Modern Warfare 3: “all the way up the bombast-o-meter”

John Walker is always worth reading, and his review of Modern Warfare 3′s singleplayer campaign is just superb.

Videogames often allow us to live out fantasies, to be who we could never be with our saggy, regular-person frames and lives. A soldier fighting in a near-future war, with access to the finest in military hardware? Maybe I could be the squad leader? Maybe I could be the hero? Maybe I could be the one who’s allowed to open doors? But no, of course not, you are – as ever – the grunt, being barked at throughout, forced to do whatever the game/game characters tell you to, which is usually to sweep up after them and the party they’re having in front.

It fascinates me that this is the successful formula, the secret behind being the biggest FPS series of all time.

Gears of waaaah

I’ve been gaming long enough to know what I will and won’t like. Generally speaking, if it involves shooting space aliens in the face I’ll like it; if it doesn’t, I probably won’t.

I’m being a bit facetious – my favourite games list includes the obvious Half-Life 2s, Mass Effects and Deus Exes, along with interesting failures such as Alan Wake – but generally speaking I enjoy fairly dumb first-person shooters and can’t be arsed with epics such as Fallout 3. The Gears of War series, then, should be right up my street: I enjoyed the first one, and kinda enjoyed the second one.

Gears of War 3, though, is one of the dullest games I’ve played for a long time.

I’m pretty sure the problem is with the game rather than me.

Games are all about suspension of disbelief, and Gears 3 keeps buggering that up. It’s got far too many cutscenes for a game whose entire plot can be summarised as “you must shoot space aliens in the face”, and those cutscenes keep grabbing control from you: instead of big action scene/short cinematic/big action scene, the rhythm is more short action scene/overlong cinematic/short action scene. In one section, having sat through a cinematic, you get to shoot two things twice before – yes! – another cinematic.

The risible dialogue, cliched banter and general tedium of the cutscenes wouldn’t be so bad if the combat rocked, but it doesn’t. The weapons don’t have any heft to them – I’m fresh to this from playing Deus Ex:HR, where shotguns kicked, machine guns rattled and rocket launchers boomed. Even through a decent amp and fairly loud speakers, the guns feel and sound like peashooters.

Then there are the bosses, something that also marred DX:HR. The “giant boss with a single vulnerable point who charges at you and crushes you if you don’t move fast enough” boss-fight is a pain in the arse in any game, but it’s particularly annoying in Gears. The boss bits just go on forever, requiring no skill beyond the ability to keep playing past the point of utter tedium.

Last but not least, there’s the problem of your squad. If like me you’re crap at games, Gears 3 feels as if it’s playing itself: by the time you’ve got your sorry arse down to the main field of battle, your artificially intelligent squadmates have already turned the space monsters to mince.

Taken together, the feeling I get playing the game is of disconnection: no matter what buttons I press or triggers I pull, the game is happening entirely without my involvement, and nothing I do is of any consequence.

I get enough of that in the real world.

Sesame Street plus Kinect? Count me in

This has the potential to be brilliant: a Sesame Street game for wee kids developed by Double Fine, which describes itself as “The World’s most talented and bearded video game development team, headed by Tim Schafer!”

If you’re a parent of young children and you have an iOS device, the Sesame Street app Elmo’s Monster Maker [iTunes link] is a hoot.

LA Noire: not Grand Theft Ellroy after all

You know that LA Noire game? I’ve got it. It’s rubbish.

Well, maybe not rubbish. Tedious and annoying might be a better way to put it. The facial capture technology is extraordinary, but that’s about it. I was hoping for Grand Theft Ellroy, XBLA Confidential, but I just got bored.

A more intelligent critique from the inimitable Richard Cobbett is over here:

…oh, LA Noire can be a painful game. Let’s start with Cole Phelps himself, deeply unlikeable guy that he is. He’s 80% the most tedious square in the history of heroes, with the other 20% mostly squidged together like some kind of chimera made from utter, total dicks. Every single ‘mistake’ I have made in this whole game has been a direct result of Phelps being either a moron or an asshole, and usually both.

Fair and balanced videogame coverage

Here’s one for the “and we wonder why people don’t trust journalists” file: Fox News decided to report on a controversial videogame, and completely ignored the experts it spoke to. Rock Paper Shotgun’s John Walker is on the case: part one is here, and part two is here.

If it weren’t scaremongering bullshit that will misinform those who do not understand that their news source makes up any old rubbish, it’d be hilarious.

Panorama and videogames

Last night’s Panorama programme – the BBC’s flagship current affairs show – was dedicated to the evils of videogames. I haven’t seen it, but I do know that John Walker of Rock, Paper, Shotgun is an eminently reasonable and trustworthy writer, so I’m linking to this piece he wrote about it.

I believe that there is a real risk for those who use gaming to compensate for other negative factors in their lives, and for those whose gaming becomes problematic for any reason. I believe that these matters deserve to be taken seriously. It is to be treated with severity. This sort of scaremongering endangers such people by mis-labelling.

For example:

We move on to the tragic story of the Korean couple who let their baby die through neglect, as they spent their time gaming. We get told that they both had “low IQs” and that both suffered from “depression”, but both those factors are ignored because as a result of their circumstances they spent too much time playing Prius Online. “She was mentally not that stable to begin with,” explains a doctor at the clinic that treated the mother. But this isn’t an episode about mental illness leading to the deaths of babies. It’s about gaming causing it. Gaming caused it.

I agree entirely with John: so many people play games that it’d be strange if problematic gaming didn’t exist. However:

Until there is some evidence that gaming can create an addiction in someone otherwise undisposed to addictive behaviour, then it must be understood as a consequence of addiction, not a cause. To do otherwise is ignorant, dangerous, and harmful to the individuals. Blame it on gaming, and you’ll take away the games, leaving the person to continue suffering.

Vanquish is a very good bad game

I’ve just finished playing Vanquish, a truly demented Gears of War-style shooter. I think Eurogamer’s review is spot on.

Sure, Halo: Reach gives you a jet pack. But Vanquish gives you the ability to slide 40 yards on your knees along concrete, ducking through the legs of a giant bipedal robot while firing rockets at point-blank range into its groin.

The acting consists entirely of ham, the characters are ridiculous, the story is incomprehensible and it often feels as if somebody’s dropped a dustbin on your head and is beating it with a baseball bat, but it’s an absolute hoot.

I want to stick a rocket launcher in my magic trousers

Over at Rock, Paper, Shotgun John Walker has been publishing a list of do’s and don’ts for video games. Many of them made me laugh. Here’s the first bit. And here’s the second.

Do: let me carry more than two guns. Just when did we all decide that we weren’t okay with that element of unrealism in gaming? Sure, it can be set in the retro-future on a spaceship made of time, but god forbid we holster an improbable number of weapons. Especially if you’ll then let me carry hundreds of bits of ammo for all the weapons anywhere. Where am I storing those? In my magic trousers? And if so, why can’t I stick a pistol and a rocket launcher in there too? I want to stick a rocket launcher in my magic trousers!

Paying for girls’ attention? Isn’t there a word for that?

I’ve written a wee piece on Techradar about GameCrush, the frankly bizarre new service that will enable you to play videogames with girls, for a fee.

Paying women to talk to you? Isn’t that what the ads for HOT GRANNY ACTION in the back of movie magazines and men’s magazines are for?

Apparently not. GameCrush’s ethos is much purer than that. It’s designed to engage the brain, not engorge the groin. That’s why the girls can choose to offer chats ranging from “flirty” to “dirty” or, if they’re feeling particularly empowered, “flirty and dirty”.

Something kinda ewwwwww

I have no idea whether this is real or not, but it certainly isn’t safe for work. As Metafilter puts it:

The Joydick is a wearable haptic device for controlling video gameplay based on realtime male masturbation.

Heyho’s comment cracked me up.

I’m comforted by the idea that any guy who’d be interested in this would also spend the bulk of his time at home. Instead of being outdoors, where I may be.

As did Rhomboid’s:

Something something Cock Band.