Sony's own Sir Howard Stringer sporting the shades of the future.
Sony has been pushing 3D gaming for some time now. They seem to feel that 3D gaming is the next step up for video games and, along with some other big names, television. Viewing things in 3D is definitely not a new concept, movies have been doing it for years and even some old NES games sport 3D. Granted being the technology behind the 3D Sony is using is more advanced than many of the other outings we have seen. That still doesn't mean that it isn't an unnecessary gimmick for the eyes. If a game is great, 3D isn't going to make it better; if a game is horrible, 3D isn't going to make it fun.
Another downfall to 3D is once you have seen it, you've seen it. If you were to play God of War 3 in 3D then spatters of blood flying at your face will probably look pretty awesome...the first fifty times. 3D could prove to be a bit of distraction in a game if the developers were to exploit it. Everything flying at you could be a hinderance. Then again some developers could, and will, make pretty good use of the 3D support, but even in that scenario there is a good possibility that the game will be just as, if not more, enjoyable with the 3D effect turned off.
3D is not worth the thousands and thousands of dollars the 3D enabled HDTVs are going to cost, and they are going to cost a lot. The glasses themselves are going to be a pretty penny as well. Paying tons of money just to obtain a layered effect for your gaming isn't going to add a new, exciting gameplay changing experience to your games. Your game will look a bit dimmer and it a bit closer. That's about it. And I don't know about everyone else, but my entertainment area is packed with enough gaming peripherals as it is.
I wear glasses throughout my daily life. They suck. I'm used to them by now, but they still aren't the most enjoyable thing to have to wear on a daily basis. These glasses I wear were adjusted to fit my face, and they are still uncomfortable. Imagine wearing plastic glasses that are adjusted to fit no one's face in particular, boasting a simple design that will sit upon your nose and ears. There will be a lot of readjusting going on just to find a comfortable position for it to sit in. We that wear glasses are pretty much screwed in terms of comfort, unless we get contacts or surgery.
I could be looking at the whole 3D craze with a lot of negativity, but I just don't see many positives about it. Once 3D technology that doesn't require me strap on some futuristic looking shades arrives, then you can surely count me in, though that is most likely many years away. I'll admit that the technology has come a long way – it's not going to be like it was playing Rad Racer on the NES with 3D enabled – but I also feel that, as of now, it's a really pointless and expensive visual gimmick. Games such as BioShock and Uncharted 2 will always be great wether they are in 3D or not. Update Superman 64 to support 3D and it will still be horrible. Maybe I'll give the whole 3D thing a try and become obsessed with it. I doubt it, but it could happen.
1. Half-life 2
Developer: Valve
Release: Nov 16th 2004
Metacritic Score: 96
Format: PC, Xbox 360, Xbox
Sales: 4.7 million
Adam Thomas: After all the games on the list, the number one game should be the pinnacle of not only a field, but of gaming. After all, with titles like World of Warcraft or Metroid Prime, you have games that have opened up the way in terms of multiplayer connectivity and storytelling. You have games like Resident Evil 4 which revitalized a genre or Grand Theft Auto III that created one. The top game has to be able to take these things, and personify them because it has to be a game that is not only memorable, but an experience that will take the player into different directions.
It is why Half Life 2 happens to be on the list as the best game in the decade. At its base, it continues the story of Gordon Freeman, scientist turned hero in the original Half Life. It would seem that your efforts were, in the end, were somewhat futile, as the human race as we know it is gone. It seems after you were enlisted by the Mysterious G-Man, you ended up in stasis, away from Humanity for 10 years. The world has changed, and humans are slaves to the alien invaders.
You arrive in City 17 and are prepared to save it. Fresh out of stasis, you have to fight with new friends and foes to save the earth with a small band of resistance fighters. The story outline isn’t too original, as we have all seen the hero story done from plenty of angles. We have all played that video game that has turned a single man into the thesis for world peace. It is serviceable, but this game puts a spin on it. It gives the presentation a bit of a lift. It lies as the main difference, because Half Life 2 relies on a style that is based on substance, with strong writing to back it up.
As Gordon Freeman, you yourself do not say a word. This hasn’t changed from the first game. Like Link in many Zelda games, your story is unraveled by the world around you. This allows the player to have a feeling of connection to Gordon. Everyone else speaks, and fills you into the story. This works because of the fantastic writing. Each character is given a personality, and each feels like they are a piece of the puzzle. It is because of it, each person feels critical to the story.
However, this alone isn’t the reason why this game is on the list. Yes, the original game, plus its expansions Half Life 2: Episode One and Half Life 2: Episode Two, provided for hours of entertainment. They were great games in their own right, but it isn’t just that. The creation of Half Life 2 gave the world a lot more entertainment, through the creation of the Steam service and the multiple games built upon its system.
As mentioned, the creation of Steam was a huge contribution to the world of the PC gaming. The service, once only used for the Half Life 2 games and expansions, now have gone to other companies to allow anyone to jump in and download and protect their games. It is much like the XBOX Live service and Playstation Network for the PC.
There were also games that, based on the Half Life 2 architecture, wowed and amazed us. For anyone who loves FPS on computers, or plays anything on a competitive circuit, they have to know about CounterStrike Source, Day of Defeat Source as well as Team Fortress. All games have gotten players stuck to their keyboards and mouse setups for hours, amassing headshots and learning maps better than their game rooms. Games like Portal have tested gamers mentally. Figuring out how to portal your way out of a closed room may sound simple now, but try it with having to bounce, spring, and slide your way to victory.
As crazy as this sounds, this piece could very well go on for a long time, speaking on the work the development of Half Life 2 did for game physics (It made hitting someone with a shotgun at close range a very satisfying experience.), independent gaming with Steam, and retro gaming construction (I couldn’t play X-Com otherwise), among other things could keep us talking for days to come (and it has through blogs and forums). All that chatter really speaks to how powerful this game was to the world at large. And as one of the only titles to have both a successful PC and Console run, it may have been the title that allowed hell to freeze over for just a moment, allowing for both console and PC gamers to enjoy just one thing together.
|
Morality has become such a common gameplay element that most developers simply use it as an excuse for a 'do or don't' act, often without any real consequences on the character or further gameplay experience. Many of these choices will affect the character specifically, whilst having no emotional impact whatsoever on the player.
One of the reasons I've been thinking about this recently is due to Mass Effect 2 – it felt quite refreshing to make some 'no turning back' decisions, which we now know will probably have quite a heavy effect on Mass Effect 3. These decisions have effects of varying magnitudes on the overall outcome of the game, but are all finite and cannot be reversed.
Many Fallout or Oblivion players will probably attest to having multiple game saves to figure out what the best courses of action are to work towards the best item or get a certain quest. I, myself, have succumbed to this all-too-easy option. This often makes the outcome of a moral choice inconsequential, as, if the outcome is not desirable to the player, they can simply load a previous save state and carry on.
Unlike in Mass Effect 2, the act of loading old saves doesn't feel as detrimental to the experience in Fallout or Oblivion; however, it does destroy the feeling of one's choices having any real weight, thus, destroying the need for a morality system in the first place.
Grand Theft Auto IV had some simple but effective moral choices. Although these choices – as with many games released in the last few years – had little impact on the world itself, they did have an emotional impact on the player; being given the choice to kill a character who feels so alive and is begging for mercy can be one of the most grating experiences in gaming and Rockstar managed to capture it so well.
Although morality is something which will continue to thrive as a feature in games for many years to come, it feels a bit superficial at present. When given the choice to kill or let a character go, the player should really have to think about the decision; these choices should not just affect one's immediate character, they should affect the game world as well as the player's emotions.
If developers want to include morality as an element in their games, the consequences of the decision being made will have to have far more impact on the player, be this through greater exposition of characters or a cinematic story one actually care about.
It will be some time before developers find a way to incorporate a perfectly tuned morality system into a game, but games like Mass Effect 2 and Grand Theft Auto are as good a grounding as any.
2. Left 4 Dead/Left 4 Dead 2
Developer: Valve
Release: Nov 17th 2008/ Nov 17th 2009
Metacritic Score: 89/89
Format: PC, Xbox 360
Sales: 2.7million/2.6million
How many FPS games feature team play? Modern Warfare, Gears of War, Halo, Killzone etc. Now how many of them actually reinforce it? Just try and go it alone in Left 4 Dead and you’ll not only be killed but most likely kicked from the session as well. Don’t have a mic? Wander into a lobby and the chances are you’ll be asked to speak, if you don’t you’ll be removed.
Although some of the community nuances seem a little harsh, they are justified. While most games suggest players work together, L4D and the sequel absolutely demand it. Communication is key to survival, comrades need to know if there’s a spare medi kit, partners need to be warned of the smoker on the roof waiting to drag an unsuspecting survivor away from the group. If you hear the gurgle of the boomer, then say so, because failure to let your team mates know what’s around the next corner could lead to the demise of the team.
One of the survivors getting tongued
Similarly the infected need to work together fluently. Particularly in the sequel where the Jockey and the Spitter need to be used with the other infected to maximise their potential. A well organised team of infected will utilise their tools. Using the Boomer to vomit on unsuspecting survivors, thus blinding them, then riding one of them off a cliff with the Jockey is joy to behold.
The L4D series isn’t just renown for its excellent co-op mechanic. Like several other titles in this list it manages to tell a story without resorting to intrusive cut scenes. The narrative is in the scenery -Valve’s trademark graffiti tell stories of past survivors; from something as simple as, “ Entire city is infected, get out” to “Karen and I are held up in recycling plant. Have plenty of food and water. Look for the hollow ontainer. Love you, Jason.” Each scrawl furthers the authenticity of the zombie apocalypse.
Chigaco Ted makes a very bold statement
The action is dictated by the AI director who controls which of the special infected are spawned and where helpful items appear, amongst other parameters. This is L4D’s greatest narrative asset, stories are crafted through gameplay, as opposed to through exposition. Look to forum message boards for painful examples of how teams of survivors have the safe room in sight; then have been denied escape at the last minute by a tank, by a witch in the saferoom door, by a survivor accidentally setting off a car alarm, by an untimely wave of zombies sent by the AI director, by a badly thrown Molotov cocktail that accidentally burnt their own team mates, by a smoker that dragged a straggling survivor to their death…their team mates refusing to leave the saferoom to help, in fear for their own lives because of the audible snarls of the hunter waiting to pounce. If you’ve played L4D the chances are that several of those scenario’s will sound familiar.
L4D made co-operation a necessity via the medium of the zombie apocalypse. One of Valve’s unsung trademarks is impeccable balancing, everything works more effectively in unison. Witnessing the gradual demise of an opposing team of survivors thanks to a well conceived plan is ever so rewarding. That’s why this writer believes L4D has made it so surprisingly high in this list. Most games offer team work; Valve have prioritised it and encased it in an absolute riot of a game.
|
Editorial
Thursday, 11 February 2010 07:46 | 
Written by Simon Flatman |
