Wednesday 22 October 2008
15 Second Review
Crysis on PC
Crysis looks nice. Very nice. Even on the lowest settings it is more than easy on the eye. It's a technical feat, a physics toolbox, a living, breathing, semi-open world bursting at the seams with detail. Disappointingly, the guns themselves aren't the stars of the show, and neither are the characters or indeed the story, and sadly, realistically splintering palm trees an FPS does not make. Firing weapons lacks the audiovisual punch we're accustomed to with Triple A shooters, the structure is suspect, enemies can often swamp the player unfairly, the AI is competent if unexceptional and there's virtually no multiplayer enjoyment to speak of. Still, worth checking out if you can run it; good for a play through but nothing more.
6/10
One-liner sum-up: The Jessica Simpson of games: looks great, but that's pretty much all it has going for it.
Crysis looks nice. Very nice. Even on the lowest settings it is more than easy on the eye. It's a technical feat, a physics toolbox, a living, breathing, semi-open world bursting at the seams with detail. Disappointingly, the guns themselves aren't the stars of the show, and neither are the characters or indeed the story, and sadly, realistically splintering palm trees an FPS does not make. Firing weapons lacks the audiovisual punch we're accustomed to with Triple A shooters, the structure is suspect, enemies can often swamp the player unfairly, the AI is competent if unexceptional and there's virtually no multiplayer enjoyment to speak of. Still, worth checking out if you can run it; good for a play through but nothing more.
6/10
One-liner sum-up: The Jessica Simpson of games: looks great, but that's pretty much all it has going for it.
Thursday 9 October 2008
Games You Should Buy
Halo: Combat Evolved for Xbox
We're now a year on from Halo 3's release. People still play it, people still love it, and a lot of people grudge it basically because it wasn't as good as the first. Don't get us wrong, Halo 3 is a pretty good game, it's just that everything it does, its 2001 grandfather does about five times better.
If you need a reminder of just how superior a shooter Combat Evolved is than the last two installments in the franchise, check out the PC demo for a quick reminder or nab it off of the Marketplace for roughly a tenner. Obviously if you already own it then it shouldn't be a big ask to fire it up for a few minutes, so disregard the previous sentence... Anyway, Halo is a fantastic demonstration of how a console FPS should be done, and it pulls off almost every element you'd look for in a modern shooter with aplomb and then some, practically setting the standard for FPS controls on the Xbox that are imitated by every big shooter today.
Aside from the excellent, responsive controls, there is plenty to rave about. The level design, particularly in the game's middle section, is nigh on peerless, with some fantastic vistas popping up in every stage (except The Library, eugh). Additionally, enemy AI remains a superb achievement to this day as the Covenant dip around your line of sight just as adeptly as a human player. Also, remember when the story in Halo was actually engaging? Yeah, this is it.
No online, no dual wielding, no fancy features, but a solid framework that was revolutionary at the time and remains exceptional today. Reward yourself and play this again as soon as possible.
One Liner Sum Up: Original and best
We're now a year on from Halo 3's release. People still play it, people still love it, and a lot of people grudge it basically because it wasn't as good as the first. Don't get us wrong, Halo 3 is a pretty good game, it's just that everything it does, its 2001 grandfather does about five times better.
If you need a reminder of just how superior a shooter Combat Evolved is than the last two installments in the franchise, check out the PC demo for a quick reminder or nab it off of the Marketplace for roughly a tenner. Obviously if you already own it then it shouldn't be a big ask to fire it up for a few minutes, so disregard the previous sentence... Anyway, Halo is a fantastic demonstration of how a console FPS should be done, and it pulls off almost every element you'd look for in a modern shooter with aplomb and then some, practically setting the standard for FPS controls on the Xbox that are imitated by every big shooter today.
Aside from the excellent, responsive controls, there is plenty to rave about. The level design, particularly in the game's middle section, is nigh on peerless, with some fantastic vistas popping up in every stage (except The Library, eugh). Additionally, enemy AI remains a superb achievement to this day as the Covenant dip around your line of sight just as adeptly as a human player. Also, remember when the story in Halo was actually engaging? Yeah, this is it.
No online, no dual wielding, no fancy features, but a solid framework that was revolutionary at the time and remains exceptional today. Reward yourself and play this again as soon as possible.
One Liner Sum Up: Original and best
Sunday 5 October 2008
Face Off!
[Sorry about the lack of updates lately, one half is busy, the other is just downright bastard lazy]
In Face Off! we pit two similar games against each other in a battle to the death. It's just like Allies vs Nazis, North vs South, Ali vs Frazier, Jack Thompson vs His Own Stupidity! Today, we see a Clash of the Half Life 2 Total Conversion Swords and Swashbuckler Mods; who will emerge victorious?
IN THE RED CORNER
Age of Chivalry, a methodical, medieval based sword 'em up.
IN THE BLUE CORNER
Pirates, Vikings and Knights II, of which the titles says all you need know.
FIGHT!
Round One: Graphics
Both games pack a good punch in this department, especially considering their price of precisely nil (assuming you have the Source Engine lying around somewhere on your PC). On full graphics they are roughly equals, however some unexpected juttering was experienced when using these settings on AoC. Terribly annoying considering it was running on a PC that can pump out 40 FPS with Crysis' most GPU melting efforts. Stylistically, also, PVK trumps AoC, utilising bright colours and superb character models to rather excellent effect, contrasting totally with the latter's muddy browns and greys.
Winner: Pirates, Vikings and Knights II
Round Two: Gameplay
Again, the two diverge completely. Age of Chivalry takes a more tactical tack, while Pirates... aims for an almost Timesplitters-esque pace. This is all down to personal preference and is undoubtedly a bit of a marmite situation. While GYSB slightly favours the considerable lick of PVK, there are those out there who simply would rather the back-and-forth nature of Age. It could be said, however, that each indulges their trait a little too much at times, with PVK becoming almost too frantic and AoC occasionally feeling like trying to race turtles in molasses. We'll call it a draw.
Winner: Nobody, or everybody. Is the glass half full or half empty? Even the conclusion is down to what you'd rather...
Round Three: Maps
This is a toughie. AoC's maps range from completely awe inspiring to utterly atrocious, while PVK's are pretty robust across the board. Though there's no doubt that Age of Chivalry's painstakingly recreated Helm's Deep is an epic stroke of genius, the same can't be said for the utterly confuddling greys and browns of the ultimately painfully generic castles that can lead a whole team down the wrong path, or the ill advised arena level which forces players to rush to get to a door before it shuts that sometimes won't open because some poor bastard is standing just a bit too close. Pirates, Vikings and Knights II doesn't contain any exceptional maps, but on the same token they're all solid, easy on the eye and not any hassle to navigate. 2-0 Blue.
Winner: Pirates, Vikings and Knights II
Round 4: Multiplayer
The pair are online-only experiences, and this functionality can make or break a game of this relative obscurity. Sadly, there aren't exactly a myriad of servers to pick from on either game, but for the overall ease of connection, ability to get into games, lack of bugs and least scope to ruin the experience for others, PVK triumphs again. AoC's little connection window may display a low ping on connection (assuming there's a spot in the few overcrowded servers that exist), but too often does one enter a game with a reasonable latency only for it to jump up to a consistent 200+ twenty seconds in and be auto booted for the trouble. That said, even low latency can mean considerable lag, with GYSB experiencing stuttering and crazy jumps forward through the very fabric of space and time with a ping of less than fifty. PVK's handful of servers generally deal much better with connection speed, and the absence of Age of Chivalry's multitude of bugs and glitches help it forth to another effortless conquest.
Winner: Pirates, Vikings and Knights II
Round 5: And the winner is...
Pirates, Vikings and Knights II by knockout in the fourth. Age of Chivalry's valiant and most definitely entertaining display was thwarted by its candidly superior rival. Both are worth a look, no doubt, but PVK is simply the far less frustrating and overall more rewarding experience.
Winner: Pirates, Vikings and Knights II
[Even if we're crap at it and awesome at AoC, which is very much the case]
In Face Off! we pit two similar games against each other in a battle to the death. It's just like Allies vs Nazis, North vs South, Ali vs Frazier, Jack Thompson vs His Own Stupidity! Today, we see a Clash of the Half Life 2 Total Conversion Swords and Swashbuckler Mods; who will emerge victorious?
IN THE RED CORNER
Age of Chivalry, a methodical, medieval based sword 'em up.
IN THE BLUE CORNER
Pirates, Vikings and Knights II, of which the titles says all you need know.
FIGHT!
Round One: Graphics
Both games pack a good punch in this department, especially considering their price of precisely nil (assuming you have the Source Engine lying around somewhere on your PC). On full graphics they are roughly equals, however some unexpected juttering was experienced when using these settings on AoC. Terribly annoying considering it was running on a PC that can pump out 40 FPS with Crysis' most GPU melting efforts. Stylistically, also, PVK trumps AoC, utilising bright colours and superb character models to rather excellent effect, contrasting totally with the latter's muddy browns and greys.
Winner: Pirates, Vikings and Knights II
Round Two: Gameplay
Again, the two diverge completely. Age of Chivalry takes a more tactical tack, while Pirates... aims for an almost Timesplitters-esque pace. This is all down to personal preference and is undoubtedly a bit of a marmite situation. While GYSB slightly favours the considerable lick of PVK, there are those out there who simply would rather the back-and-forth nature of Age. It could be said, however, that each indulges their trait a little too much at times, with PVK becoming almost too frantic and AoC occasionally feeling like trying to race turtles in molasses. We'll call it a draw.
Winner: Nobody, or everybody. Is the glass half full or half empty? Even the conclusion is down to what you'd rather...
Round Three: Maps
This is a toughie. AoC's maps range from completely awe inspiring to utterly atrocious, while PVK's are pretty robust across the board. Though there's no doubt that Age of Chivalry's painstakingly recreated Helm's Deep is an epic stroke of genius, the same can't be said for the utterly confuddling greys and browns of the ultimately painfully generic castles that can lead a whole team down the wrong path, or the ill advised arena level which forces players to rush to get to a door before it shuts that sometimes won't open because some poor bastard is standing just a bit too close. Pirates, Vikings and Knights II doesn't contain any exceptional maps, but on the same token they're all solid, easy on the eye and not any hassle to navigate. 2-0 Blue.
Winner: Pirates, Vikings and Knights II
Round 4: Multiplayer
The pair are online-only experiences, and this functionality can make or break a game of this relative obscurity. Sadly, there aren't exactly a myriad of servers to pick from on either game, but for the overall ease of connection, ability to get into games, lack of bugs and least scope to ruin the experience for others, PVK triumphs again. AoC's little connection window may display a low ping on connection (assuming there's a spot in the few overcrowded servers that exist), but too often does one enter a game with a reasonable latency only for it to jump up to a consistent 200+ twenty seconds in and be auto booted for the trouble. That said, even low latency can mean considerable lag, with GYSB experiencing stuttering and crazy jumps forward through the very fabric of space and time with a ping of less than fifty. PVK's handful of servers generally deal much better with connection speed, and the absence of Age of Chivalry's multitude of bugs and glitches help it forth to another effortless conquest.
Winner: Pirates, Vikings and Knights II
Round 5: And the winner is...
Pirates, Vikings and Knights II by knockout in the fourth. Age of Chivalry's valiant and most definitely entertaining display was thwarted by its candidly superior rival. Both are worth a look, no doubt, but PVK is simply the far less frustrating and overall more rewarding experience.
Winner: Pirates, Vikings and Knights II
[Even if we're crap at it and awesome at AoC, which is very much the case]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)