loosened up as time goes by, and the facial map on his model seemed to suggest that his constipation never loosened either. But Sam Lake’s written diarrhea soon grew on me. Max Payne is a game that kept one foot firmly in self-awareness, and it was rather amusing to see it. The story sometimes felt difficult to follow, like a drunk driver in a dense forest, but the experience grew on me, and I was somewhat sad to see it go.



Then, as I prepared Max Payne 2, that sadness turned to jubilation. A more developed graphical engine, more manageable difficulty, and a physics engine that resulted in even more detailed collapsing bodies of my victims in bullet time all waited me. It was time to put Max through his paces once again, and after countless episodes of Address Unknown, and hundreds of souls sent to their just reward, it was over. Unfortunately for Max, everyone he knows tends to end up severely injured or with a bullet in their brain.

They were all dead. Lying down with their gunshot wounds lay bare; bullets pierced through them like cavities in the mouth of a child with no real self-restraint on Halloween night. After so many long hours, Max had escaped the trap that had been laid for him back in 2001. His journey through the night hadn’t ended, but he could finally wake up from the nightmare, down a few painkillers, and have a brief moment of respite before going back to the inevitable sleep that waited for him.

And, indeed, the wait for Max Payne 3 grew harder. I grasped my mouse, and I returned to begin the next difficulty for Max Payne 1. My journey through the night was about to become a fever dream…











By now, most of you have already seen the new 3DS second nub attachment (and if you haven't...look above) and most of you, (judging by the comments) have raged at the thing. Whether it be because of the look, or because of the concept, the darn thing can't catch a break. Yet, I feel that much of this discourse may not be very well founded, and I would like to offer a few rebuttals.

We don't know how it came about. I'm sure there have been fans who have wanted a second nub considering the fact that the Vita will have one. This puts Nintendo in a predicament. What if this attachment wasn't an excuse for Nintendo to decide to make a new 3DS, but a result? If they were to simply announce a new model, the current 3DS owners would feel slighted. Instead, this is a way of Nintendo to allow them to play the games that will be compatible without having to go out and buy that new model, instead paying a much smaller amount on an add-on.

Furthermore, we don't even know if it will be something that becomes standard in future games. It might. Or it might just be something used in a minority. Nintendo hasn't needed that second nub until this point, because they don't offer as many games that make it a necessity. Even if there do end up being games that offer it as an option, it could just be that; an option. If it makes your experience better, you can go out and get it, or you could ignore it.

Moreso than anything else though, I think we need to look at it and recognize what Nintendo is trying to do: Improve the handheld. They are not taking anything away, they are not forcing you to buy it (at least not yet). They are trying to make the experience better. The 3DS had a bumbling first several months, but now with Nintendo trying to fix some of the mistakes that the fanbase made incredibly clear, is it worth bemoaning it? The 3DS's problems have happened; they're in the past, no one can change them. Can't we just, for once, appreciate them trying to bring it up to our expectations?

If nothing else, I ask you this: In ten days, Nintendo will have their 3DS press conference before the Tokyo Game Show, where they'll go over this, and their plans for the future. Then we can see where this is going. Can we just keep an open mind until then?










Sonic the Hedgehog has had a rather...mixed history. He rose to power back in the early 1990s to combat the plumbing menace, had some great platformers, had a few stumbling blocks back on the Dreamcast, and by the time SEGA dropped out of the console wars, just about all of the important people from his past left Sonic team. This resulted in some 3D games that were outright panned by critics and the gaming community, yet despite this, the games still sold like bottled water in the desert. So he's still here. Fortunately he's starting to get back in the swing of things. He had a solid start to his platforming revival with Sonic the Hedgehog 4: Episode I, a stellar 2D outing with Sonic Colors DS and an...okay...attempt at finding a 3D formula that works in Sonic Colors Wii.

Now, I say Sonic Colors Wii was just okay and not great because even though I do enjoy it, it's because I believe I have a stronger threshold than others when it comes to these things. Some of the level design is pretty bad at times, and there can be a serious sense of misdirection (Starlight Carnival boss, I'm looking at you) that can cause way more trouble than can be required. But the other games I brought up are great. Outside of a few not-so-great levels and the fact that the physics aren't quite where I want them to be Episode I was a darn good start, and Sonic Colors DS proved that the formula created in Rush could result in a great experience with the right level design.

There's a reason for all this, and its one that SEGA really needs to realize if they're gonna bring Sonic back into the spotlight: Sonic Team sucks on their own, but with Dimps at the helm they can kick massive rear. The fact is, just about everything Dimps has a hand in is considered to be better than what Sonic Team does on their own. And one game of theirs in particular is one that I just can't get away from as of late: Sonic Advance.



I started replaying Sonic Advance last year, right around the time Sonic 4 was announced. While I spent more time with the Nintendo Gamecube Sonic games (I was a kid, don't judge me) than I did with the Genesis games, I also spent a hefty amount of time with some of his handheld offerings, and the one that got me the most was Sonic Advance. Advance 2 was okay, and Rush was entertaining while it lasted, but the original Advance was the game that I couldn't get away from as a kid.

I opened my handheld drawer in my dresser, dug out my old Game Pak, and stuck it in my Game Boy Advance SP (which still works, amazingly; Game Boy hardware lasts). Then right as the Chaos Emerald floated into Eggman's hands, the nostalgia hit me like a whack from Amy's hammer. This was the game I fell in love with. The stellar level design, the sense of speed, the superb music, and the respectable cast. Everything was how I remembered it.



First off, Sonic Advance is incredibly faithful to the old games. Much like them, speed is not the main pull here. First and foremost, the focus is precision platforming, with speed used as a reward for playing well. There is no speed boost meter, no complex moveset outside of a few stunts for each character, no objective other than run to the end and collect as many rings as possible as quickly as possible and don't get hit by Badniks. That's it. Of course, each level has lots of paths to go through, so you can keep coming back to explore and find new hidden secrets. Along with that, the character roster is much more conservative than some of his more recent outings. You can play as Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, or Amy. That's it. No Shadow the Hedgehog, no Cream the Rabbit, no Big the Cat. Plus, no voice acting so the odds of their personalities getting in the way is minimal.

Another thing Sonic Advance nailed was the atmosphere. The music was upbeat and memorable, and stuck with me long after I stopped playing the game. Most of the levels were based on previously explored themes, but they perfectly managed to keep the upbeat spirit of the classic games intact, and sometimes resulted in some dare I say epic scenes. I mean, how often in a 2D platformer do you get to run up a rocket while it's flying into space and huge pieces of it are falling off as you ascend. Egg Rocket Zone does just that, and it's accompanied by some fantastic music.



But the thing that really got to me was that the game was probably the fact that, for me, it was the perfect storm. As a kid, it was a 2D platformer with Sonic in it. That was enough. But now, it's a remnant of what once was, and what we're capable of. Not only is it my own personal nostalgia engine, but it's a reminder that Sonic games did and still can be a contender in this industry. It was a reminder of what 2D platformers are capable of in this day and age of 3D technology, big budget action titles, and developers trying to ape one another. A simple game that's only a few hours long with only a handful of gameplay mechanics can keep my attention to the point where I have spent hours upon hours (maybe even more than a hundred) playing it. It's a reminder that, even though we've moved on, sometimes the simplest of gameplay can keep the hedgehog running.

All these elements resulted in a game that felt exactly like the classic Genesis games, but most of all, it felt like it was what Sonic would have gone in for the future. Unfortunately, the fanbase cried out complaining that it was too slow, and each subsequent game has veered farther away from that timeless 2D formula. Starting with Sonic Advance 2, the "hold right to win" mentality got hold, and the fanbase ate it up. So when Sonic 4 was announced, I came back to Sonic Advance, and was immediately greeted with what has become possibly my personal favorite Sonic game ever. Call it nostalgia, call it a lack of experience but since I pulled that Game Pak from my drawer it's become one of my handheld mainstays, and every once in a while, I'll pull it out again just to practice in the time trials, or run up Egg Rocket Zone again. As the Steamtoid regulars are fully aware, my Sonic kick hit full speed, and it's only gotten faster since Sonic 4 Episode I hit.

I've since started catching up on some of the older Sonic games that I've missed, and am currently going through Sonic 2 (I'd be farther, but some of my perfectionist tendencies keep me behind) but Sonic Advance will always remain the game that pulled me in to Sonic's 2D adventures, and now that I've rediscovered it, I feel it may end up being one of those games that'll just keep pulling me back in.

Now if you'll excuse me, I feel the desire to go for a run. The chime of the rings call me...
Photo Photo Photo










2010 was actually a pretty great year, to be honest. We had some great games, some awesome announcements, and aside of a few editors having to move on, Destructoid is now bigger and better than ever. To be fair, even with a few speed bumps here and there, just about all of the games I played lived up to expecations.

There is however, one thing that's kind of bugged me. That something being that after the whole debate about expansion packs and sequels after last year (see: Left 4 Dead 2 ridiculousness) it seems that a lot of that went under the rug this year. Okay, not entirely, we had plenty of games that went under that. But there's one game that, considering the community's response, could potentially say that we still haven't accepted a universally accepted "sequel" formula.

And that game is Super Mario Galaxy 2.



Now before I go any further, let me just make this clear. I love Super Mario Galaxy 2. It has, without hyperbole, the best pure three dimensional platforming gameplay I've ever experienced, period. It is one of the finest games I've ever played. As a matter of fact, if Super Mario Galaxy 1 didn't already come out, and I was asked to review SMG2, I wouldn't hesitate to give it a perfect 10 out of 10.

But there was one thing that niggled at me for the entire length of the game. That being that really, when you look at it, nothing new really was added. Sure, there were new levels, new power ups, and other aspects like Yoshi brought in a bit more depth to the game. But what did the game really do a whole lot that was actually all that new?

Look at some of Mario's other sequels. Super Mario Bros. 2 was pretty much a different game than Super Mario Bros. 1 (as would be obvious considering it wasn't even a Mario game in Japan). Super Mario Bros. 3 brought in an (well, almost free-roaming) world map, flight gameplay with the Tanooki suit, a larger variety of level themes, mid-level mini-games, and plenty of other stuff. Super Mario World brought in Yoshi, even more new themes, the ability to replay previous levels freely, lots of exploration. Heck, New Super Mario Bros. Wii, a game where one of the primary selling points was its familiarity, added the chaotic co-op mode.

Even past those, Super Mario 64 made the massive dive-bomb into real-time 3D gameplay. Heck, even Super Mario Sunshine did things differently. Whether or not you think FLUDD added to or detracted from the quality of the gameplay, it played very differently from SM64. And Super Mario Galaxy pretty much ditched almost all of the problems that its 3D predecessors had.

What significant changes to SMG1's formular did Super Mario Galaxy 2 bring that hadn't been seen before? A few minor changes here and there, the world map, some new power-ups. But that's kind of it. Mario had the same basic moveset, the game had the same basic elements. For pete's sake, a few of the levels were practically ripped from SMG1 and even SM64! There were improvements, yes, but when the first game was as incredible as it was, those improvements were borderline-negligible. The fact remained that (for me, anyway) that sense of playing a brand new game, a game with new secrets and fresh components, was practically gone.



I've seen other games in the last few years that have done a far more significant job of playing with the established ideas of their predecessors, or at least trying some new ideas, even if those ideas didn't work as well as hoped. Heck, I'd even say that Metroid: Other M, with all its problems and all the less than stellar execution weighing it down, did a better job to try and keep the franchise fresh with new ideas than Super Mario Galaxy 2 did for its own. Even if the game did have issues, at least we can try and figure out which parts of the game did work, and try and build upon those parts for the next game.

Look, I don't mean to say anyone is wrong to love the game. At the end of the day, you have the right to your own opinion. But I can say that almost no one who reviewed it, almost no one who champions the game on comment threads or message boards (or at least no one I've seen) has stated the simple idea that the game could have done better to earn the "2" at the end of the name. That makes me genuinely concerned about where the industry will go from here. Any franchise, no matter how revered, should always be encouraged to mix things up, make things feel fresh again.

I can't change what has happened in the past, and I can't change how you all view the industry. Playing devil's advocate against one game isn't going to do that. But I hope this encourages a few of you to just sit back, remember all the sequels you've played, and just consider what being a sequel should require, and what we should ask from the companies who we're paying to entertain us.
Photo










In the last several years, retro gaming has resurfaced as a new movement in the industry. Starting with services like the Wii's Virtual Console, and furthered by new games like Mega Man 9 and New Super Mario Bros. and its Wii counterpart which, by choice, go against their successor's innovation to create experiences similar to the games of years passed.

But now games are growing up, and we have to decide if retrogames have a place in these modern times. But are gamers ready to do that? Or more importantly, is doing that the right thing? Or is there a way that we can justify our retro biases and understand how to move forward?

It's clear that retrogames aren't going anywhere fast. As proof of this, look at Nintendo's upcoming lineup. The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword marks a return to more colorful, cartoony visuals that breath a sense of youthfulness. Metroid: Other M, while bringing in the size and scope of the more modern Metroid titles, has a control scheme and basic gameplay that was clearly based off of previous titles. Donkey Kong Country Returns and Kirby Epic Yarn both utilize tried and true 2D platforming that are based off of each franchises roots. Activision hopes to mark a return to the old days of social gatherings to play first person shooters with its Goldeneye 007 remake. Golden Sun: Dark Dawn is the newest entry in a franchise acclaimed for its old school JRPG goodness. Heck, they're even pulling Pit out for the newest Kid Icarus game in almost two decades.



I don't think it's unreasonable to say that part of the appeal of retrogaming is the nostalgia factor. Mega Man 9 had 8-bit pixel art and New Super Mario Bros. Wii included the Koopa Kids, first intruduced in Super Mario Bros. 3, a game that is heralded by many as the greatest platformer ever made, if not the best game ever made period. Both of these features are tied to the olden days of the NES, the system that many older gamers remember as their first. They were the days of plastic cartriges and storylines that you could fit on one page of an instruction manual.

These were simpler times not only for the games, but for the gamers as well. They were in their youth, where their only responsibilities were getting to school, and getting to dinner on time. They had innocence, and their lives were good. Now real life has showed up to bite them in the rear end. Retrogames allow them to return to a simpler time, when they had none of these problems. The nostalgia not only allows them to remember all the enjoyment out of classic games, but it also causes them to recall those days.

I myself recently pulled Sonic Advance out of my stash a few months ago, and after I started playing it I was immediately returned to my days of elementary school, relaxing in day care. I remembered playing the levels over and over again, looking for those elusive Special Springs. I recalled watching in awe of running up Egg Rocket Zone while the lower parts of it fell to the ground and the remaining parts continued soaring upwards; while awesome music blasted through my ears. It's one of the most epic levels I've ever played in a 2D platformer, and as a 12 year old, I was struck dumb. It also returned me to the old days when I could sit around and go fooling around in the playgrounds, when my grandfather could still give me piggyback rides, and when children's programming was still good.



But while games like Sonic Advance or The Legend of Zelda: A Link To the Past may have aged beautifully, other games haven't been so lucky. Super Mario 64, while still a good game, has not been on the good side of time. The graphics, the game design, even the control scheme have all been done better (often times by other Mario games). Sure, there might be some memories still attached to them, but the games themselves might not be as fun as they used to be.

This brings up the opposition to the retro movement. People argue that in creating new games to appeal to those emotions and nostalgia, they're holding gaming back. That they don't allow evolution in games to continue. These games do nothing to push the medium forward and they are counter productive. Not only that, but the gamers playing them are just as responsible. All they want to do is play the same old game all the time.



To an extent, the naysayers have a point. It's foolish to say that New Super Mario Bros. Wii didn't become the fastest selling single system game of all time without having the appeal of being familiar. It had simple 2D platforming where the only real objective is to keep moving right until you hit a flagpole. The controller was meant to be played like an NES controller, and many of the enemies were based off of classic characters from games past. Even the Super Guide's ideals, a feature that had never been used in a Nintendo game before, could be traced back to the days you'd have buddies over and you'd have your super awesome friend beat the levels you couldn't even lay a scratch on. Retrogames are treasured not only on their lack of innovation, but on their desire to go against innovation altogether.

And perhaps it is true that retrogames don't push the medium forward, but they wouldn't be popular if they weren't good. New Super Mario Bros. Wii and Mega Man 9 didn't become popular soley because they were familiar. They became popular because they represent a dying breed of games. Games that were good then, and good now. They carry design philosophies that modern games don't, and while some of them died out for a reason like lives systems or passwords, many of them are still just as good now as they were 20 years ago. Sonic the Hedgehog 4 may be utilizing an art style, soundtrack, and gameplay based on the classic Genesis games, but when you consider that the last great Sonic game was Sonic Advance, a game that stood up to the test of time because it was a continuation of the Genesis design philosophy, Sonic 4 has the potential to be the best, and most focused Sonic game in years. Most importantly, at the end of the day, SEGA's still willing to push the franchise forward and make Sonic work in 3D. Just look at Sonic Colors.

I'm not against progression in games in any way. There is a reason why games that try new and innovative ideas get critically acclaimed. But there is still room for a few retro games here and there as well. Just because New Super Mario Bros. Wii sold fourteen million copies worldwide doesn't mean that the entire industry will cease focus on new and exciting games. No one can play the same game forever, retrogamers included, and I think our biases can still leave room for the newest franchise to make its way into our systems.
Photo Photo








About a week ago I picked up Darksiders from Gamestop. I realize that I'm several months late to the party, but I had heard some mixed feelings about the game and decided to wait until the price went down. Plus the game had been selling pretty well so I wasn't worried about the developers not getting proper support. Anyway, it was on sale for $20 so I decided to strike. This morning I finished the second dungeon, so I felt that it was time to put my impressions down on paper.



First of all, the art style is fairly appealing. There's a good variety of different areas, colors, and textures as well as a fair job of continually introducing new demons to turn into mince meat. Along with that, the storyline is fairly deep, or as deep as it needs to be at the very least. I will however say that some of the character design is overwrought. War in particular looks way too detailed and half of the items on his outfit serve no purpose other than to try and make him look cool (Which it doesn't, to be honest). His personality feels a little boring as well. He's supposed to be the embodiment of violence, yet he's spent most of the game scowling full of angst.



The combat feels a little shallow. So far the game has done a decent job of introducing new weapons on a regular basis. Chaoseater and the Scythe work fairly enough as a light and hard attack, and there's a good variety of moves you can purchase using the souls you collect. Plus the enemies have decent variety and the quick-time event finishers are fairly well implemented. But why is it that all the combos can be counted on both hands? All you can do is hit one of the buttons, and after three hits the combo ends, and you can't work in the other weapons into your combos as well. It gets repetitive really fast. I'm not a huge fan of the dodge mechanic either. It isn't as effective as I'd like it to be, and holding down the right bumper then flicking the stick just feels weird, although I guess it feels better than using the right stick. Although part of my frustration might have to do with the fact that I played Bayonetta when it came out; there were a crapton of combos in that game and the dodge mechanic was fantastic.



As for the dungeon crawling, it is Zelda to a "T". Collect four life shards to increase your health meter (Pieces of Heart), check. Do puzzles that involve pushing blocks and hitting switches, check. Collect an inventory item that will be used to solve puzzles and defeat the boss at the end, check. To be totally honest, it's really getting close to ripoff territory. The very first item you get is a boomerang, and considering the fact that there's a hookshot later in the game, I'm guessing that it won't do a whole lot to differentiate itself.

But for all it's flaws, I'm only two dungeons in, and I'm willing to keep an open mind. The combat may be flawed, but it doesn't bother me too much (I really enjoyed Madworld, so repetition in beat-em ups doesn't bother me horribly) and the dungeon crawiling, while derivative, is still entertaining and fun. Besides, as I said earlier I waited for the price to go down for a reason, and so far the experience has been worth $20. So we'll see. If anything the game should satisfy my Zelda fanboyism until Skyward Sword comes out.