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




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




click to hide banner header
About
I like action-adventures, RPGs, fighters, and platformers most of all. All genres are open to me as long as the game is good.
Badges
Following  




It’s difficult to write about The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds and still contribute anything valuable to the discussion of its quality. Much has already been said about the game, and opinions are expectedly not unanimous. I suppose it’s because the Zelda franchise generally carries itself with the little things, or miniscule design aspects that add up to more than the sum of each title’s parts. While this newest adventure in Hyrule makes some big changes to the direction of the series, I find it is still the simple joy of high-quality puzzles and discovery that make A Link Between Worlds succeed.

A Link Between Worlds shares the same world as the SNES classic A Link to the Past, and supposedly takes place later in that same timeline. References to the 16-bit Link’s adventure and subsequent victory over Ganon help set up a connection between the two related titles. I believe it’s entirely possible to play the 3DS entry without needing to complete A Link to the Past, but veterans will surely enjoy a few nods to past Zelda adventures (not in terms of plot, but more in the cameo and “wink-wink” ballpark). Since there aren’t only A Link to the Past references, fans of the series will no doubt be pleased to find the occasional easter egg relating to other Zelda titles before and after the 16-bit era.



The story is arguably the weakest part of A Link Between Worlds, even though it’s probably intentionally basic to a degree. I never found A Link to the Past’s narrative as rich as some of its successors, but I’m guessing the designers didn’t concentrate too hard on that factor back in 1991. In keeping with the priorities of that game, A Link Between Worlds makes it clear that it’s going to have a relatively traditional plot early on, and does most of its expository work in the first hour (which isn’t much) to set up Hyrule’s current status. Essentially, it knows that the player knows how things go, and cuts out most of the now-unnecessary development about the world.

It almost comes off as a self-aware quest, and I basically gave up on expecting anything new or emotionally resonant out of the game’s plot-driven scenes. The villain, Yuga, is essentially a mix of Ganondorf (thievery) and Ghirahim (flamboyant mischievousness) without much intimidation factor. There aren’t many endearing NPCs or supporting characters important to the main storyline, and time spent with them is minimal. Without a companion like ghost Zelda, Tatl, or Midna, Link traverses the land alone (albeit uninterrupted). The writing for each character is still charming, however short each encounter may be (Irene is particularly likeable). Even though there isn’t much substance to the story, the ending definitely surprised me with a couple delightful twists and revelations. Nothing becomes as thematically strong as what the N64 titles were capable of, but A Link Between Worlds at least carries that classic Nintendo charisma where it counts. 



A Link Between Worlds, as a portable action-adventure, mainly focuses on swift, minute-to-minute entertainment that keeps a steady pace throughout. It achieves a blend of easygoing (but not childish) puzzles and loads of side objectives/secrets to discover. The overworld takes a decidedly different direction from the grand scope of recent Zelda titles and returns to a more condensed Hyrule. This ensures that every few steps will lead to what is likely another hole in the wall, underground cave, or even minigame. It’s distraction heaven, though isn’t really any better or worse than the more expansive worlds of The Wind Waker or even Ocarina of Time (both of which had their own plethora of secrets simply spread out further from each other). Unlike Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks, this 3DS entry actually has an overworld that compliments the portable nature of the game. As was the case with A Link to the Past, the isometric/top-down combo helps mask the relatively small scope of this version of Hyrule, whereas a free behind-the-back camera (a la Ocarina of Time) wouldn’t have been able to benefit from far horizons or more natural geography.

One of the biggest changes to the formula is the ability to rent key items from house-guest/intruder Ravio. All of the usual suspects are present, from the hookshot to the hammer. And while the tornado rod and sand rod may be thought of as limited versions of the Roc’s cape and Sand Wand, I think they are balanced neatly for the obstacles present in A Link Between Worlds. Ravio’s shop allows Link to rent any item at his leisure provided he has 80-100 rupees per rental, though the term “rent” is a bit loose. Link only loses temporary possession of these items upon death, which adds incentive to not be reckless. Although I died a few times exactly because of that bad habit, I found that I could often just reload a save at the most recent weather vane I visited (avoiding a re-rental). Of course, this tactic wasn’t worth it in situations where I hadn’t saved within 15 minutes of puzzle-solving, but it’s still largely viable in a game with fast-travel and mid-dungeon warp points.



The nonlinearity of this system is different but ultimately not flawless. While it’s neat to choose one’s next dungeon, the difficulty doesn’t meaningfully scale after the first 3 of them. The majority of the dungeons make it very clear which item (if any) is needed to proceed through the entrance and, by extension, the rest of the rooms. This results in a Metroid-like feeling of finding a location first, and then coming back to it when the right item is acquired. Unfortunately, this feeling is diminished when players know exactly which “series staple” item is required, what it does, and where it can be found (Ravio’s shop). Furthermore, the dungeons are practically forced to not mix item usage, though having extra utility occasionally helps in combat.

The most pleasant bullet point in the design of A Link Between Worlds may be attributed to the wall “merging” mechanic. This core power is given to Link early on via Ravio’s bracelet and an encounter with Yuga, who utilizes the same magic. The ability to seamlessly merge into walls and walk around as a cave painting lends a greater feeling of freedom than either the new item shop or the loose dungeon structure. Gaps that normally get players only thinking about switches or hookshot targets can sometimes be overcome by finding the right geography on the sides. The best effect that wall merging has is the resulting expansion in environmental thinking; that something as traditionally limiting as a wall can be the new factor of mobility is a testament to the ability’s innovation. There are limitations, however, such as being able to only walk laterally from the same altitude Link merged from. There is also limited time Link can stay a painting, as merging drains the same slowly recharging meter that he must balance his item usage with (ammo is an absent mechanic). In dungeons, this concept is almost always used to some degree, especially in conjunction with the verticality of different floors. In the overworld, merging can be useful for obtaining bonus items and discovering hidden caves, hideouts, etc. More importantly, strange fissures in the walls can only be passed through via Link’s special power.



These fissures act as warp points to the game’s Dark World, named Lorule (with pun probably intended). Lorule features a darker palette, the return of the iconic “Dark World” theme, a few minigames, and the majority of the dungeons. Lorule has its own versions of Hyrule’s terrain, with most of the major sectors being divided by missing land. This forces players to explore it by transferring ‘between worlds’, which in turn leads to warp point hunting. Thankfully, the hunting is never tedious since the compact layout doesn’t favor artificial play time, and I’m assuming most players will run into fun distractions anyways. One of my favorite distractions has to be the StreetPass function, which pits players against passing profiles who appear in various locations as Shadow Link. The CPU-controlled opponents are fought in multiple isolated arenas, with their gear/hearts determined by the players’ profiles prior to StreetPass encounters.

If the look of A Link Between Worlds can be described as any one word, it would be “smooth”. The models of characters, enemies, and several objects seem to have soft curves with relatively simplistic textures. These factors do a great job at channeling imagery of A Link to the Past, but the real smoothness comes from the frame rate. Having 60fps running on a handheld action-adventure like Zelda, even in stereoscopic 3D, is a much bigger deal than it sounds. Speaking of stereoscopic 3D, much of A Link Between Worlds is evidently constructed to push players into turning the slider up. The layers in the game’s isometric/top-down perspective become much more distinguished with the 3D effect on, a perk that comes in handy during particular platforming sections.



The soundtrack is a gathering of many favorites from A Link to the Past (plus other Zelda titles) and worthy original tracks that compliment characters and scenarios well. From the Vader-esque intensity of “Death Mountain” to the soothing acoustics of “Kakariko Village,” Composer Ryo Nagamatsu certainly demonstrates his competence at rearranging many of Kondo’s classics in updated fashion. There are even a few diegetic performances of recognizable songs included solely to please fans (priced at 10 rupees each at the Milk Bar). Aside from new renditions of old melodies, the collection of original tracks impress as memorable character themes and atmospheric dungeon tunes (the main Lorule dungeons surprisingly feature the same motif).

The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds supplies both the familiar and the fresh to its generational audiences, acting as a link between generations by nature. To some, it may leave a “what’s old is new again” impression, while for others it may be the most novel entry the series has seen in a decade. For me, the enjoyment stemmed, like usual, from the core level design and its many subtle touches. Videogames rarely reach the ingenuity that Nintendo employs with their Zelda franchise, gimmicks and nostalgia notwithstanding. While portions of the adventure can be disappointingly easy (a few bosses are pushovers), the only subject being handheld throughout the journey is the 3DS. It’s a welcome change of direction that will hopefully stay with the series beyond the inevitable structural and graphical alterations. With fantastic, streamlined gameplay still at the heart of this newest Zelda installment, A Link Between Worlds may well be remembered for its finely balanced representation of the franchise’s past, present, and possibly future.
Photo Photo Photo










Almost a week has passed since the Nintendo Direct showing of Super Smash Bros for Wii U and 3DS, so I've gathered my impressions and sorted them in casual Good/Bad/Ugly stacks. I've also separated the contents in the same basic order that they were shown in the presentation. I'm genuinely looking forward to trying this game since the Direct left a positive impression overall, so take the negatives with a grain of salt.

Release Info
The Good: 3DS-but-not-Wii U owners can get their hands on the majority of the game without feeling like they're missing out for not owning a next-gen console. The fewer Wii U owners around can host traditional multiplayer sessions on his/her couch when friends decide to get together starting in Winter (and after they're practiced on the 3DS). Also, any criticisms toward the 3DS may cause last-minute changes to the console version for the better.

The Bad: The 3DS version may cannibalize the WiiU version so people who've "had their fill" by the end of 2014 may not care to buy their own console copy. This may hurt one of Wii U's biggest chances at a system seller.

The Ugly: Nintendo may be pulling a mini-Ground Zeroes and testing if people will double dip on the same big game (which they could easily exploit in the future). The Wii U version may be seen as the main attraction for some, but it's hard owning a 3DS and trying to hold off on the appetizer for half of a year.


Battlefield will look visually appealing in any form

3DS VS. Wii U Differences
The Good: Same roster confirmed. Different stages will add some visual variety and identity for each system. Battlefield confirmed for both. Melee's double-music track for the 3DS and (even better) Brawl's music customization for the Wii U is great to hear.

The Bad: Some may feel "why not make every stage on both systems?" because this isn't going to work like a Pokemon Red/Blue social trading mechanic anyways.

The Ugly: If the Ice Climbers are giving the 3DS version trouble, then they also won't be on Wii U which would be a shame.

Stages
The Good: Stages for both consoles look fun and nicely detailed. Also, Jungle Japes returns once again. Boss characters and the Yellow Devil seem like a neat twist.

The Bad: Sakurai stated last year in an interview that players won't be able to turn off stage hazards because "you'd find yourself with PSASB". I'm not sure why he'd avoid this option logically. Many people love the layout/geography of certain stages yet dislike certain damaging hazards (like Norfair lava or Arwing lasers).

The Ugly: Ridley was implied to be a boss, which means he won't be playable. Although I personally don't desire the massive dragon, I'm betting many are let down. Sakurai could just be teasing though, as it was only a shadow. Also, dual screen 3DS stages would've seemed like a neat opportunity but none have been shown.


Too funny

Online Play
The Good: Sakurai directs people to try their best to find a fast connection. Lag was a significant issue in Brawl's online world, so hopefully Nintendo (and some of its new-to-online audience) has learned since. For Fun & For Glory is a step in the right direction, and at least separates the two primary attitudes in a series that's essentially a buffet of options. For Glory is a major plus because it acknowledges the competitive fighter audience, something that Brawl did but in a not-so-appeasing way. Between this and allowing EVO 2014 and MLG Anaheim streams for Melee recently, Nintendo has been upping their reputation by throwing the passionate minorities a bone as of late. Multiple skins in the Final Destination style is nice, yet who knows how much variance they'll have regarding stage size, blast boxes, or walls beneath ledges. The normal Final Destination looks awesome, with some Namco/Soulcalibur influence apparent. Code of Conduct with banning is a pleasant surprise, and should cut down on the inevitable trolls and whiners. I'm not sure how big of a hit Global Smash Power will be, or how it'll work, but I guess fans who go hard on solo play will appreciate the rankings. 

The Bad: The anonymous online matches in both For Fun & For Glory modes indicate that the match settings for both will be stock-less "timed matches". I personally don't know anyone who plays under this default setting (all my friends switch to stock), but it would've been better to show off a series of branching lobbies that cover major preferences like Stock, Stock with Time limit, Team Battle, etc.

The Ugly: Sakurai's use of Final Destination as the Glory stage implies that he derived his impressions from Brawl's (somewhat unpleasant) Wifi world or "that meme", and probably not the hardcore tournament scene. Current tournament Smash matches can mostly be seen on stages with platforms, so it's weird that Sakurai didn't choose series' signature Battlefield as the For Glory stage (or at least a choice to vote on pre-match). Nevertheless, if this new Smash has been balanced under a no-platforms environment which doesn't result in super-skewed matchups, then Final Destination should be fine. In the end, playing with friends or anyone offline will allow fully adjustable rules as always. 

Items
The Good: Some old favorites are returning, with updated designs. The Back Shield is a cool idea, the Beetle is brutal, the Fire Bar is spicy, Bombchus and fairies are perfect for Smash, the Ore Club is a 'heavy' close+ranged weapon, the X bomb comes in 2 directions, the Hocotate Bomb seems like a warp star out of control, the Rocket Belt resembles R.O.B.'s recovery, and the Steel Diver is an alternative to the ray gun. Seeing Skull Kid, Midna, and Dark Samus makes me glad that they'll at least see some light on the field. The Master Ball carrying legendaries brings me back to my constant replaying of Melee's Event 37.

The Bad: Palkia used Spacial Rend on the Mario Galaxy stage! It's not very effective...

The Ugly: Waluigi.


Skyloft is Yoshi's newest island

Returning Characters
The Good: Zero Suit trolling was done pretty well. The separation of transformation characters is something I prefer. Transforming was a unique mechanic, but in practice wasn’t as widely used as Sakurai might’ve expected. Fully-fledged standalone characters should be more fulfilling and easier to balance, like the Trainer’s Pokemon in Project M. Sheik’s side special being changed was a smart decision, as the Chain in previous titles was extremely poor. Dedede throwing only Gordos (albeit nerfed ones) and Olimar pulling ordered Pikmin removes unnecessary randomness that may affect competitive play. Lucario’s comeback factor (a trend often criticized in modern fighting games) is eased by the risk of self-destructing upon powering up too much. Olimar’s collective “weight” adds some neat strategy to his recovery. Like with Project M, Pit’s been given more offensive utility, and his new final smash gives hope to those wishing for a playable Palutena. Finally, Yoshi looks very well-animated, though I just need to know if he can jump out of shield.

The Bad: Kirby’s Hammer Flip is essentially Dedede’s down special. I expect a few different properties between the two, but I’m sure Sakurai could’ve been more creative (especially with his own character). Also, Captain Falcon and Ness not being shown yet slightly worries me.

The Ugly: Let’s hope appearance is the only thing Samus takes from Other M’s portrayal. High heeled jet boots are a bit weird but I think people will get used to them. It is unclear if Lucario’s mega-evolution is its own mechanic, but Mega-Lucario and Mega-Charizard being shown alongside Greninja’s final smash implies that both mega-evolution cases will just be final smashes.

New Characters
The Good: Rosalina seems like a neat substitute for Ice Climbers, with potential for long-distance desyncs and cool combos. Unlike Nana, Luma seems to have different attacks from its master. Little Mac continues to seem like a hype character, with his power meter confirmed to be akin to super meters in traditional fighters. Wireframe Mac and male Wii Fit Trainer hopefully indicates more alternate costumes. Winning with Villager shall bring the same odd satisfaction as winning with Phoenix Wright in UMVC3. Mega Man’s moveset appears diverse and hugely fan-pleasing, especially his final smash.

The Bad: Compared to the other new characters, Wii Fit Trainer doesn’t seem nearly as interesting gameplay-wise. A damage strengthener and charged projectile don’t come off as compelling as Mac’s meter/armor, Rosalina's Luma applications, or Megaman’s arsenal of weapons.

The Ugly: I wouldn’t be surprised to see a bit too much Little Mac in For Glory mode, since there will be no platforms to avoid his crazy ground game. Only time will tell.


Would these cause severe imbalances, or help to counter existing ones?

Custom Movesets
The Good: This seems like a neat side-attraction, and is sure to add more replay value on a character-by-character basis. I’m guessing there will be a pool of different “versions” of each character’s specials, and players choose their favorite combination. It hopefully will allow tweaking for more than just specials; I’d be thrilled to bring back directional air dodges if I could.

The Bad: None. More customization is always a plus in Smash.

The Ugly: This feature may go underrepresented if the procedure to customize moves takes annoyingly long in casual (or even competitive) environments.

Smash Run
The Good: Augmenting power-ups, platforming, item equipping, and franchise-drawn enemies. All climaxing in a multiplayer match that rewards combat skill and (indirectly) dungeon efficiency. These are all elements that I’m a fan of.

The Bad: By its nature, I doubt we’ll ever see this mode added into the Wii U version unless 4 GamePads in one place becomes normal somehow.

The Ugly: There will most likely be noticeable imbalances between characters in this mode. Whichever characters can most efficiently navigate the dungeon and benefit from its power-ups are almost certainly going to become more frequent among fans. This is probably why Sakurai recommended the “random fighter” option anyways.


Kirby may be pink, but he's no ditto when it comes to copying Pokemon

Ending
The Good: The orchestral arrangement of the SSB64 Credits + Character Select music was a major nostalgia bomb. The Pokemon reveal video was impressively choreographed and goes to show that Sakurai’s team makes the best trailers on the Nintendo side of the industry. Also Greninja’s final smash may be a coincidence or homage to similar finishers.

The Bad: With 4 standalone Pokemon in the game, I highly doubt we’ll see both Jigglypuff AND Mewtwo return. Smash purists would want Jigglypuff for its veteran status, and old school Pokefans would want Mewtwo for its series significance (plus the cool factor).

The Ugly: It's okay Mewtwo, at least you have Project M....


Hopefully a digital re-release for the old Gamecube classic can happen this year too.

For the Smash enthusiast, this presentation may rank at the top of the Nintendo Directs seen thus far. The dual-platform release ensures that more people will be able to experience the fun in either stereoscopic 3D or glorious HD. The game already looks like a massive improvement from Brawl, with more hitstun for combos and a lack of anything akin to random tripping. While wavedashing may not return, and L-canceling is still a mystery, I still think fights in this new game will play out at an enjoyable pace.

A final minor concern of mine is the title(s) of these games. I'm unsure if they'll be getting a subtitle (like Havoc or Unleashed) or a numerical value, yet there's also a small chance that each version will be named uniquely. In any case, I'd just like the announcer to shout "SUPER SMASH BROTHERS!" at the end of the intro movie, just like in SSB64 and SSBM. The new Smash game will probably be packed with at least as much content as its predecessors, and further customization indicates that the game will try not to leave anyone in the dust. Of course, I can't forget to mention that the HD graphics appear absolutely stunning. I look forward to the next Smash-centric showing, and possibly a 3DS demo to tide me over until release.
Photo Photo Photo









I finished Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney – Dual Destinies a while ago, but only recently did I complete the DLC case “Turnabout Reclaimed” after a break from the long run that was the main story. Now that enough time has passed, I figured I would leave some thoughts about Phoenix’s most recent foray into the courtroom, and how it stacks up for an Ace Attorney fan such as myself.

While it IS possible to play this title before other entries, I wouldn’t recommend it. Although the majority of the cases can stand on their own, the development of the overall series has always been sequential to a degree. Furthermore, there is little reason to make Dual Destinies a starting point considering the older games most likely hold up just as well today. Their text-heavy design is already a niche calling, so curious audiences will most likely be attracted to the series on the promise of quality writing rather than any slightly improved 2013 mechanics.



Dual Destinies is commonly referred to as “Ace Attorney 5” because it is the fifth main game in the series if you discount Edgeworth’s spinoffs (the Layton crossover will probably also count as a sidestory). It stars the titular Phoenix Wright, which may be a bit of a surprise for fans that thought Apollo would be taking the mantle for a new generation. I can only assume that Wright’s iconic presence was too much to let go, and that every future protagonist would have to share the spotlight with him in order for the majority of fans to be happy. Many people pointed out that Wright had an unexpectedly large role in Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney, and it seems that this newest game reinforces the blue lawyer’s mascot status. Combine that with the existence of Edgeworth’s own two games, and I can clearly tell that there’s a reverence for the franchise’s original rivals.

The result is a 3DS title under the direction of Takeshi Yamazaki, who previously worked on the Ace Attorney Investigations games. In a sort of compromise, Dual Destinies puts three attorneys in the playable spotlight: Phoenix, Apollo, and newcomer Athena Cykes. Playing as multiple characters isn’t new for the Ace Attorney games, but Dual Destinies makes this trio one of the focal points for the character development that ensues. It works quite well, and doesn’t end up feeling like a cheap option to safely please fans. Although most of the game is spent as Wright, players take on the role of Justice and Cykes for at least a full episode each which is more than enough time to establish their status as up-and-coming talented attorneys.



The storyline is divided into episodes like the previous games, with Episode 1 comprising of an introductory courtroom battle and subsequent episodes extending into detective/lawyer hybrids. While the main things I suspect most fans remember from each Ace Attorney game involve their final episodes, Dual Destinies does an excellent job at tying its earlier cases into a meaningful whole. While I anxiously awaited the inevitable higher drama of the last case, the game at least held me over well with its clever wit and charm throughout. Well, maybe except for Episode 2, easily the weakest case in the game thanks to a nonsensical villain plot and overly weird supporting characters. At least it was placed near the beginning of the game to introduce major characters such as a new detective and prosecutor.

The debut of prosecutor Simon Blackquill is a strong one. While he may not reach the heights of Godot, he’s certainly more engaging and entertaining than Klavier (and probably Franziska). Blackquill carries a mischievous samurai personality that often leads to humorous intimidation tactics, especially with his “SILENCE!” shout and pet hawk assaults. He lives in a strange position of being a prisoner who is actually allowed to stand in court as a prosecutor. This oddity ties into the “dark age of the law” state that Dual Destinies occasionally touts as the current issue with its fictional world. While this overarching problem doesn’t translate into anything as far as a gloomy atmosphere (nor a harder game), the perception of law in the game world leads to some interesting conflicts and moral quandaries for the characters. Episode 3 in particular benefits from the added weight of this state of mind, becoming arguably one of the best “middle” cases in the franchise so far.



It’s worth mentioning the DLC case too, because it certainly doesn’t falter in entertainment value. It doesn’t do anything drastically different (other than feature a wildly unusual defendant), but its quirkiness, likeable characters, and relatable setting make it a particularly strong standalone episode. I only wish it was implemented as part of the main game, since I suspect many players experienced it after the final case as a result of its DLC status. It takes place between Episodes 2 and 3, and would probably be better off being played as such (it doesn’t act like it exists in a vacuum). At the very least, it could’ve replaced Episode 2 to strengthen the core experience.

In terms of gameplay, not much has been altered from previous mainline Ace Attorney titles. I feel the investigation scenarios are a bit more streamlined and straightforward this time around, as there’s little-to-no forensic analysis manually enacted by the player. While some may see this as a downgrade, I honestly don’t miss it (though I do miss Ema Skye). One thing I greatly appreciate is the red circular indicator for individual objects in "examine" mode. It’s a minor visual difference, but prevents pixel hunting and accidental repetition. A neat side effect of playing as 3 protagonists is the altering roles that the lawyers assume depending on the case. I enjoyed looking through the eyes of both Athena and Apollo during investigations, as well as seeing how they fare as sidekicks to each other. 



While Phoenix and Apollo still possess their respective magatama and bracelet powers, they aren’t utilized as frequently as in previous games. The courtroom’s biggest gameplay addition comes in the form of Athena’s signature power: the Mood Matrix. This electronic program allows Ms. Cykes to analyze the emotions she detects within a witness’s testimony. The emotions are represented by happy, sad, angry, and surprised mood markers which bleep in various signal strengths. “Pinpointing” contradictory emotions on certain statements will cause witnesses to admit reasons behind the mood in question. Additionally, “probing” involves tracing the source of an overloaded emotion via the recreated images of a witness’s recollection. Although there are no penalties for guessing wrong in the Mood Matrix, there isn’t a significant difference in challenge. Penalties and Game Overs have always been circumvented via constant saving in Ace Attorney titles, and the absence of that process with this minigame isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Besides, I’ve always had a sort of self-imposed embarrassment when I answer wrong in Ace Attorney games, which is punishment enough in the presence of a cynical judge and prosecutor.

As the first entry on the 3DS, the changes to the franchise’s presentation are mainly graphical. The biggest difference is the polygonal characters, which animate more fluidly and dynamically than I ever expected. The background locations benefit from depth, and not just the stereoscopic 3D effect. Players can now switch camera angles around a crime scene while investigating to get a better sense of place. There are also anime FMVs for significant occurrences or character introductions, and they’re even fully voiced for the brief times they last. However, the English voice acting (outside of Phoenix) isn’t exactly satisfactory, somewhat hindering the impact of these sequences. Even worse than mediocre voices are the striking number of typos in Dual Destinies. Typos are the #1 cause of broken immersion for me in a text-driven game, and it brings to question how much proofreading was actually done at the end of the title’s localization. Overall, the best aspect of an Ace Attorney’s presentation has always been its soundtrack, and Dual Destinies does not disappoint. While it doesn’t surpass the first game’s compositions in my opinion, the relatively high quality and endearing tunes possess serious staying power. The ending theme is an absolutely gorgeous reward for completing the story.



Even though Dual Destinies doesn’t peak as high as the original trilogy’s greatest moments, Yamazaki has proved to be a worthy successor to Shu Takumi (at least for the time being). Dual Destinies pays minor tribute to old features while updating the series with appreciable new ones such as a text review log and two separate save files. The trio of defense attorneys makes for an interesting and dynamic storyline with Phoenix as an older, mentor-like boss who still can learn much from his fellow lawyers. Apollo is stronger in this new entry than he was in his own dedicated title, and Athena makes a wonderful debut thanks to her lovable facial expressions and compelling arc. In the end, Dual Destinies soars high with a powerful narrative themed on the nature of truth, and enough over-the-top comic relief to make it fun all over again for “Objection!”-yelling audiences.
Photo









Relax, ye impatient gamers! Thy gameplay shall start soon, after 13 minutes!

[Spoilers for MGS4 and an early scene from Silent Hill 2. Also, this is highly opinionated and based on personal enjoyment of mentioned games.]

Recently I watched a strongly-told argument on the merit of cutscenes in videogames, linked to me by dannaz on his/her blog. TotalBiscuit informs his audience that cutscenes fundamentally disengage players from the game and turn them into spectators, something he assumes players don't want to be. He does make strong points on the stance. I've heard the "interactivity is the #1 priority in game storytelling" argument before. It's championing the signature ability of videogames as a means to do it all. In many places I actually do agree with TotalBiscuit. I understand the sentiment, but I don't consider it law.



When he says "The player expects to be the hero, that is kind of the point, that's the point of gaming in general....it was all about me being the hero, me me me" he's only drawing from his own expectations of gaming. Anything that goes against those expectations runs the risk of derailing "the point of gaming" on his terms. And most of all, he seems to be basing this on the traditional structure of action-adventures or shooters. I can say right now that I've played too many games that eschew this seemingly 90% interactive-action-threshold, yet STILL turn out compelling. 

It's true that there was a "disconnect" when Silent Hill 2's James tried to hide from Pyramid Head with his flashlight on and gun blazing, but that was the result of a moronic action and would cause disconnect in a horror movie format too. If James had done something smarter, I would've been all for it. With Bioshock Infinite, I was in full control of the protagonist the whole time, but that didn't help my connection because he was unlikeable, unsympathetic, and cutscenes wouldn't have really mattered. Final Fantasy VI, conversely, had me taking control of several characters, often switching around them. Yet they were all so endearing and sympathetic that I couldn't help but cheer them on no matter if their actions/dialogue were up to me or linearly set in a well-directed cutscene. If a game has the confidence that it'll lead me along one of the best stories ever, in a linear manner, then by all means! That doesn't mean it shows laziness or incompetence, especially in a gameplay engine designed to focus on walking and slashing evil things.


Goddammit James....

"I want different things from shooters than I want from RPGs". This is genre expectation, and classifying game genres is already mega-subjective, what with hybrid titles experimenting all over the place now. He even acknowledges this as a curious case with Mass Effect. But by this logic, hypothetically what happens to the girl who buys ME expecting it to fit the 3rd person shooter genre she loves? She's going to flip out at all the hours of pace-breaking dialogue and cutscenes that she didn't expect out of the game. What happens to the boy who buys ME expecting it to be an RPG, and ends up with "WTF I didn't ask for Gears of War in my dramatic role-playing game!"
The man who buys ME not expecting anything genre-wise will get the most satisfaction for what it is as a whole. It executes its downtime "cutscenes" with smart writing & finesse (even though the paragon/renegade system could be better) and its shooting isn't bad either.


"You will enjoy this entire game without dual-analog, because we make it work" -Retro

Pidgeonholing genres into what they can/can't be made out of limits the industry's creative range, especially since genres aren't and shouldn't written in stone anyways. When developers have the balls to break these imaginary chains and gamers decide to open their arms wider, we get stuff like Metroid Prime: a genre-bending 1st-person game with shooting that doesn't control like an FPS and is not 95% about shooting. Hence the never-ending debate on its official (ha!) classification. But nearly everything it does, it does excellent...unless you come into it from a strict FPS perspective in which case you ruin it for yourself on those terms.

Likewise, pidgeonholing videogames into what they can/can't tell their stories with limits the industry's creative range. And likewise, when developers have the balls to break this imaginary priority, and gamers open their arms, we get stuff like Metal Gear Solid: a medium-bending title that doesn't give a damn about prioritizing cinematics or interactivity. Hence the love-it or hate-it status especially with ludology-purist gamers. I'd argue it does nearly everything excellent...unless you come into it from a strict Interactivity perspective in which case the game butchers itself on those terms.


You either hated this sequence for being a meaningless show, or you loved it because it was just plain awesome.

He also says "We seem to be losing what makes a good story in a videogame versus a good story in a TV series or movie, it is not the same. Principles are being applied from movies that are not actually relevant in videogames." I can't agree on that in absolution. There are fundamental storytelling techniques and tools that totally have the ability to carry over to different mediums and still have impact, provided they're handled well. The use of theater actors for fiction plays has been carried over to fiction films, the 3-act structure you learn in theater class can work in a book or film's story, the 1st-person narration of some literature has been utilized in noir film. And of course, film's signature camera work can and has effectively been used to enhanced many games.

When film was introduced, it was all about the "motion picture", and the communication of things through a purely visual means in the frame with time passing. Fast-forward to movies like The Jazz Singer featuring audible synchronized talking, and the realm of possibilities in film opened up considerably. Some people were naturally nervous about films losing their perceived identity as "motion pictures", because pictures don't talk. If a picture is worth a thousand words, why do we need them to fall back on actual words?  "Grrrr we don't need no audible dialogue! Now they just be copying plays, they don't know how it's supposed to be done!"


A game that practically champions the idea of emotion through interactivity, still uses emotional noninteractive cutscenes.

As you can guess, I think audible synched dialogue is pretty freakin' relevant in movies now. Nobody loses their cool when we hear live actors yell, sing, whine, beg, and flirt in front of the camera. Nobody says "go back to theater where you're actually relevant." People are still impressed when you can visually show/communicate something of course, but nobody I know by now wants synched sound discouraged across the whole medium.

"Games do not look better than movies...why on Earth would you try to draw that comparison...a cutscene will never look as good as it would in a movie" is once again a point well-established within the context of Max Payne 3, but doesn't account for all games. A Naughty Dog PS3 game may look better to some than a grainy 1940s movie for example. And yet, this means nothing when it comes to overall impact of a technically inferior scene. A 1940s movie may pack more punch than a modern film with similar themes. Snake and friends have had plenty of cutscenes that absolutely destroy comparable action films in emotional weight, yet the MGS games as they are can only have existed on a gaming platform.


They could've made any of these non-dialogue scenes interactive even within Brawl's sidescrolling engine. That doesn't mean they'd be as well-animated, stylish, humorous, or charming though, especially with said engine.

Sometimes works of art are "forced" into the gaming realm by virtue of containing ANY bit of interactivity that a DVD remote can't provide. That doesn't mean that a title with 90% cinematic or novel-like sections is automatically a bad game. It all hinges on the effectiveness and uniqueness of the final product. Phoenix Wright: Trials and Tribulations is my favorite DS game ever and has a very low interaction rate relative to its manga/anime-like scenes. Games like these feature good writing and cutscenes presented mostly in a linear manner, and use the tools of interactivity to put a twist on the tale. Just because a title feels like a book/movie much of the time doesn't mean it actually CAN be a book/movie. The minute you place interactive elements as part of the structure of your visual piece, you probably will have to call it a game. But you shouldn't be obligated by the almighty Videogame gods to use interactive elements any more than you should.

I think the final battle of MGS4 exemplifies what the Metal Gear Solid series has done for cinematic games, and why its fans have loved it for what TotalBiscuit may dismiss. From a cynical view, it is an unnecessary choreographed cutscene fight immediately preceding the interactive fight, and only the latter should be relevant in a game space. It's true that the cinematic first half could've been completely deleted and affected nothing of the plot, but personally I wouldn't have traded it for anything....not even paltry quicktime prompts for the sake of interactivity. The way the blows gradually synch up, the sweeping pace of the camera shots, the pain and determination on their faces, and the perfect timing of the music are just some of the feels that interactive sequences (as of now) cannot provide. And yet, MGS4 lets you have your cake AND ice cream, because the cutscene fight beautifully concludes with the growth of health bars and transitions into a nostalgia-fueled interactive duel. It's Kojima saying "This series is tied down by neither movies nor games; this uses both indiscriminately and you loved every minute of it." The cutscene fight may not have affected the plotline, but it affected the mood and by extension the entire battle.



TotalBiscuit claims "if a game has solid enough mechanics, I'm gonna enjoy it regardless of the story" (Doom)..... yet I can also claim that if a game has a solid enough story, I'm gonna enjoy it regardless of the mechanics (Silent Hill 2). TotalBiscuit neglects to mention the latter and goes so far as to say that Max Payne 3 is straight-up "not a good videogame" as a result of failing to let you "experience the story at your own pace, on your own terms as the player - not as the viewer". Maybe the game just plain sucks.

This has been quite a long-winded counterpoint in order to essentially say "do whatever works", but the important thing to take away is that we should learn to accept the presence of established narrative techniques that cross medial boundaries, because our favorite mediums are blending together anyways through technology. A ludology-purist may not consider the Ace Attorney series to be his cup of tea, but he cannot deny that the franchise has a loving fanbase and simply wouldn't be the same in old-fashioned anime format.


You could give me 10 more minutes of this guy and I wouldn't be complaining.

This year marks the 15th anniversary of the release of Half-Life and Metal Gear Solid. Both of these titles were lauded for their narrative, yet on completely opposite ends of the spectrum. The Half-Life games accomplished their storytelling in TotalBiscuit's ideal way, so why is it even possible that I became more attached to the Metal Gear storyline despite its insistence that I put the controller down 40% of the time? I think it has more to do with the fundamental content of the narratives than the origin of their techniques. It could be that my fingers aren't itching to control my character (or simply press something) at all times. If I can passively watch AND enjoy the content of a disc spinning in my DVD player, then I can do the same for a disc spinning in my Playstation. As long as it's good.

It's great to encourage the unique abilities of gaming's signature contribution to the world of art, but we mustn't get so caught up in the advocacy that we discourage or even condemn the mere usage of older, proven techniques.
Photo Photo Photo










Recently I finished Silent Hill 2, and as a newcomer to the series I thought I’d leave some quick impressions of what many consider to be the series’ peak. I played the Greatest Hits Edition of the game on a PS2 with an old (but big) TV and in the dark at night. Also, I started and finished during the week of Halloween; I thought it was the perfect time to get into it. I didn’t play the original Silent Hill because it was basically spoiled for me during a lecture in my university’s Video Game culture class. I won’t give away any major spoilers in this, so fellow newcomers interested in Silent Hill can safely read on.

The game follows James Sunderland (the protagonist) as he drives to the titular town in search of his wife Mary. Mary apparently died 3 years prior to the game’s setting, but James recently received a letter implying that she was waiting for him at Silent Hill. Puzzled by this, James parks near a grimy bathroom and is forced to walk to different areas of the town (overlooking a large lake). For the most part, James is alone in this adventure, but he encounters a few other characters that periodically show up from hour to hour and may even accompany him for a time.



Silent Hill 2’s plot is the main reason to play the game, and I suppose it is why the game has received so much praise and hype from survival-horror fans throughout the years. The objective is simple, intriguing, and uninterrupted, yet none of the supporting characters with different agendas are wasted for a second. Throughout his journey, James encounters several monsters that plague the town of Silent Hill, but each type of creature is brimming with symbolism and imagery that give the game depth beyond “infected undead”. In fact, the entire game is loaded with embedded narrative that lessens the boring burden of having to explore every nook & cranny for items. Books, logs, and wall-writings are all simultaneously eerie and relevant if not to the town, then to James himself. By the 2nd half of the game’s 3rd “dungeon”, I couldn’t stop playing and simply wanted all questions to be answered. The writers definitely knew not just how to create an intriguing premise, but how to pull players further down the rabbit hole with every new cutscene and persona introduced. The game has several different endings (all of which I’ve looked up on Youtube), but I’m going to go with my gut and say that the ending I received is the most fulfilling of them all. These different resolutions are achieved through different playstyles and replays, so players shouldn’t feel disappointed for obtaining one or the other.

In terms of horror, I’d say Silent Hill 2 is most effective upon introducing new places or enemies. There are a few jump scares, but they’re more due to enemy placement than scripted sequences found in other games. However, when walking into a new location, the darkness and unfamiliar layouts can build a slight anxiety for the player, especially if a map has not been obtained (or is under-detailed). I thought the game could’ve used a few more enemy designs, if only because the ones present are quite excellent. Still, for a survival-horror game I never found myself in danger of dying except at one boss encounter. Maybe it’s because of my urge to dig deep for items and ammo, but I honestly think once James gets a gun the game becomes much easier.



Speaking of digging, that’s essentially the gist of Silent Hill 2’s gameplay. James explores the town in search of a hint or key to a spot on the map (which he superbly marks as he explores) and then comes across an item which he must insert or combine to further progress. While these treasure hunts occasionally lead into traditional “adventure game” puzzles or riddles, I found them few and far between. The thematic implications of the puzzles were interesting, but overall I’ve certainly seen better in tangential genres.

The combat in Silent Hill 2 is extremely unwieldy at first, with melee weapons either slow to start up or being swung with uncertain range. This may be a trope common to old survival-horror that I’m simply unconnected to, but I’m not quite ready to say the game’s melee combat holds up in 2013. Thankfully, James can at least aim guns at a foe from a few feet away, so there’s no real reason to not use a gun for the majority of the game. Since I had to search all over drawers and corners for necessary items, I found myself picking up sufficient ammo and never ran out throughout the whole game (at least on medium difficulty).



Graphically, the game definitely holds up and never looks outright laughable. I think it’s because the developers restrained themselves quite a bit in the early days of the PS2, so the visible aspects of the environment don’t carry much in the way of flaws. There are occasional CG sequences, but they never lend a sense of inconsistency to the package. Even though the fog from the Silent Hill series was originally born out of technical limitations of the original Playstation, I think the decision to keep it around for the sequel worked for the most part. The only real issue with the massive level of fog in the outdoors is that it forced me to constantly switch to the map in order to see the exact door/entrance I chose to make my destination. When that theoretical destination of mine was sometimes not exactly correct, it would lead to a bit of frustration. Indoors, the game succeeds with extremely dark corridors and rooms, usually only lit by James’s pocket light that he receives early on. Since there’s no massive draw distance inherent to indoor buildings, the game creeps out players via pure darkness.

The camera is both a blessing and a curse for the old survival-horror genre. I’m familiar with the old Resident Evil games (but never finished them) and their combination of pre-rendered backgrounds with tank controls, yet I never thought that this was an appreciable way to scare players. As someone who loves Resident Evil 4 to no end, I think that ridding of the variable camera angles remedied any problems with tank controls. Silent Hill 2 does not feature pre-rendered backgrounds, yet still doesn’t place its camera in relatable spots like other 3rd-person games. Some interior areas can yield frustrating enemy encounters that have James blindly shooting offscreen just because his portable radio made static noise (indicating enemies). There are a few workarounds to these issues, but none can detain the initial effects. Players can press L2 to orient the camera behind James, but this seems to only respond in certain places where there’s enough room (outdoors, halls). There’s also an alternate control-stick option that orients James’s walking from the camera’s POV, but the shift in camera angles (especially within the same room) breaks this convenience during dungeons. In the end, players can still manage to muscle their way through Silent Hill 2’s almost-archaic maneuverability and explore the true haunting beauty of the town. I’m just glad that recent horror games have found more natural ways to disempower players beyond unwieldiness.



Aurally, the game stays true to its name and keeps quiet for the most part. Sound effects are spot-on and ambient in all the right places. The music never gets intrusive or overstated during gameplay, yet at a few points there are some very memorable piano/guitar themes that definitely stick. I have to mention the voice acting most of all, because I think that most people would write it off as imperfect, 2001, flat performances. While at first the dialogue hit me as oddly-exchanged, I started to feel an obvious unease and uncertainty within the characters through their awkward lines. If this were executed intentionally, I wouldn’t be surprised considering how smart the storyline is. Between unorthodox writing and half-emoted acting, Silent Hill 2 lends a special sort of artifice to its atmosphere, which (for a psychological horror title) works well in my book.

In addition to the main scenario, there’s also a sub-scenario in the Greatest Hits version. Born From a Wish is essentially a short chapter on the side where players control the character Maria for about an hour. It includes a dungeon and a bit of walking around the streets, but the payoff is certainly worth an extra night of trekking through Silent Hill. It doesn’t take away anything from the main story and gives some nice supplementary insight into Maria’s character. I recommend it to players who have finished the main quest.



Silent Hill 2 left a positive impression on me, and in short I’d recommend it to anyone with a thirst for psychological twists and turns. As a horror game, it managed to spook me despite my recent completion of the original Amnesia. Best of all, I found myself coming back to its many narrative metaphors despite the uninviting grime of its world. It also contained an amazing atmosphere that reminded me of the mystique of Termina mixed with the melancholy of Midgar. Being my first Silent Hill game, this particular entry worked as a standalone tale and I can absolutely see why it is seen as a true classic in many eyes today.
Photo Photo Photo










OK, my take on this situation! (spoilers for....Ocarina of Time?)

So Ross spoiled a pretty big part of Justice for All in the first paragraph of his review, his only warnings being "previous entries" and "in its final case". If you could stop reading there, congratulations. If you read 7 more words for trust that Ross wouldn't actually say the specific twist...you were screwed. There's no arguing for one side or the other's ability to stop reading. It was a matter of how fast you read and how cautious you are with every sentence, which don't go hand in hand.



What is arguable is the expectation of readers going into reviews. What Ross was trying to do was express the importance of the main theme in the game by illustrating its buildup in prior entries. He uses, admittedly, good examples of the theme's increasing focus throughout the series. Unfortunately, one of those examples was a major spoiler for a 6 year old game, which pissed off those who never played that title. I think the opening of Ross's review is well-written and (being a series veteran) illustrates his point concisely. The problem with doing this is FORM OVER FUNCTION. The review begins like a neat essay keeping its form and pacing, but sacrifices its function as consumer recommendation.

Now I've seen plenty of pieces that call themselves reviews but are full of spoilers in order to get things across. Matthewmatosis is the best analytical reviewer on youtube because he dissects games beginning to end with 40 minute videos, but he gets no flack because he has a spoiler warning for the first few seconds. Even for his brief recommendation video for Ghost Trick, he admits to only showing footage from the beginning of the game. I think spoiler warnings can be disruptive in the middle of an essay like "blah blah blah [spoilers!] blah blah blah" but setting one as a preface is an acceptable compromise if authors want to keep their writing look seamless. I chose to preface my Zero Escape series review with a warning of possible spoilers for series newbies in the Virtue's Last Reward portion of the piece, because I believe knowing the sequel's basic concept can ruin a big part of 999. The 1st half of the review was completely safe for everyone though.



Ross's review of a sequel to a continuous saga comes hot off the heels of Sterling's review of The Stanley Parable HD, which reveals nearly nothing and then says "How do you discuss it, analyze it, and recommend it? That's quite simple. You don't."

Jim is correct; We can't truly discuss something and recommend it to someone at the same time. I played the original mod, so I can see where Jim is coming from, but there's always an off-chance that some clueless person will click the review and go "WTF Jim that's lazy!" But I'm betting if he keeps inquiring about the title and gets teasing recommendations from friends or cryptic Facebook statuses on how it "blew my mind zomgbbq!" then perhaps the reader will be even more curious than ever!

Reviewing is a balancing act in this regard, so it's the author's job to communicate what his/her target audience is. Going too in-depth will send newbies on the fence into a frenzy. Keep it too shallow (How the game works, what you do, end) and there's no point in series veterans reading it (the discussion of themes in the game and setting after AA4 was interesting for me personally). If I had to, I'd probably lean toward the latter as there's no bigger bitch than a spoiler for the newbies.



The biggest challenge is figuring out the threshold for each individual subject. Where do we draw the line? The fact that young Link becomes an adult in Ocarina of Time is at once a major selling point in promotions and reviews, and a massive unexpected twist for those who played the game "raw". Smash Bros Melee literally spoils Shiek's secret for those who never played OoT in the 3 years it had been out before the Gamecube. If you watched the recent Emmy's, you logically know who survives at least past Season 4 of Breaking Bad. Here, let me start writing a consumer review for Majora's Mask....

'Majora's Mask begins with young Link riding through the Lost Woods searching for a lost friend after he had saved the land of Hyrule from Ganon-------'

That right there is already a spoiler for the guys still playing catch-up with the first N64 Zelda. If the reader came into the review for a direct sequel to a game he hasn't completed, the simple sentence I wrote will imply that Link does not keep his adult form at the end of OoT, which may ruin an aspect of OoT's wonderful ending.



So barring the unavoidable situations in popular culture, or implied through a sequel's promotional material/premise that we cannot shut down, I think we should do our best to avoid FURTHER spoiling stories for our friends offline and online. Writers and "series vets", please be mindful of the magnitude of what you reveal about a game whether on a review, daily hotness, etc. There's no objective threshold for what ruins an adventure, but a CLIMAX of a game (new or old) is probably not the best scene to discuss without a spoiler warning. Readers and consumers, please be cautious when you venture into continuity sequels or ancient franchise territory....read intentionally slowly and be prepared to turn away at a moment's notice if the subject heads down a path you don't want to be unveiled.
Photo Photo Photo