It's the game franchise that divides. Whether it be that you prefer DICE's latest offerings, or you're just done with online FPS's with this style, or even you just dislike the repetitiveness of the series, Call of Duty's success is one that angers a good proportion of gamers. When Jim Sterling gave the game a sterling and well deserved 9.5, there was a little bit of uproar that the game hadn't scored lower.

I recently got my Level 80 and Prestige’d in the multiplayer component of that latest Call of Duty game, having never played a Call of Duty title online for more than a couple of hours before. Now, however, having given the series a chance, I have sunk 40 good hours into Modern Warfare 3, and for the most part, had a great deal of fun. In fact, any time I wasn't having fun can be blamed on other players themselves (H4X0RS!)
In order to see what needs improving, I thought I would first make a list of what ought not be changed:

1The Levelling and Gear systems: Part of Call of Duty's appeal is the ongoing levelling up a player can do the longer they play. As you play more, your points unlock a higher rank, which in turn unlocks more equipment and guns. Even guns have a level attributed to each of them, which as you use them more rises and unlocks new perks and bolt-ons for each gun (better scopes, bigger magazines and silencers for example). It's a way of crafting a playing style that works for you. I myself favoured charging through narrow streets and tunnels, blasting away unsuspecting enemies with my fully levelled Striker shotgun with extended magazine and the Kick perk attached, meaning better shooting from the hip, giving me the edge over those assault rifle carriers who need a second to aim down sights, or those akimbo bastards who need a second to steady their aim. It adds incentive to keep playing, and even when you're the very best, like no one ever was, you can reset all your stats and receive a shiny badge to say how awesome you are, and start all over again. It just works.

2 The Engine: It looks decent enough. Treyarch, Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer are doing mighty well at squeezing every last bit of life out of the aging engine, and I would recommend they continue to do this. Yes, Battlefield 3, the games biggest competition, is a mighty fine bit of eye candy, but perhaps the competition need not be fought on this front. I have ideas where Call of Duty should strike.

3 Lack of Dedicated Servers: I'm pretty sure most of my PC brethren will happily throw a knife in my eye for this remark, but it needs to be said; I'm sick of playing Left 4 Dead 2 or Team Fortress 2, getting all my friends together, and then joining a server with stupid rules and mods. Without dedicated servers, developers can ensure their game is being played how it is meant to be played. Plus, dedicated servers with funny mods or rules could mean exploitation of the rather brilliant levelling system, as modified rules could mean more ease in levelling up, which would give an unfair advantage. Maybe they could throw in a different mode for this kind of game, which is separate from the levelling systems.

However, if Call of Duty and Activision wants to win back the hearts of gamers, there needs to be some changes. People will only fall for playing what is pretty much the same game with new maps only so many times. Here are some suggestions, hope you're listening guys:

1 Refine the Single Player: When I "reviewed" MW3 in my backlog journal, I gave it a perfect score. It was emotional, well paced and basically brilliant. But a lot of this enthuse may have had a lot to do with the fact that I was genuinely surprised how much better than MW2 it was. MW2 lived in Call of Duty 4’s shadow, and was definitely more Two Towers than Empire Strikes Back (as in, the weak second entry, not the strong point of the series). However, MW3 was definitely the Return of the King (arguably best one) as opposed to Return of the Jedi (fucking Ewoks?).
The ultra violent and scary moments where the public get screwed over are one of the strong points of the series. In this respect, MW3 wins again, with the scene of the family getting blown up highlighting the true villainy which Makarov and chums were capable of, making you want to hang the bastard from the furnishings all the more. The airport scene from MW2 kind of worked, but you had to really look to find the true meaning in the scene other than “Shoot innocent people? Whoopee!” More context should be built into these scenes, so that the player knows why they are seeing what they are seeing; to build resentment of your enemy, and to give you motive to get to them. With this motive, the game becomes more than a five hour multinational bloodbath, and more an exercise in questioning whether war is really what is needed right now.
My idea for a Call of Duty campaign would be to take a family, for whom many of the male members (and maybe a female member for the modern day) are all drafted into their respective wars; the great great grandfather in WW1, the great grandfather in WW2, the father in the Falklands War (yes this article is brought to you by a Brit), and now you, after looking back on what your family has given to their country, before shipping out to Madeupistan to settle the latest conflict. Maybe the protagonists could talk, or the narration could be done by letters, but the important thing would be to craft a story that examines warfare over the last one hundred years, which conveniently would allow the developers to show off all the skills they’ve picked up since the original Call of Duty on PC.
Or, you could even have one of the relatives be a German soldier during WW2. Crazy I know, but don’t forget that many people didn’t fight for the Nazi’s necessarily; they just fought for Germany and their family. This new perspective could turn the genre on its head if done right and tastefully.
So yeah, to summarise, more thought put in, and don’t just nuke us and burn us in a ditch.

2 A new way of fighting online: When it comes down to it, you get home from work, pop in a disc (or open Steam) and jump into a fight. Easy. Team Deathmatch, Kill Confirmed and Domination prove to be most popular amongst the masses.
But what if there was something else? What if you could level up and unlock gear in these aforementioned modes, and yet there was another, deeper, more complex mode, which hid even more juicy equipment and perks?
It’s easier said than done, I know, but perhaps all it would take is a little outwards looking. How about actual real life battles played out on historically accurate maps, with the chance to rewrite history, or preserve the time line? How about a new implementation of killstreaks which reflect the time? Rewrite D-Day, by upping max player numbers to 32, and having the option as the leading player on your team to command tactical insertions, new defences and mortar fire? Any battle could conceivably be remade; I know you Americans are quite proud of the Alamo, but what if the Mexicans (correct me if I’m wrong on any point here) had conceived of a more effective method of attack? Scary, no?
Some people might suggest vehicles and the like, and to this I would say that it should only be done if it works. It isn’t absolutely necessary though.
Also, as a fan of Left 4 Dead’s versus mode, I’d like to see something that encourages team work. How about having medic gear, allowing you to heal the wounded? Rather basic a suggestion, but heck, could work.

3 For the love of God, follow Valve’s example: Activision, I’m about to say two words that might just make you shit your breeches. Ready? Free content… now go clean yourself up and hear me out. A map here and there, a game mode every three months, or really just anything as a sign of good will to your players. It works for Valve, one of the most beloved developers in the industry. You have a lot of money, so why not rock the boat a little and see how much it pays off in adoration from, dare I say it, your new fans! Remember those guys who played Call of Duty 4 who you haven’t heard from in four years? They’re back, and what’s this? Could it be two £20 notes in their hand and eager look in their eye? Wow, guess it paid off after all.
Another, perhaps more outlandish suggestion would be to release a trial version of Call of Duty multiplayer with a free-to-play business model, which would perhaps restrict access to single player and certain modes, but would allow players to build up a taste for the game, and then either purchase the full product, or some kind of multiplayer license, enabling them to gain full access to the multiplayer. This model would work well for those who don’t give a flying toss about the campaign, and could still work on consoles if Sony and Microsoft (and maybe even Nintendo) are willing. Oh, and a PS Vita version might work out well too.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that whilst Activision and chums are feeling quite comfortable on their mountain of money, there is still hope for the franchise yet. Whilst paid content and the Elite service are the dominating thing right now, we can only hope that someone in those golden walled offices with their platinum urinals and caviar dealers on speed dial are actually thinking “What is this franchise really capable of? What are we trying to say about warfare as we know it today? What can we do to keep our multiplayer component fresh and interesting? Where is that boy with my caviar tacos?”

Eight months ago, I set out to finish all the games in my collection that I had acquired during my ball-breaking addiction to Left 4 Dead 2's versus mode. The road has been bumpy, with progress ranging from light speed to snails pace. This week, that inconsistency is set to continue, as I recall my time with a DLC chapter for a game I've already completed, and the multiplayer segment from another game I've already completed.

First up, Deus Ex: Human Revolution- The Missing Link. This was acquired during the Steam sales for something like £2 or so. Not much to argue with there, as its equivalent to a mere twenty minutes pay at my minimum wage pub job, for three to four hours of reliving one of my favourite games of 2011.
However, I mistakenly got my hopes up. The gameplay was solid, and it looked beautiful using AMD's Eyefinity set up, with the extra two screens at the side giving a more absorbing look into the dark dank world that Adam had woken up to find himself in. The plot was even okay, with a moral dilemma (which I cunningly found an alternative to) rounding out the game and spelling doom to Belltower Industries.
But the pacing was way off. Admittedly, this may have a lot to do with the fact that the DLC was designed as a standalone chapter within a larger game, which you could access independently from the rest of it so as to avoid mucking up continuity within an existing save file. But with only three hours to get absorbed, Eidos Montreal were going to have to work some magic on this short but sweet project. Unfortunately, thanks to continuous backtracking, repetitive environments and those fucking security checkpoints with the “Biometric Data…Assembled!” robot lady, this DLC is more “D…D…Diagonelly” than “Diagon Alley!” so it gets a 5 from me. Worth £2 or so for a slow weekend, but nothing more than that.

Now, finally, after a month and a half and 40 hours of gameplay, I have earned my first Prestige on Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3- Multiplayer.
It’s been a mixed time with COD; some days I would revel in the slaughter as I picked apart my opponents from afar with my trusty CM901 and later my FAD, or perhaps a plucky knife throw from afar, or sprinting through the back alleys of Seatown with my golden Striker shotgun tearing through anyone unlucky enough to step out of that doorway. A highest killstreak of 13, a K/D ratio of 1.2 shows that whilst relatively new to the multiplayer component of the COD franchise, all that time with Left 4 Dead and Team Fortress 2 has helped me be a relatively worthy opponent to most people.
However, it’s not all sunshine, lollypops and flashbangs. There are several things that weaken the experience. Whiney complainers who are losing. Hackers who use their aimbots to unleash a nuclear blast with their 25 player killstreak, and of course, akimbo wielders and campers. Whilst it might seem harsh to say that these latter two are frustrating considering they’re legitimate tactics, it can be very frustrating when you’re trying to play in a competitive way. Where’s the fun in lying in some grass picking off every poor bastard who rounds the corner? Or the fun in running around with the most overpowered weapon combo in the game (dual machine pistols). Okay, yes, it is silly to get annoyed about, but these wouldn’t seem so bad if every other fucker on the server wasn’t bitching about it, rage quitting, or hacking everyone’s pants off.
But all in all, I really enjoyed it. Chances are, I’ll play enough to prestige one more time. But, I’m well aware that perhaps the only reason I was enthralled was because this was my first stint at COD multiplayer. Will I still be happy after COD BLOPS 2? MW4? Probably not, but only time will tell. To all the “COD Haters” I’ll say this. Yes, the multiplayer (which gets an 8 from me) is pretty much what you’ve played before, with even more plans for wallet fucking DLC on the way. But, the single player is amazing. Buy it for the single player after revisiting the other two MW’s.

Next time, a progress report on my 3DS backlog, with Super Mario warily taking centre stage (and he'll be lucky to be leaving alive), and maybe I’ll start Battlefield 3 multiplayer and do some kind of comparison... I dunno, whatever I feel like.

Well to be honest, in the last month since my last update, there hasn't been the largest amount of backlog tackling going on. Two games have fallen, and I’ll get to those, but my primary gaming focus has been bringing my gaming rig into the second decade of the new millennium with aplomb. New AMD FX-6100 six core processor which works well, with noticeable performance improvement alone, doubled ram now up to 8gb, a 3D monitor, which combined with my old monitor and my TV which are all 23 inches allows Eyefinity support, not to mention stereoscopic 3D on supported games (which thanks to the middleware which came with the monitor, is quite extensive a catalogue) as well as two HD 6970’s, which were not too long ago the flagship card for AMD. Together, it’s amazing. Only a replay on Crysis 2 suffers slightly after DX11 and Hi Res texture patching applied, but I suspect this has more to do with software than hardware, as Crysis 2 is not optimised for Crossfire. Still, Eyefinity is beautiful with any game that supports it, and surround vision really sucks you into the experience, as it takes up your entire peripheral vision.

Anyway, onto the backlog.

At long last, Rage has bitten the dust. With the right kit, it’s a beautiful game. With the wrong kit, as I found out, it’s a wasteful dog of a product, poorly optimised for most machines out there. Don’t even buy it if you don’t have Windows 7, as the patches that iD released only work with that. Dedicate yourself to the upgrade though, and you get a… err… morbid cross between Fallout 3 and Borderlands that doesn’t quite gel.
The plot is there. That is about all I can say about it, and the variety of environments is piss poor. You even have to revisit certain areas quite a lot, and driving between them gives you little joy. The shooting is unsatisfactory, the weapons don’t have that Battlefield 3/Modern Wafare 3 pazaaz which is hard to explain, but the only way I felt I was wielding a dangerous weapon was that the number of corpses around me tended to increase. The feel is in the action, and shouldn’t be in the result, but this is how Rage feels.
Graphically and artistically, its good, but the lack of optimization and the average at best single player make it one for the bargain bin (where it already dwells at £12.95 in most stores). I’d get something else instead. 5

Next came Star Wars: The Force Unleashed 2. Anyone who might be following this series (IS THERE ANYONE ALIVE OUT THERE!) will know I wasn’t too displeased with the last game. And whilst this game got trashed by reviewers everywhere, I have to confess that this is the most fun I’ve has on a Star Wars game since Knights of the Old Republic.
It’s beautiful, it’s halfway decent to play, and you know what? It feels like Star Wars, and you feel like a rogue sith/Jedi as you carve your way through the Empire. Plus, I’m a massive fan of the parts where Starkiller hurls himself off stuff and falls. I loved it in 007:Everything or Nothing, I loved it in God of War III, and hell yeah I loved it in this. But Starkiller definitely has the edge of James Bond and Colin in this respect. He falls with style. In fact, I want a freefalling game which is just about freefalling combat. Those guys who made Arghghghghghgh A Reckless Disregard for Gravity could do this for me I’m sure. But I digress. Next Steam sale, get this in your collection. It’s not an amzing game by any means, but it is an entertaining way to spend three hours for £3.74. 7

Next time, Deus Ex: The Missing Link DLC (in 3D) and possibly my report on my time with MW3 once I reach Level 80 and Prestige my ass. Plus, looking to start Assassins Creed: Revelations, so might have a tidbit on that too.

Ta Ra.

Gaming means a lot of things to different people. For some it is an outlet for stress, for others it is a good way to burn ten minutes before going to the pub. For many, it is a time consuming pass time which allows escapism into whole new worlds, and for others, it is practically a sport. As I sit and question my motives for this blog, I start to realise that all these reasons are nowe for me. Being quite a diverse gamer, with no real allegiance to any particular brand, publisher, developer and hardware, I am allowed access to a wide array of games which can all serve different purposes for the individual.

A while back, I started a series of blogs (which I never finished) which I hoped would offer an insight into one gamer’s view of games as an artistic medium. Back then, I was the escapist; a gamer who wanted to escape his existence and enjoy one where I determined the outcome, where my victories changed the world. Back then, my personal life was a complex one, one which I’m not particularly proud of; I was deceiving many of those around me who I hold very dear, an extended series of lies and deceit which preserved temporarily my comfortable existence. However, that time is at an end, and I feel I have paid for my mistakes, and mended bridges that, thanks to a dearly loving family and a solid group of friends, were never truly broken in the first place. I feel better about the person I am today, and therefore am in no rush to escape from the existence I dwell in. Games now mean something else to me, but I will always be thankful for the part they played in allowing me to escape my life, even if perhaps, with hindsight, confrontation of my demons would have been better in the long run. In particular, Left 4 Dead 2 allowed an escape from this life I now regret, with its victories, its defeats, and the friends who I will always treasure and remember elevating my sense of worth, even if it were in an artificial manner of speaking.

Now, with my life back on track, and two decent paying jobs under my belt, I treat games as a relaxation tool, a way to unwind at the end of the day. Sure, I still love a little bit of escapism, but its necessity has waned. I’m happy with who I am, and I don’t need to become the Dovhakien (spelling?) to feel good about myself for a few hours. It is for these reasons that I write. Sure, this series of blogs has hardly set the world on fire, but I’m starting to feel that their benefit for me is the main concern. Gaming now has a new meaning which I quite enjoy; analysis, and with this new meaning, once the credits roll on the latest interactive adventure which has reached its conclusion, I can sit back and take a new spin on the time I have just spent, thinking how has this game affected me, and would I do it all over again. For the most part, this answer has been yes. In fact, the only game I wish I could get my time back off would be Fallout: New Vegas, but I can go back and read these reviews and remember each game and why I enjoyed them, which in itself is rather enjoyable for me.

My gaming this fortnight has been a little erratic. I have completed just one game, and progressed in a few others. Rage is an ongoing battle, with my opinion on this title gently rising despite the aggro caused by its less than desirable ease to run on PC. Skyrim has taken a proper back seat, regrettably, as I don’t wish to gain a massive attachment to a game I know I can’t enjoy for long periods of time due to being busy. This has led to an increase in playing the kind of games you can dip in and out of, which brings me on to Serious Sam HD: The First Encounter
If you’ve been following this series of blogs from the start, you’ll know I only got into PC gaming around 2008, and even then, most of the games I played were available on console, and were mostly built with consoles in mind. However, Serious Sam is a series which has always been PC first (or exclusive) and pretty much embodied PC gaming at the turn of the century. Now, with updated graphics, the series returns to show all the cover-takers and down-the-sighters what FPS’s were all about once people stopped using sprites and modified Doom engines.
There isn’t much to say, which is perhaps a good thing. Serious Sam set out to be a nuts-out mental shooter, with hundreds of on screen enemies looking to tear your organs out through your white t-shirt and blue jeans, and eat your red converse trainers as desert, feet still attached. It’s amazing fun barrelling through these enemies with rockets, bullets, shells and mother-loving cannonballs. This is a perfect game to spend a few quiet unoccupied nights on, dipping in and out of the mayhem and slaughtering a couple of armies worth of skeleton horses and Bomb-Hand-Screamy-Men. This sheer fun is what has led me to immediately pounce onto Second Encounter, which I will give opinions on next time, but for now, I recommend just getting this in the nest Steam sale, sticking some music of your choice on and going at it. My music choice was The Vulture by Pendulum, and a good part of the rest of that album (Immersion). I also recommend Nero’s latest album; whilst most gamers tend to veer towards tastes of a more heavy metal persuasion, dubstep can make a good soundtrack to slaughter. SS:TFE gets an 8 from me.

Aside from this, things have stayed pretty crosshair orientated. I have gone on to play Modern Warfare 3 online, and my perfect score from last time still stands. The developers have really hit their stride with online FPS, and to help matters along, contrary to my last attempt at competitive multiplayer, it turns out I’m actually pretty good at it.
I have also started playing a lot of Team Fortress 2 which I bought ages back, but due to my lack of skill, I never really got into. Now, thanks to two years with Left 4 Dead, it seems my knack for this has also increased. I favour the Scout and the Pyro, the Scout for missions with large expanses, in which a pistol, some good aiming and some better dodging make you a viable foe for any sniper, and the Pyro for the parts where a couple of Heavy’s and a Demoman might be plaguing a corridor or a tunnel. My new appreciation for this now free-to-play title leads me to award it a 9, but don’t expect to many reviews for multiplayer only games, as next time, Rage and Serious Sam Part 2 fall victim to my sturdy gaze.

It has been a couple of weeks, dear Destructoid, but here I am with another sexy cutting edge Backlog diary entry for you to ignore. And I come to you with news that my PC is now badass. One AMD HD 6970 fitted, one copy of Windows 7 installed, and one id Software and one DICE game now fully operational without nasty hiccups. In fact, Rage now is modified to run at double texture resolution, so is looking quite good. Maybe the content doesn't quite match that standard, but that is for another time.

SPOILERS!!!

Today, my worthless opinions will spew in the direction of several games. Firstly, Sonic Generations, a playable Sonic game that didn’t make me hate it, myself, and it again. I’ll let you in on a little surprise; the 3D Sonic sections are actually more fun than the 2D ones. It was a real blast…err…blasting through levels inspired by a level from every major Sonic title made. For the first time in a while, newer Sonic really felt like he had a sense of speediness about him. The 2D was okay, a nice throw back, but they failed to meet the excitement of 3D Sonic. Plus, Perfect Chaos as a boss was a nice surprise from probably my favourite Sonic game, Sonic Adventure. Being only £19.99 on Steam, it was a nice budget platformer; something I’ve lacked for a while, and made a nice change from all that preceded and now follows. I give it a 6 because even with my new badass PC, there was still some graphical hitches and slowdown.

Next, and at long last, came Gears of War 3. Now if you’re not a fan of Gears of War, then you’ve probably made your mind up. I, on the other hand, am one, and did not leave disappointed.
My opinion may be rose-tinted, but considering I’ve been playing these games for five years, I have grown rather attached to the series. I have more attachment to it that I do Uncharted, so if you’re going to accuse me of bias, you’re probably right.
All in all, I think this final instalment in the trilogy rounded things off pretty well. I was particularly keen on the bit that humanised the Cole Train as he dreamt of days gone by, and the way he was treated by the locals of his old home town.
I was sad to see Dom die; the scene itself was handled very well. However, to heighten the drama of it, perhaps Epic could have written up to it a bit better. Sure, it may have then been expected, rather than the genuine surprise that it was, but it would have been a fitting end to the more likeable of the lead duo, even if he did spend the whole second game going on and on about his c*nt wife!.
Haven’t got onto Horde or Deathmatch yet, but will definitely be doing so in the near future, but based on the single player, I’m giving Gears 3 a (H)8 out of ten. A satisfying ending, surprisingly good story and characters, and some genuine moodiness along the way.

Next came Call of Duty: World at War (still). When it comes to quality of first person shooters, this one is just above par, even though it is just about three years old now. Gameplay was your typical COD affair, which is always solid, and the story was adequate enough to keep you motivated and moving, especially the Russian side, with the charismatic Reznov (whom I didn’t expect to be present, having completed Black Ops prior to this one) driving you on to defeat the Nazi’s. So charismatic was he, that his complete ruthlessness towards his adversary was at times quite scary. However, putting the Sickle and Hammer on the roof of the Reichstag was a nice way to end what has proven to be the last of the World War II era Call of Duty games. It perhaps at times felt like a better looking Call of Duty 1-3, but it held its own just long enough for this player to complete it. 7

And then came Battlefield 3 So hyped and, from the look of a recent IGN readership poll, loved by its community, beating MW3 to top spot for their Best Shooter of 2011 award. It was rather good; it certainly outmatches its competition in terms of graphics.
However, I did have a gripe or two. One, the story was somewhat mediocre, and I had no attachment to any single character at all (even when they died), making this a four hour long exercise in “shoot, move, shoot, move, tank bit, shoot move, finish”. It handled very well, and looked gorgeous with my new graphics card, but man, the bastard kept crashing until I updated my OS to Windows 7. Very frustrating, and it would have been nice if they developers had had the foresight to see this might happen, which it has done to many users as I understand. Still, solid enough gameplay with a mediocre story and gorgerous looks, but in no ways a revolution; merely, it’s the something else to Call of Duty if you want a FPS war-sim. And fair play to DICE; from what I hear, the game is doing reasonably well.

And now, dear reader, on to Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. I’ve played a lot of FPS’s in my time. Hell, I’ve played a lot of FPS’s this week, and so I fully expected to merely enjoy MW3 a bit. £40 is a high entrance fee for such a game which you can expect to be a bit too similar to its previous year’s predecessor, but I took the plunge anyway, expecting something of a let down akin to the one I felt after playing Modern Warfare 2.

Didn’t happen.

It makes no sense. Everything tells me that as a rather seasoned gamer who enjoys numerous genres and loves a good plot should have disliked MW3, and I should have rooted for Battlefield 3 to take Activision’s crown away from them. I should have been bored with the play mechanics, the samey and underwhelming graphics and the engine that powers them.

So why is this the best game I’ve played in months? Why did it keep me up until 3am after getting home from work at 12am for three nights running? Why did I constantly think about returning to save France or the Russian President, even when I was trying to muster the nerve to chat up the cute red haired girl at work who, quite helpfully, seems to be chatting me up instead (get in!)?

Well, I have theories. One, despite its aging, the engine for MW3 holds its own. Not only does it compete with most FPS’s out there, barring BF3 and Crysis 2, but it weaves a believable world for you to save. London, New York and Paris are gorgeous to fight in, and accurately make you think you are in a world of shit, and to be more specific, YOUR world of shit. Rather than go all out on a new engine ala BF3, IW and Sledgehammer seem to be going down the Valve/Source route of “if it ain’t broke, just tack some shiny bells and whistles on”.
Two, it had Sledge Hammer (and Raven Software) on board to freshen things up. Left in the hands of OW or Treyarch, the series could have been in danger of stagnating. But luckily, this is not the case.
Three, I assume the multiplayer (which you bet your ass I’m going to try, both deathmatch and co-op) is the most popular and well supported. And whilst there are still no Dedicated Servers, the bitter taste after MW2 has faded away, and ultimately, I couldn’t care less.
Four, the plot. So maybe MW2 let us down by not doing an Empire Strikes back, and instead doing a Two Towers. But MW3 is definitely the Return of the King. Being the conclusion to a popular series must help, but IW crafted themselves a real gem in Captain Price, and SPOILERS!! I was genuinely gutted as he mourned for Soap. His eventual revenge on Makarov for all he had done felt very real and very personal even to me, the player. Helped along by scenes of death and destruction (namely, the now infamous family getting blown up scene), that final scene as you smoke your cigar was a fitting touch to a trilogy I hope many a wrongly hateful gamer will come to recognise as a turning point in the plot of first person shooters. War never felt personal in any War game before, even with the dreadful Japanese Banzai chargers, the Kamikaze pilots or the evil doings of the Nazi Third Reich. But you nuke one player character, have two more burnt in the ditch, have the player watch as the American Delta Squad you accompanied through the game as Frost heroicly stand their ground in the face of overwhelming umbers, and then kill off the primary protagonist of the series in a heartfelt and desperate scene of anger and betrayal, and you have yourself a personal war. Yes, Modern Warfare 3 is a surprisingly fantastic game, and I urge all gamers who have turned their nose up at it merely because of the fact it commits many sins of modern gaming (being owned by Activision, DRM in the shape of the forgiveable Steam, DLC, the cutting of PC features, being owned by Activision and being owned by Activision) to reconsider, even if you only pick it up when it is budget price. An absolute well deserved and surprising 10

Now, back to work.

Yeah, I caved. I just went out and bought all but two of the titles I planned to buy from what some might call the “November Madness” that was the release of so many highly anticipated titles. Suddenly, Uncharted 3, Skyrim, Sonic Generations and Assassin’s Creed Revelations are all in my possession, and eagerly awaiting completion. So now, this blog series is likely to turn from “Backlog Diary” to “Stuff I’ve played that’s getting in the way of Skyrim.

Not to cheapen the thrills of these games. One I’ve completed, one I’m halfway through, one I’m yet to pop in due to my plans to upgrade my TV to a 42 inch 3d Panasonic next week, and one is Skyrim. The ones I’ve played have been great (Uncharted 3 I gave an 8, and Sonic Generations is looking towards a 7 at the moment) but Skyrim is destined to dominate my time once this games have bitten the dust. And then there’s Zelda and UMvC3 to purchase (the latter sooner rather than later)

But then that shall be it. No more purchasing until the backlog is looking healthier.

In other news, due to a blown out power supply, I sought to upgrade a good deal of the innards of my PC. New case, sound card, power supply and an AMD Radeon HD 6770, which serves to be a placeholder until some money is put together for an i7 processor, new mother board, more RAM and an HD 6950/70/90 (depending on income). So now Rage is just about playable despite some graphical glitches, and will hopefully find its way onto these pages in the coming months.

But onto what I have completed; F.E.A.R. 3

I’ve been a big fan of the FEAR series, owning every game and expansion pack thus far, with only the non-canonical Extraction Point to finish. Whilst this latest instalment may be considered the least scary of them all, it definitely was the most fun to play.

Aside from Max Payne, FEAR has always been the series which did bullet-time right. There is a great sense of satisfaction in popping out of cover (which FEAR 3 deals with using the “press q to stick to chest high walls” method) hitting Shift and popping a few heads within the space of three real-time seconds, before popping back under and listening as the dead soldiers colleagues shout “Shit, his fuckin’ head!”. It’s a good thing this is so enjoyable, as you’ll spend most of the game doing it. Yes, F.EA.R. 3 is without doubt a shooter before it is survival horror.

But that’s not to say it doesn’t give you the creeps sometimes. Weird decorations and finger paintings in blood do make some areas rather foreboding, making the player walk rather than run, just in case that creepy pink thing pops out for another go at you.

I played single player rather than co-op, which is a shame, as playing as Fettel and competing for your characters unique ending is a fantastic idea that should be taken on board by some other co-op game developers. You fight together, but in your own way, you’re also battling each other in the long term, as each of you rushes for that stylish headshot or possession.

However, these backlog entries are primarily focused on single player experiences, and this one stands on its own two feet in this respect. It may not be genre defining, but some lessons could be learnt from it. My only niggles are the constant pop up telling you you’ve earnt some kind of EXP reward for doing something a certain amount of times, the rather average boss fight and closing chapter, and the lack of more supernatural enemy types, as well as the short length of four hours. However, I gladly bare in mind that this game is designed to be played through multiple times with a partner, so can forgive it on that last point.

So F.E.A.R. 3 gets a 7 from me. It hasn’t set my gaming world on fire, but it was nice change of pace from the likes of Battlefield 3 and CoD. Next time, Sonic Generation and/or Battlefield 3.