Showing posts with label Yahtzee. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Yahtzee. Show all posts

Friday, 8 March 2013

The Halo Games

These days I've finished Halo:Reach. This is the last Halo game made by Bungie, although not the last in the series (that would be Halo 4). Spoilers ahead if you haven't played any Halo games.

I left it for last because I understood that it was not as good as the previous ones. This is kind of true, but still is a pretty awesome game. The graphics are better than previous versions, and the world feels quite richer, with heavily populated areas, cities, bases, etc. I'd say its weak parts are the characters. I didn't manage to connect with them much.

As Yahtzee explained in his review, a team called "Noble Team" is clearly competing to see who is more selfless and caring, and performs a better sacrifice. The only two characters that had some slight development, in my opinion, were Jorge (the first guy to die) and the female researcher(don't remember her exact name) that acts as the usual crazy scientist (usual, but interesting). The rest were quite...bland.

It didn't help that there were moments where the IA of the other characters made them look while 2 huge hunters were playing tennis with my character's corpse....that cannot be helped I guess, otherwise you wouldn't have a challenge (since the other team members are kind of immortal unless killed by the plot), but when all characters are supposed to be super-soldiers, it doesn't quite fit....

Anyway, the game is still good and fun to play. However, I liked more the other Halo games, including 4 (and I'm not counting Halo Wars among them).

Halo games got me addicted some time ago after one friend from university, Alex Urbano, introduced me to them. They have something special. The main character, even if he's not talkative and it may appear rather bland as well, has a certain sense of humor, maybe like stereotypical action heroes, but that puts more personality than all the Gears of War characters combined. Together with the second main character, the AI Cortana, it makes the game much more fun. They interact like some kind of couple, and they kind of are a couple, in their weird way.

The main games always have a feeling of greatness, of something epic going on. I think the music has a great influence on that, I already commented in other posts that it's awesome, transmitting the action of the game together with the awe of discovering new planets and technology. By the 3rd game, it even adds a melancholic touch, and the feeling that it's the end of the world.  But it's not only the music...the graphics and the areas also give a special imprint. Instead of gritty realism, in these games everything is shiny, colorful, well illuminated (unless the are is supposed to be dark, of course). The different places are usually beautiful, in their modernity or their impossibility (a world in the shape of a ring, a huge structure with floating parts, an underground area that goes kilometers deep, etc.)

ODST, probably the weirdest game of the group, it's really great in making a simpler plot with new characters interesting. It centres more on the exploration of the city, and uses quite well the feeling of being completely alone, surrounded by enemies, trying to get help and get an idea of what has happened while you were unconscious.

It also has Malcolm Reynolds in it as the squad's leader, which is always a plus^^. 

The gameplay for all Halos  is quite simple,you need to explore different regions, gather useful weapons and kill everything to advance. In some exceptions, you can just try to run through enemy territories very fast. When you get hit, your shields take the damage. When you're out of shields, sometimes you have a life bar and sometimes health regeneration, but the effect is the same: Enough hits without shields, and you die. If you wait without getting hit again, shields recharge.

If you play in a difficulty harder than normal, the games are actually pretty hard. It's not easy to get out of places were you're heavily outnumbered and outflanked. Usually there will always be  a group of small enemies together with a couple of big ones. The small ones are not a big danger by themselves, but they interrupt you if you try to concentrate on the big ones, and their added attack can easily kill you if you don't find some cover.

In these harder difficulties, an important part of gameplay is actually something closer to survival-horror style games, where you scavenge for ammunition, and where it's important to not miss and waste resources. Lots of times you need to use the normal rifle instead of the big huge laser, since no matter how good you are with the laser, in the end it can only kill 6 enemies before you need another weapon.

In the end, you learn to use whatever is at hand, you learn to use as few shots as possible, you learn how to use grenades....you learn how to play better and better. And it's done nicely together with the advance of the plot.

I'd like to finish talking about Halo 4, the start of a new trilogy created by a Microsoft department dedicated to make more Halo games, while Bungie dedicates itself to other ideas and games.

When you heard such a thing, it sounds like the usual big company crap, where they beat the corpse of any franchise as long as it expels a little bit more of money for them. Probably the managers that decided to do this had that in mind. However, it seems they selected for the job actual Halo fans and ex-members of Bungie.

The result is really great. This game has more plot than any of the older games, and it manages to develop some very interesting secondary characters, apart from giving new dimensions to the usual ones. Sure, there are plenty of things that still don't make much sense, but the care and detail that has been dedicated to it is clear.

There is this example, further in the game, where you meet some old lady scientist, where without saying much, her expression in the game says thousands of things. You're forcing her to get rid of something she is researching. Without saying much, the face shows the regret of wasting hours to throw it away, the regret of not being able to know more, that she doesn't want to do it at all, but she knows that there is no other option to save the station where they are situated. By this simple trick, they develop her into a likeable character, with an inner world.

And then they kill her in a gruesome way. And they manage to motivate you to kill the bastard responsible for this.

This is good storytelling using video games  This is what they can offer. Sure, without good graphics they may have not been able to pull this off, but the idea of the whole scene, of all your efforts  of all her efforts  of the expression and tone of her voice, all that....that's storytelling when it approaches art.

Compare it with the stupid little kid in Mass Effect 3...I could not care less about him. He appeared once, he was a little bit annoying, maybe with reason, but with no nuances. We were supposed to feel bad because he was a kid. But the voice used, the face used, the situation, the dialogue....I could not care less. Specially because they force it on your character, who gets traumatized by it.

In Halo 4, they do nothing like that. They just show an interesting character, and kill it, and they do it in a way that you care...but even that is up to you to choose, in a way.

That shows that this game was made with care and respect, whatever the reason of its origin was. And that's why it's a great game.

Sunday, 12 August 2012

Mass Effect's Ending

Between the Olympics and preparing to move out of this country, some time ago I actually managed to finish Mass Effect 3. I want to talk about it a little, while trying not to spoiler it, even if by now most people have seen it/have heard enough about it.

So, the ending....when the game was released, and the complains about its ending started to be heard everywhere, there was a comment that Bioware was going to release some kind of expansion, or epilogue or something. Since I didn't have that much time to play anyway, I waited for a while...and when they finally released the expansion, I started to seriously play. Therefore, I never saw the original ending, but I did search for it afterwards, and yeah, it was really really bad...

The reason that it was bad it's that in the original one, they don't show anything. This game has a huge detailed mythology around it. The universe where things happen has a huge backstory, you could literally spend hours reading about it in the in-game encyclopaedia.  The attention to detail is impressive. Therefore, if you finish the game with a big explosion, a couple of characters surviving it, and a fade to black, that's really an insult. It clearly shows that whoever did the 3 games did not participate in this ending. It has no explanation whatsoever of the consequences of your choice.

That said, the expansion is much better in my opinion. Things make slightly more sense, and you get a little epilogue, where you can see the effects of your last actions. If that was the original ending, there would have been some muttering about the lack of sense, but I doubt it would have reached the levels that the original ending created. And while watching this ending, one gets the real impression that some company directives tried to sell the ending as a DLC, and when the shitstorm hit them they backed away and offered it for free.

Nevertheless, the expanded ending is still...lacking. To explain that, I'll use the review and article made by Yahtzee. For those who do not know him, he's a games critic that always shows the negative points of a game. I like his reviews, even if I disagree with several of them. He did not like Mass Effect, for example, and I believe that he misunderstood the point of the game. But it's still a good article.

In his article, Yahtzee mentions that Mass Effect gets an ending, even if you don't like it, and that the ending serves to finish a story. And no matter what you did before, this way everybody gets the same ending, and the story has a clear beginning, centre and end, which is the same for everybody. He mentions that that was the ending creators wanted, and the fanbase should not be able to change it, because it would create a bad precedent

I disagree with that. Games are interactive storytelling, which is a very modern storytelling technique, that can be approached in very different ways than traditional storytelling. Mass Effect shows a perfect basic example in its ending: Instead of one ending, you have 3 of them. That's something really innovative, that you cannot do in a book or a movie (there have been books that tried to do it, but it doesn't work really well with them). Well, it's innovative in the sense that game are innovative, because almost since they had more complex plots than "eat yellow pills, avoid ghosts", games offered multiple endings.

The problem with that comes when the difference in the ending is like the one in Mass Effect: You have a couple of options, each one gives a different ending. This causes the feeling that no ending is really the true one, because with a simple load you can get back there, choose a different one, and see what happens. It's a lazy basic mechanic, to show off the "interactivity" of a game compared with a movie.

There are games that go further than that and really explore the storytelling capabilities of interactive media. Let's put as an example Silent Hill 2, a Yahtzee favourite. The game has a number of different endings, I believe that there are 3 normal ones, a joke one, only available after clearing the game once, and a 5th one that only appeared with an expansion. Let's focus on the original 3....

Each ending depends on how you played. I don't mean a decision you took, but literally how you played. Did you receive a lot of damage and didn't heal often? Did you spent lots of time checking on a character and trying to talk with them? Did you check certain objects a lot, and ignored others? That's how the game decides the ending.

The effect this makes is that the story is consistent with your gameplay. You can argue that it's actually 3 different stories. Your different gameplay shows a different story. And when you reach the end, there's not a damm thing you can do to change it. That's the one you chose, voluntarily or not. Do not try to reload, it won't change. To see a different one you would have to replay whole sections of the game, or start a new one directly.

This is what games offer when telling stories. The option to have a lot of different stories. You start from a common point, and then each branch goes somewhere different. Maybe some branches cross each other later on, but in the end they do not, each one going their separate way.

Mass Effect 1 and 2, and the first 2/3 of 3, follow this logic. Depending on your choices in the 1st and 2nd game, there's entire characters and plots that some people will never have. And this is awesome. That's what games offer. It's very complex to pull off, and programmers will  have nightmares thinking about how to do it. But it has been done, and it's possible to do it.

Mass Effect 3 should not let you choose and ending. It should not translate decisions into little points that showed how close or far you were from completing the game. It should have taken all these  plots and subplots, and offer you N different endings, each one depending on who you saved, who you killed, and who you met. But I guess it would have been too brave to do that and tell players that if they wanted a different one, they better started Mass Effect 1 again....and that was an incredible missed opportunity to show games' true potential.