The Gamer’s Quagmire #70: I’m Not Quite Dead
Everything you wanted to know about gaming, and less
by Jamison DeLorenzo
There’s nothing quite like a long hiatus for a small, largely unread, gaming column. After a year-long sabbatical for gaming and some relatively major life events now feels like a good a time as any to get back onto the horse. Well, not literally of course. Odds are the equines are probably sick and tired of having random people jump on their backs just because they’re too lazy to do away with a tired cliché.
The strange this is, this is a weird time of the year to pony up (it’s a theme, sorry) and write something interesting again about gaming. There has been a noticeable lack of great games so far in 2009. Sure, Killzone 2 has gotten some buzz. The big budget games this year so far, Guitar Hero: Metallica and Resident Evil 5, just haven’t created the splash that publishers and gamers alike were hoping for. It is not that I haven’t enjoyed either of these games, but neither offered anything different that made people say “Wow!”
A year ago I would tell you that the unprecedented success of the Wii was the cause for this. The predominantly casual nature of the Wii is bring gaming back to the family. Most of the mature and dedicated gamers that exist today probably have fond memories of gaming with the Atari 2600. I would argue both the 2600 and the Wii are very similar to each other, to the point that the Wii can be called the 2600 of the current decade. In terms of development time was there anything back in the 2600 days that could compare with GTA IV?
My point is not to compare consoles this time, but rather to look at what gaming means to people today. America’s first major down-cycle in the economy causes people to take a closer look at budget gaming. We can’t realistically expect an expanding or even steady market for $60 games and $300 consoles with so much less money to spend.
Gaming to me will always be about escaping from the normal world doing something that brings me happiness. Whether a game is the creation of a drug-induced hallucination or a satirical mocking of what I’m trying to get away from the job still gets done. Based on the reports you see of the video game market being somewhat recession-proof and sales numbers still going strong you probably wonder what the point I’m driving at is.
Let me tell you. Sooner or later gamers want something new, something interesting. We’re still in an interesting time for gaming because the initial generation of gamers are still indentured servants of the industry. We are still a long ways a way from being forced off the gaming reservation, but sooner or later you need fresh blood, and it’s difficult to do that with high console prices and an increasing development costs.
Yes, okay, there are plenty of great older games you can get, and some fresh games that are quite cheap. We are on the bleeding edge of an industry that provides opportunities for independent people to download development kits and create their own games. But, still, I have to wonder how much room is there still in the industry for a rash of games in the GTA ilk?
I realize that it is difficult to figure out what demographics will eat up certain games, and that if some game like KOTOR came out in 1986 then I may have never given games like Tecmo Bowl or Tetris a chance. I wonder if such a simple game like Tecmo Bowl could even be created today and have it be a game that so many people reminisce about 10 or more years from now.
Here’s what I do know. In an era where we’re relatively close to having a really high penetration point in HD TV’s that there is a place for the monster-budget game titles. But don’t we need to consider how we rope in the 6 and 7 year old potential gamers? Don’t we need to sell the idea of video games to them with simpler titles than to toss Gran Turismo or Call of Duty in front of them and expect them to enjoy it as much as possible?
I realize that’s pretty much zeroing in on a question that Nintendo has already answered for us, but there were 3 versions of Mario out for the NES, and at least two of them are etched into video game lore. No offense, but Super Mario Galaxy is not going to be enough to hook them for life. Quality titles take time to make and you don’t want to sully a great franchise (that list is gigantic, so let me utter one word, perhaps “Sonic”, and move on), but sooner or later you need to look at what Galaxy was and realize that you just don’t need a game half that big to tantalize a kids’ brain to have them swoon over the next Mario title.
As someone who’s currently neck-deep in an MMO I cannot really tell you about the enormous amount of options out there that could hook the next generation of gamers at a dirt cheap price. One big title from Nintendo a year isn’t going to cut it. Pokemon has more than run its course (three times over). Wii Sports, let’s face it, was never meant to do more than to get the console through the front door. $10 budget titles via DLC are not as widely known of to get mass appeal.
Maybe we’ll get something in the next 2-3 years and maybe we won’t. What I don’t want is to tell someone to download an old game from 5 years ago as a starting point for why people should pick up gaming now. What bothers me is, right now that seems like the best option.
Post your comments in the Forum!
May 9, 2008
The Gamer’s Quagmire #68: Lucky Number 4
Everything you wanted to know about gaming, and less
by Jamison DeLorenzo
Promises are promises, and, this amazing revelation aside, I figure if there is a week to talk about GTA this would be the week to do it. There are very few stories in gaming news this week that do not involve this game, and rightfully so. Considering the sales numbers this game is putting up (6 million copies sold in week one) it would be rather silly to ignore this landmark game.
That was far more than just a play on words relating to the number of NYC landmarks in the GTA IV version of Liberty City. This is one of the few games I have ever seen released where every major gaming publication and review site is giving this game near perfect marks. I am not saying this should drive you to your nearest store and pick the game up, but so few games are ever given a high score, let alone from everyone. After taking a week off from work to plow through this game, something which I had planned since the beginning of the year, I find it very difficult to disagree with the notion that this game isn’t as close to perfect as a game can get.
There are many things this game does that its predecessors have done. All the basic gameplay elements that you love (or hate) about the game are back, the satire is still present, the detail in the city environment is amazing, the story is engrossing, and the characters and dialogue are movie-level quality. These are all things I expect from GTA. Games that step up to this level are almost always highly praised, including last year’s icon in this department – BioShock.
Where GTA has stopped before, IV has kept going. Let us start with what is in the forefront – the graphics. The work Rockstar has put into Liberty City has definitely raised the bar in the realm of the free-roaming environment. Combine the graphical power of Crysis with the city detail that went into Assassin’s Creed and what you get is Liberty City. Downtown is littered with gigantic signs that make you feel like you’re on the strip in Vegas. Seeing the city skyline light up at night is just like looking out of a hotel window. Those are the big visuals. The details – like movie posters and other ads inside buildings, the geysers of water that shoot up when you knock out fire hydrants, the debris that gets caught in a cyclone when a helicopter is flying nearby, being able to hear your car radio while outside the car – all of these experiences make you feel like you are inside a real city.
Next to the basic gameplay elements that make GTA what it is, the satire embedded in this game is easily the most enjoyable aspect of this. This is not anything new, but being able to see this in the form of television and the web are brand new experiences. One day I spent hours just watching TV in one of my safehouses. Is there any point in doing this? You don’t get missions or any real information on backstory in the game, but it sure is entertaining.
The only complaint I have is that the character movement is still a ways away from smooth. Running around, moving through crowds of people, breaking into cars or just hopping in them all have very natural movements. Jumping, however, is still atrocious. Trying to get Niko to jump between ledges, onto or off of a boat, or in between rooftops is still an ordeal. Jumping in wide open spaces is not nearly as frustrating as cramped spaces (I got stuck once under a staircase which forced me to reload because crouching and walking wasn’t working right), but jumping in a straight line can be a major ordeal at times. One mission I failed because I tried getting onto a dirtbike from behind it, only to walk in circles for over 10 seconds before my target escaped.
If those problems were not present in the game I would easily be able to state with conviction that this game is perfect. When I say a game is perfect, that means that while the game can still be improved to do things in different ways, there is nothing that I feel the game is lacking. For example, the cover combat system could be a little easier to use for getting in and out of cover or sprinting between cover spots, but it didn’t really cause any problems. The combat system was still much better than anything that has been in GTA games to date, so I cannot state with a straight face that the combat was difficult or frustrating.
There is one thing I should make a special note on. There is a mission that involves a bank job in this game. I thought this was going to be as annoying as the Vice City mission was, but it turned out to be the best mission in any GTA game I have played to date. The tedious parts of the robbery – securing the bank, subduing employees and customers, busting open the vault, were all scripted. The entire mission revolved around the escape from the bank. The adrenaline rush in running through the streets taking out cop after cop, running through the subway, avoiding helicopters, and the final escape back to the house provided more adrenaline and energy than I could ask for. I would need 3 Red Bulls back-to-back to recreate that sensation. This mission was the defining moment for the game.
Coming up with something different to say about this game is tough. You know it all and you’ve probably seen it all. The highlights of this game were the graphics, fighting system, environment detail, voice acting, character animations, story, dialogue, satire, and length. The driving, movement, and missions were good but could all have been improved. The multiplayer was new and fun, but still could be so much more. Every one of the highlights were near perfect if not perfect, which means that GTA IV probably didn’t exceed many people’s expectations, but it matched what most people were expecting from Rockstar. If that doesn’t say something about what the value of the GTA franchise is, then nothing really does.
Post your comments in the Forum!
March 14, 2008
The Gamer’s Quagmire #64: An MMO With Sprinkles on Top
Everything you wanted to know about gaming, and less
by Jamison DeLorenzo
We have all been witnesses to the recent acquisition of Blizzard and the attempted acquisition of Take Two. Both of these companies are rumored to be in the development stages of a new online game, and these speculations have largely revolved around Starcraft and KOTOR. Whether you believe these rumors or not is your decision, but a new rumor popped up recently which has caused me to recall an article I wrote back in 2003 about the very same subject – a GTA MMO.
I went back and re-read my old article and discovered two things. First, my sense of humor in these rants of mine has changed a lot in even as little as two years. Second, the points I attempt to drive home now are a lot more coherent. That’s the price you pay for being a writer who is a lot more raw than polished. There were, however, some interesting points I made four years ago about what a GTA MMO would be like. Now that I have a lot of experience in playing in the genre it’s time for me to spruce up some old ideas and figure out how this game could work.
I know what you are thinking – come on, not another GTA article!? This topic is repeated a lot, but, to be completely honest, it gave me an opportunity to spruce up an old idea that, frankly, needed some polishing. It also allowed me to put a lot less time into putting together a solid article this week. Sometimes being lazy can pay off, and a retrospective on my old musings has been enjoyable (at least, for me it has). At this point let me make a solemn promise not to write anything more about this franchise until the last week of April, when GTA IV hits the ground running.
While I believe that the GTA MMO concept is probably not in development or even in beginning discussion stages, I believe that the primary reason people are drooling over this, aside from an overwhelming love of the MMO genre and GTA, is the very noticeable lack of a multiplayer capability in the franchise since GTA 2. Anyone who played these games on the PC knows how much fun deathmatches, cannonball races, and killing ice cream men can be. Who would be odd enough not to enjoy that type of good-natured fun? The good people at Rockstar North finally figured this out, and now people are salivating over the inclusion of multiplayer in the impending GTA IV release.
And while I do not have a problem with the ice cream man, or Van Halen, I have had a bit of a problem thinking about GTA as an MMO. My initial thought was along the lines of finding the person so I could test out my brand new nightstick, but after a couple seconds I decided I would be remiss to dismiss some idea like this (who knew I had the capacity to put together a hip-hop album?). I put away my nightstick and began thinking about how such an idea could be brought to fruition.
The types of character classes and opposing factions are pretty much the most important aspect of making an online game deeply immersive. Playing as the traditional thug is the obvious choice, but there are other interesting ones too. There should be the ability to play as cops, major and minor gang leaders, business owners, pimps, or other low-level thugs. All of these jobs could build off each other in working to build an impressive – how would Fat Tony put it – mafia crime syndicate.
In terms of what could be done as part of the general level grind I expect a lot of the standard stuff you see in most MMO’s. There would almost certainly have to be some generic NPC gang activity like there was in City of Heroes, but there does need to be a GTA spin on it. I came up with a couple minor things to consider, but I think they begin to set the tone for a larger GTA universe. Imagine holding up a jewelry store only to have the clerk pull out a Colt Python as soon as you turn your back to leave. Imagine an ambulance driver slashing you with a katana when trying to hijack his vehicle. Better still – imagine some psychotic soldier driving around in a Hummer running people over at will.
I also thought about basic skills and professions, and San Andreas started to tap into those ideas. When Rockstar talked about the RPG elements in that game they referred to your stats (swimming, running, muscles, etc.). I don’t see why those couldn’t be basic skills that several classes in a GTA MMO have access to, but there are plenty of ideas there. The professions are what interests me more, and you can have varying weapons specialists, drivers, brawlers, and grenadiers for all fighting classes. Gang leaders could specialize in recruiting, entrepreneurship, and negotiations. It’s all very doable.
Car theft is a major element in the basic game, so I’m betting that cars, along with people, would have to have a pretty good respawn rate. While that part is not that interesting I will state that watching many people get into ugly PvP battles over stealing a single car could be a boatload of fun. Contributing to overall mayhem in battles against cops could also be fantastic.
Using a PvP angle along with building your syndicate’s influence, the battle over various businesses would be great. This is a concept that Mythic Entertainment calls RvR (Realm vs. Realm) battles and has placed this into the core of Dark Age of Camelot and Warhammer Online. I would argue that this dynamic would be perfect for an online GTA game. Instead of just businesses, however, you could also control another form of ownable property – the gang hideout. All of these buildings could constantly be fought over by competing factions to shift overall control of a city. Keeping control over these buildings may be trickier than getting someone to laugh while watching A Night at the Roxbury, but it would be very competitive and entertaining PvP.
Going back to four years ago I didn’t think that there was a reasonable way to put together a GTA MMO, but today I am starting to believe that there is something to this idea. While these ideas are a bit scattered and light, they should make any eager readers think that the overall game concept could theoretically work. Years of experience playing the genre do wonders for being able to put together ideas like this. With enough effort and innovation this could be a very popular game. With all the innovations the franchise has already brought to the table this move might be the last great innovation Rockstar can bring to the table with their primary cash cow. Even if that meant the end of the GTA franchise as we know that would be just fine with me – so long as it was still a lot of fun to play.
Post your comments in the Forum!
January 27, 2008
The Gamer’s Quagmire #59: Mass Obscenities Like a Fox
Everything you wanted to know about gaming, and less.
by Jamison DeLorenzo
Last week was a special time for me. It wasn’t because that Burnout was an excellent game. It wasn’t because I managed to find myself in the middle of a Guitar Hero party where I was the only one able to show off my skills in Expert mode. It wasn’t even because I was blessed with seeing GTA IV’s April 2008 release date. The media finally managed to embarrass itself beyond belief with what might go down as the stupidest video game debate since the original panic surrounding the Pac Man obsession in the mid 80’s.
Those of you into video game news are not new to this information at all. In fact, you are probably wondering why you should continue reading when you’ve seen so many different video game experts sound off on this issue, including X-Play and Penny Arcade. I’d offer forthcoming pictures of boobs, but this is a family-oriented site. Instead, what I can offer is more cheap laughs at the expense of the “news” corporation that started this discussion.
The reason I take such exception to the Fox News debate last week goes far beyond the egregious lies that were flying around the debate like flies at a fall baseball game in Cleveland. Mass Effect had an enormous impact on me. It was easily one of my favorite games from the past five years. Whatever your impressions of that game were, you understand that when a massive amount of lies swarms around one of your favorite games you become enraged. It took a long time to figure out exactly how I wanted to respond to the Fox segment on Mass Effect. Once I realized that it has been ages since I did a line item breakdown of something that has gotten under my skin the internal debate was resolved.
It is time to kick back, relax, and watch the snowball of rage come rolling down the hill.
The event begins as the tag line on the bottom of the screen serves as the basis for the topic du jour. According to the always accurate bottom-of-the-screen banner, Mass Effect features “Full Digital Nudity” and “Graphic Sex.” I realize that the news shows on the channel are generally pretty right-wing, but what is most striking is that this is the same network that has brought us a litany of shows revolving around sex and edgy cartoons. How can the same network that reruns the Side-boob Hour with Peter Griffin also get freaked out about a side-boob in a video game? That and a small portion of a posterior is the racy sex scene that these people are talking about.
Before the interview comes in play, an interesting comment on marketing was thrown in. Admittedly I do not watch a lot of TV, but did you know that the game, which is clearly rated ‘M’ (i.e. ages 17+), is being marketed to kids *and* teenagers? Sometimes it is difficult to tell when people make up lies used by other people in an attempt to sound poignant, but this felt like one of those templated arguments that is used by so many people when they attack video games.
Anyway, the interview came next between a psychological expert of some sort (I refuse to put the name in because I don’t want to leave any hints that I am lending any credence to the person) and a video game columnist (in other words, someone far more professional than myself). I got a really good laugh when every single opinion made by the psychologist was shot down like the Luftwaffe over England when she admitted to never playing the game. I always find it annoying that people can make by informed decisions about a game without ever sitting down in front of it. It’s easy to make snide remarks about anything without being truly informed, but you cannot call yourself a professional without doing actual first-hand research. This is bad science at its very core.
- Studies prove adolescents play games more than kids – I don’t know about you, but every report I have ever read about gaming studies shows that most gamers are men somewhere in the realm of ages 27-34. To quote a famous rock band – “this is my generation, baby.” Pretty much the only thing worse than an expert that doesn’t do their own research is one that lies about the research they have (or have not) seen. On the plus side, the comedy continued because the expert then went on to claim that they had to side with the research they, supposedly, read instead of listening to someone who actually played the game.
- Women are only there for their sexuality – Ignoring that you can pick the lead to be a female, this comment is still quite the impressive broad stroke. Coming from someone who claims never to have played the game this is not a surprising comment, because you cannot know about the internal struggles all three female party members have throughout the game if you never played it.
- The man is deciding how many women he wants to be with – Technically this is a true statement, in that you can choose to be with 0 or 1 other female. Oh yes, you can make a truly stupid remark in the game to see if there’s a way you can get both female love interests to go with you. I don’t think I need to elaborate on how that choice winds up not working for you. Still, if you insist on taking the stance that the dialog option merely being present in the game is enough to be revolting, I should warn you that only someone who wants to string to women along and then make a piggish response is going to make that happen. This is the player’s choice, and I refuse to blame a video game developer or publisher for a choice that players make in a game. If this sounds familiar, this is the a rehash of one of the many attacks against GTA.
- Boys cannot tell the difference between what happens in the game and real world – I don’t doubt this for a second. I find it difficult to blame this on a video game that has arrived during the sixth console generation. I don’t know about you, but the day when people realized that raising children takes true diligence is going to be a welcome one.
Moving past this segment we get to the panel discussion portion of the program. I wasn’t sure what to expect from this segment after the interview melted my brain, but on some level I expected to see a balanced discussion. Naturally this is the trap that is laid out in front of everyone. It is a relatively clever one as it will catch almost everyone who is highly ignorant of video games.
Anyway, I’d love to give you some deep insight on the discussion the panel laid out and the differing sides of the debate, but they all landed on the “we hate Mass Effect” side of the table. In case I missed something in my years on a debate team, group discussions were always the most informative when people had differing opinions.
Here is a quick breakdown of all the comments made during this evil segment:
- Luke Skywalker meets Debbie Does Dallas – It’s hard to say exactly what this means, other than somehow a game has gone one graphic sex scene to multiple sex scenes. The lie is worsened by the clear fact that nobody on the panel has played the game because the story is one of the most compelling in an RPG that I’ve seen in a while. BioWare understands storytelling better than most, and it always annoys me when people are turned away from incredible stories based solely on disinformation and a differing taste. As a side note, I find it amusing that anyone who is unfamiliar with the original movie from 1978 is going to look it up and become more educated on a subject that the panelists clearly view as vile and disgusting.
- Why didn’t it get the AO rating? – This alone ranks a 10.0 on the Asinine Comments Meter. Pot shots aside, the AO rating is not some horrid rating that only the vilest games get. The AO rating is a direct equivalent to the movie NC-17 rating, although with movies like Saw IV being given an R rating I honestly have to wonder how a game like Mass Effect could ever possibly be given a rating similar to what you would see on current R movies. If Mass Effect were a movie it would unquestionably be a PG-13 movie. The AO comment in this case is nothing more than a buzzword used way out of context to try and make a point (or, more accurately, beat it to death).
- What happened to Atari, pinball, and Pac-Man? – The same thing that happened to Gone with the Wind – the medium grew up. I know, I know. These are turbulent times and we must all shy away from the vile video game industry. Seriously though, how can broad comments like this be made during the time of what can only be described as the Wii generation? As little interest as I have in playing it I don’t know that I could argue with anyone who claimed that Wii Sports is the most played console game in the world right now. If you want to know what happened to Pac-Man, Wii Sports is the answer to your question.
- It’s up to the parents to censor what kids see… unfortunately – Apparently the day of parental responsibility I’m pining for is a long way away. I am genuinely interested in finding out if anyone on the panel has children of their own, because that would go a long way to explaining this comment. I know only one person said it, but nobody reacted negatively to this at all. On top of all the lies tossed around in the small segment, I find it difficult to take the opinion of anyone seriously who publicly refuses to pay attention to their own children.
What frightens me is that I could keep going with this article, but I am way past the length I like to write for my weekly articles. I’m happy to discuss this further with anyone who cares to post in the forums, but in the meantime let me close by saying that I always knew there was a reason I refused to watch network TV news segments. Even if you strongly disagree with that, at least I have proof of doing firsthand research on the matter.
Post your comments in the Forum!
January 9, 2008
The Gamer’s Quagmire #57: Learning to Enjoy a Playpen
Everything you wanted to know about gaming, and less.
by Jamison DeLorenzo
You need forgive the embedded juvenile humor for the lead-in question of the week: how do you know when it is okay to play in the sandbox? Several reviewers have felt the need to pound Assassin’s Creed for reasons that flew over my head. It is true that I am nowhere near an established or astute reviewer that many paid professionals are, but sometimes it takes the wit of a strung out English major (they’re always useful for needlessly comparing totally unassociated ideas) to critique design choices in a game that have no direct impact on the overall quality of a game.
It was not all that difficult to find several scathing reviews of Assassin’s Creed and to create a set of flaws that people had with the game. The universal opinion of the game seems to be that while it was drawn out and somewhat laborious the game was a lot of fun. Many reviews are more polarized than that, but I feel that this was a fairly common sentiment amongst most reviewers. There all always exceptions (and no, they never “prove” the rule… by definition), and in this case the most glaring are the ones that stipulate that it was a horrible design choice to make Assassin’s Creed a sandbox game.
What is that exactly? Sandbox games refer to games where the player is given overall objectives to complete but is given free reign on how to do it. GTA is a popular example when describing this style of game for obvious reasons. You’re almost never told what route to take to a specific place, which weapons to bring, which car to drive, what steps to take once you get there, or anything like that. The order in which you complete several objectives isn’t necessarily important either. Metal Gear is another game like that, only exercising stealth is encouraged.
Consider the popularity of these two franchises for a moment. There are contributing factors like story and graphics that makes these games what they are, but giving players free roaming capability is the highlight of the game. Combining that with the dark side of what you can do in GTA is what makes that franchise the powerhouse that it is right now. A free roaming environment is one of the many major draws of the larger RPG’s for many people. Giving gamers the ability to do what they want when they want in a game is, in my opinion, the best way to make games. The short version of this reads as follows: constraints are bad.
Upon reading multiple articles talking about the recent rash of games attempting to emulate a sandbox environment I began to wonder which games were being talked about besides Assassin’s Creed. Have there been any? I sure haven’t played any, and I don’t recall any popular ones that people have been talking about. Saint’s Row is the only other franchise that comes to mind, and that’s much more of a GTA clone than just another sandbox game.
I submit to you that Assassin’s Creed, if you look at it as a GTA clone, it, for the most part, succeeds. Grabbing all of the flags is basically just like grabbing all the hidden packages. Doing all of the extra missions (saving the citizens) is a lot like completing all of the now defunct rampages. Completing all basic mission objectives gives you free reign to recklessly roam the city, causing as much havoc as you deem appropriate, before completing them is a direct parallel. Whether I’m performing acrobatic face plants into alleyways or crashing a sports car into a pawn shop I’m having fun. That’s they key to a good game isn’t it? Fun?
The flaws that exist in Assassin’s Creed are the battle system (which is mindlessly repetitive) and the later missions not offering anything that new. Those are very gaping flaws that prevent the game from being as epic as Ubisoft wanted it to be. The only thing that prevents the game from being a total rinse and repeat is the moving story, but any good reviewer sees past that when discussing the game as a whole. Any competent critic, or common sense enthusiast, also figures out that a lack of mission variety and rewards has nothing to do with a gameplay mechanism.
Yes, a lot of the extras you get by exploring the world don’t provide you with a whole lot. However, I liked climbing insanely tall buildings and swan diving in conveniently placed haystacks. I loved finding perches and gazing on the horizons. Did exploring the ends of the Earth net me anything interesting in terms of rewards, story, or abilities? No, but that’s a problem that can be easily resolved without nuking the environment. I did expect a fuller story by finding all those extra flags and saving all of those citizens. My DNA sequence was more complete as a result- why didn’t that amount to anything? The lack of reward was frustrating, but it didn’t stop me from continuing to hunt for everything.
It’s basic logic- if you don’t enjoy exploring areas or already know it’s going to be tedious then don’t complain after you do it. It was painfully obvious going in that the size of the world Ubisoft created for the game was gigantic (even though all of the major cities were remarkably close to each other) and I knew I was going to hate saving all the citizens, hunting down all the flags, and killing and endless amount of guards. I did it anyway knowing that is largely unnecessary, and if it weren’t for a free-roaming environment I would have been in those annoying areas where the places the game developers didn’t want me to go were blocked with invisible walls. I would also have been forced down a path instead of running across rooftops while dodging arrows in whatever direction I felt like.
Call me insane, but I know what I prefer.
Post your comments in the Forum!
StillontheShelf.com - no frills, just content. Powered by WordPress
©2003-2012 Craig Reade and Mad Cow Disease