Game Freaks 365's Xbox 360 Review Guide
By Kyle W. Bell
Smashwords Edition 5, November 2011
(Originally Published March 2010)
*********
Copyright © Kyle Bell 2010, 2011
License Notes:
All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise) without the prior written permission of both the copyright owner and the above publisher of this book.
Cover design by Angel Cortes cortesangel@live.com
*********
Table of Contents
Reviews (Alphabetically Ordered)
*********
Introduction
You earn a check that only gets you by enough to pay your bills. Maybe you struggle to make a car payment. You really want to play the latest video game, perhaps Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 or Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, but your budget does not allow you to buy both. What should you get?
Picking good games can be hard. Avoiding duds can be even more difficult. That's why smart consumers turn to experts on the subject. Game Freaks 365 was founded to help people choose games that are worth their hard earned dollar and bypass games that are better suited for the trash can. Writing about video games is our passion. This guide aims to help the smart consumer pick the best games that the Xbox 360 has to offer.
Game Freaks 365 (http://gamefreaks365.com) is a video game news and review website that has been around since April 2003. We have covered every major console and handheld since, including the GameCube, PS2, Xbox, GBA, N-Gage, Zodiac, Nintendo DS, PSP, Xbox 360, Wii and PS3.
Nearly 200 reviews from some of the finest games on the Xbox 360 are included in Game Freaks 365's Xbox 360 Review Guide. Popular titles like Batman: Arkham Asylum, Battlefield 3, BioShock 2, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, Catherine, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, Grand Theft Auto IV, Halo: Reach, L.A. Noire, Medal of Honor, Need for Speed Hot Pursuit, Portal 2, Red Dead Redemption, and Resident Evil 5.
So what are you waiting for? Get reading!
*********
Please Note: Reviews for multi-platform games may be from other platforms, unless major differences between the versions are present.
*********
Publisher: 2K Sports
Release Date: November 16, 2005
Available On: Xbox 360
Amped 3 is my favorite video game that features unicorns, action figures being set on fire, Russians, and shiny kitty litter. There aren't any other games featuring enough of this stuff, I must say. But Amped 3 features more kitty litter than you'd ever believe, and it's got some great snowboarding gameplay to boot. Amped 3 is one of the better Xbox 360 launch lineup titles, and it's the only one that's going to have you laughing and scratching your head in confusion within the same gaming session.
I doubted Indie Built could pull off a great game here. Amped 2, which was generally considered too difficult and too technical, bombed on the sales charts and it came as a surprise to me that anyone wanted to pick up XSN's snowboarding franchise. Well, Indie Built did it, and they did one heck of a job making an enjoyable game. What makes Amped 3 so unique is, well, everything that isn't related to the fantastic gameplay itself. You wouldn't think too much of the game from looking at its bright green box art which features a snowboarder and the prominent, bold, and pink Amped 3 logo.
Once you crack open that box and pop the game into your Xbox 360, you'll be thinking differently. Some of the stuff you'll see in this game is more bizarre than anything you'll ever see again. I mentioned unicorns and kitty litter earlier, but those are just two of the seemingly endless items of wonder that are tossed around in this trippy game. I'd like tell you more about the stereotypical anime cutscenes, the cut-and-paste art, or the sock puppets. But I can't. I can't tie any of these things to the Story Mode, and it would be a travesty for me to ruin any of the stuff in this game. It would ruin the "What the heck?" feeling that I was so happy to have while playing Amped 3.
The Story Mode is where most of your time will be spent. There are hundreds of challenges. Some are extremely generic to the genre - score points, go through checkpoints (which in this case are acid-influenced magic circles), or do a trick to impress a sponsor. These goals are the ones I didn't like, and they were the ones that I got really tired of when I was finishing up with the story mode. I especially hated the kitty litter challenges, because I hate picking up random, scattered, unimportant items in games like this.
The ones I enjoyed kept me playing, though, especially the crash-your-sled one. The goal here is to launch your player off of his sled and physically harm him as much as possible. Needless to say, this is endlessly entertaining and constantly funny. It's even funnier when you're not riding on a sled, because sometimes you'll barrel downhill on a chair or a portable toilet or other objects. This is what I wanted to see from such a unique, artistic game--fun, creative modes. Sadly, the generic goals don't do the game any justice, but Amped 3 is a lot of fun to play and that's what allowed me to trudge through the ho-hum junk and reach the exciting stuff.
Indie Built made Amped 3 easier to play (which is something XSN failed to do with Amped 2) and they did so by making the controls very similar to Neversoft's Tony Hawk series. All of the tricks are mapped to the controller's face buttons and grinds are made easier with an auto-snap system that aligns the player with rails. These two factors alone make playing Amped 3 simple and fun while the difficulty comes from the challenges themselves, not the controls. This alone makes the game much better than Amped 2.
While the art is fantastic and the presentation is impressive, the visuals of Amped 3 are its most disappointing factor. Launch titles are expected to show off the power of a new console, not show any kind of shortcomings. Amped 3 doesn't really impress me visually. If you told me this was an Xbox game and I didn't know what you were playing, I wouldn't think twice about it from looking at the graphics.
It certainly doesn't look bad - little touches like powdery snow effects look really nice. It's just that this game's visual caliber is very low when it's compared to 360 beauties like Perfect Dark Zero, NBA 2K6, and Madden 06. The audio factor is quite different, there are hundreds of songs, dozens of artists, and hilarious voice acting to boot. If you're a fan of indie rock, electronica, and hip hop, you'll love the tunes found here. Since the original Amped, I've appreciated the fact that the series has featured so many low-key, unsigned bands.
The Xbox Live factor here is pretty disappointing. There isn't any online multi-player at all, and the most interaction you'll have with other players is through the Leaderboards, which hold records for every single challenge found in the game. I thought it was fun to see how I sized up against other players but I would have loved to actually hit the slopes with someone else. Maybe they'll do it with Amped 4.
Mentioning Amped 4, I'd love to see Indie Built go for another round. Amped 3 is a fantastic game. It offers fun snowboarding gameplay, an art style that will blow your mind, and a story that will bust your gut in laughter. You don't have to sift through a lot of junk here--there are some annoying challenges, the graphics are ho-hum, and the lack of Xbox Live multi-player is certainly a let-down. Other than that, I can't complain. Check this game out, it's great. If nothing else, you'll want to get that "What the heck?" feeling I mentioned before.
Graphics: 5
Sound: 9
Gameplay: 8
Creativity: 10
Replay Value/Game Length: 8
Final: 8.3 out of 10
Written by Cliff
Armored Core 4
Developer: From Software
Publisher: Sega
Release Date: March 20, 2007
Available On: PS3 & Xbox 360
From Software’s Armored Core series has deteriorated since its first few PlayStation entries. In 2005 we saw two entries to the series; the PlayStation 2's Armored Core: Nine Breaker was met with harsh reviews, and the PlayStation Portable’s Armored Core: Formula Front was a beautiful and aurally-pleasing game that didn’t come to the table with interesting gameplay. Does Armored Core 4, the first next-generation entry in the series, inject some much-needed excitement into the franchise?
The story might not draw in the casual gamer. Mega-corporations rule the world, which has fallen into quite the state of disrepair. A small group of liberators plan to knock out these corporations through mecha warfare, and a majority of the missions will put you up against such resistance as “Normals,” or standard mechs; “Nexts,” or typical Armored Core units; and other enemies like self-guided missiles, submarines, and helicopters. The missions generally ask you to attack a certain target or defend one, so they aren’t too complicated and don’t require any overthinking. This doesn’t mean that Armored Core 4 loses that traditional element of strategy, which comes into play any time you create a mech for combat.
The fun in Armored Core lies in its creative element. The mech creation has become much easier thanks to a cleaner interface and fewer uses of acronyms and confusing terms. In other words, you could possibly call this the dumb man’s Armored Core. While you’ll still customize your robot with arms, legs, core units, heads, and various weapons, a few of the other parts have been taken out. For example, since combat rules no longer restrict the amount of boost you can use, coolant units are no longer involved in mech creation. It’s this simplification that could draw in more people to the series, and I find this to be a very beneficial thing for From Software’s game.
Combat is also a lot easier and quite a lot of fun. It’s the polar opposite of From Software’s 2006 effort, Chromehounds. Chromehounds was slow-paced, while Armored Core 4 features some white-knuckle action. There are missions where you will die if you remove your finger from the boost button simply because the enemy Next that you’re fighting is so quick. At least pummeling opponents is made simple with intuitive controls. You’ll use your left and right arm weapons with L1/Left Bumper and R1/Right Bumper or the face buttons, and you can easily switch between left and right arm and back weapons with the press of L2/Left Trigger and R2/Right Trigger. There’s a quick boost function that will instantly propel you in any direction at the expense of some energy, and this quick boost can become quite useful for evasive maneuvers. Basically, Armored Core is finally easy to play. Since it’s easy and fast, it’s fun. Home run, From Software.
I'd say the only single-player flaws are the short missions and the trial-and-error missions. Even early on, you’ll come face-to-face with missions that last 45 seconds, or missions that simply require you to get your ass kicked before you can have a clue of what to do. There are a few times where you’ll feel sucked into the fast-paced combat only to be ripped out because you very quickly destroyed the single mission target–that’s lame. There are other missions, like ones against Nexts, where you’ll have to face a beating before you know what weapons to equip or what battle strategy to have. Still these complaints don’t really hurt the overall experience, which is a fun and exciting one.
Visually, Armored Core 4 doesn’t put Gears of War or MotorStorm to shame, but it most certainly dazzles in some spots with fancy lighting effects and the occasional use of a grainy visual filter. AC units animate very well, though there is some clipping from time to time whenever you pass by a hill or a building. Explosions could have been a bit more...well, explosive, and I would have liked to see the after effects of my destruction a bit more. Since a lot of rubble (and destroyed enemies) disappear quickly from the battlefield, an all-out attack will most likely look barren after the fact. It’s a little disappointing. The sound effects and music are pretty standard, although I will say that I liked the delivery of most of the dialogue. Except for a few lines (mostly the “Come home” lines at the end of a mission), the voice actors do a fantastic job of handling the proper emotion or authoritative tone for whatever situation is at hand.
Finally, with an online multiplayer mode, Armored Core 4 is the fully-featured entry into the series. Devoted mech creators can take their camouflaged, speedy Gundam-inspired bots online and blast the crap out of a friend’s massive, bright pink Mechassault-style brute. This is what AC fans have been wanting, and From Software delivers.
Overall, Armored Core 4 is a huge step forward in every way. It might have been simplified a lot, and a lot of long-time fans might find that to be disappointing, but I think it was a much-needed shot of juice. You’ve got some pretty good graphics, fast-paced destructive mech combat, and online multiplayer. What more could you ask from a mech game? And for heavens’ sake, mech fans, buy this before you even consider touching Gundam or Chromehounds–but you didn’t need me to tell you that.
Graphics: 8
Sound: 8
Gameplay: 8
Creativity: 5.5
Replay Value/Game Length: 7.5
Final: 7.7 out of 10
Written by Cliff
Army of Two
Developer: EA Montreal
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Release Date: March 4, 2008
Available On: PS3 & Xbox 360
It was not long ago that when considering video games, Army of Two was the bee's knees. I remember EGM claiming it as their #1 most-anticipated original IP. There was even enough buzz to spark a Create-Your-Own-Weapon contest. EA Montreal gave the gaming media quite a lot of exciting news about their new project. As a result, like many previous occasions considering EA video games, Army of Two was expected to be a large-scale success.
Following a delay into spring 2008, Army of Two has finally released. With its not-so-gentle-nudge toward using cooperative tactics (with a second human player, for the love of God!), Army of Two and its two lead characters, Rios and Salem, produce many interesting experiences throughout the campaign. As a result, it is a good, fun game to play. That is the absolute most accurate statement I think I can make about the game, because there will be friends that play together in harmony, and these friends will enjoy a very large percentage of the game together. Sadly, however, the game has a handful or two of flaws that can potentially ruin the experience for anyone lacking the patience of a monk in a monastery.
Before I explain more about the game, allow me to first say that my review was written based almost completely on the cooperative multiplayer experience. This is the way that the developers want gamers to play the game, and I felt that it was most necessary to do so. The single-player campaign feels lonely, despite the commands that can be given to the CPU Rios or Salem. Thus, the game is aimed toward people who have others to play with (or Xbox Live/PlayStation Network accounts). For those lacking local multiplayer possibilities, Xbox Live and PlayStation Network fill in the gaps to let everyone enjoy the game's modes.
There are six terrorist-killing missions, each taking place at a different place and point in time. The game's storyline is shoved between levels and told through some very impressive-looking CG scenes. For a third-person shooter, Army of Two's plot is very interesting. It involves a lot of political and military conflict, which one would expect to be full of corruption and back-stabbing. Before the end of the game, Rios and Salem question almost every supporting character's intentions. To keep the smug politicians and gung-ho military men from becoming intolerable, the pair (particularly Salem) provide some comic relief in several different ways. Oh, before I forget mentioning it, there is also a lot of swearing included in the script. A lot. Keep Timmies away from this game.
All six levels provide a lot of chances for friends to use the two-man mechanics EA Montreal has been primping for the last few years. Partners have to use step-jumps to lift their friend up to higher ledges. There are a few parachute scenes, where one player steers the parachute while another snipes and shoots at enemies on the ground. There are several (a few too many) back-to-back sequences, where enemies simply pour from all sides while Rios and Salem spin around shooting in slow-motion. The Aggro system is also pretty interesting: one person can divert the attention of the enemy and maintain it by means of suppressive fire and aggressive tactics while the other flanks or performs an important objective. For a good reason, this is the very first thing introduced when the campaign begins. Without taking advantage of Aggro, it is almost impossible to succeed in any of the missions.
Some objectives are optional, and offer the benefits of extra cash. There are also hidden cash drops in each level, and collecting them is helpful because the cash can be used to buy and upgrade weapons. There are a lot of primary weapons (assault rifles, shotguns), secondary weapons (submachine guns, handguns), and special weapons (sniper rifles, rocket/grenade launchers) to use. Upgrading Rios' and Salem's arsenal is one of the game's best parts. Weapons can be equipped with new barrels, cartridge extensions, stocks, and more. Essentially, anything from a P90 to a .44 revolver can become a pimped-out killing toy (literally).
Unfortunately, this is the proverbial peak of the hill where I will shift the attention from the upward to the downward. As I mentioned before, there are a few parts of Army of Two that are flaws, and there are also some that are good or bad based on personal opinion and experience. As a multiplayer-based experience, the best experience can only be had as it was intended: cooperatively. Even if that happens, though, there are some hurdles for gamers to jump over.
To me, it is frustrating to be annoyed, even a small percentage of the time, with the game's most focused mechanics. The two-man tactics dominate the experience, and sometimes it all feels gimmicky. There are a lot of places to use different two-man abilities, but I feel like they were intentionally spread out to avoid staleness. Step-jumps can be useful (and/or mandatory), but they are not the most graceful or speedy. Thus I often groaned when I needed to nudge my friend to come over and give me a boost. At least getting around the levels is easy. Too easy, though, thanks to the game's GPS system that actually draws an arrow on the ground pointing you in the exact direction. I cannot stand getting lost in a video game of any kind. I like small clues or a nudge. Army of Two's GPS takes you by the hand and basically puts you on a monorail to success.
Army of Two has the production value to impress a lot of people and the exciting gameplay to interest just as many. The basic mechanics work for the most part, but I noticed another small batch of problems. Beside the fact that the enemy models and objectives become repetitive, there are control-related issues. It feels like there is a 10-foot radius around Rios and Salem that acts as a blind spot, because no matter how hard I would try to get them to attack or shoot something within that radius, they could not do it. Instead I would often be forced to backpedal, most likely just a few feet before getting blasted to the ground. This would not be such a problem if the melee attack was effective, but it is not even easy to use. In fact, throughout most of the game I ignored the melee attack due to how long it takes to use and the fact that it often does not even kill its victim. When buying weapons, one should consider how much more effective the weapons will be when they are fully equipped. Unfortunately, Army of Two does not indicate which weapons can and cannot be upgraded. Watch out for the MP7.
Probably the most annoying problem of all is the way that Rios and Salem become black holes when they are on their own doing anything. If a partner goes down, the other has to stand above him and heal him by waiting on an on-screen meter to show the progress of the healing, which depletes if one of the characters is shot. As fleshy black holes that absorb painful bullets and rockets and grenades, Rios and Salem get hit a lot in general. Most of the enemies, even on the lowest difficulty setting, can pick off a flea from a couple hundred yards away.
Army of Two is a good game. It is fun to play with a friend, particularly if the pair playing the game can cooperate very well for six missions of slightly to very-repetitive, objective-competing, terrorist-killing, third-person action. However, it is not quite the great one that I think the world expected. It has a few flaws that can severely hinder the experience for a lot of gamers. It is no surprise to me that there are mixed reviews and so many differing opinions on many different aspects of the game. It all depends on how the game is played, and how much patience can be had getting shot by enemies who had might as well be somewhere in the Andromeda galaxy.
Graphics: 8
Sound: 9
Gameplay: 7
Creativity: 7
Replay Value/Game Length: 6.5
Final: 7.5 out of 10
Written by Cliff
Army of Two: The 40th Day
Developer: EA Montreal
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Release Date: January 12, 2010
Available On: PS3 & Xbox 360
Following up on 2008's Army of Two, EA Montreal set out to up the ante. Released in the dead of winter, Army of Two: The 40th Day improves the core single player gameplay while ratcheting up the multi-player to compete with the likes of Gears of War 2. Still, co-operative action is the name of the game. It's called Army of Two, after all. Unless you have a friend to play with at home in split-screen or online, I'll be upfront with you right now and say that this isn't worth your time.
That being said, Army of Two: The 40th Day is a significant improvement upon its predecessor. The A.I. is vastly improved and some of the glitches that I saw in the first game don't seem to be a problem anymore. There was one weird glitch that I ran into where after a cutscene, my friend who was on the same side of a wall as me all of a sudden was stuck on the other side of a locked door and could not get through. Aside from that, I really did not experience many problems.
This is a game of teamwork where the actions of your comrade can determine whether you live or die. Certainly this is a mixed blessing, depending on who you are playing with. Fortunately for you, if you have a gun crazy ally, the game will pull aggro on them and the enemies will start to target at the guy doing all of the firing. This plays strategically into your hands if say you want to pull out a sniper rifle and pick off a few of them. Other strategic moves you can make include taking an enemy hostage.
As far as the weapons go in Army of Two: The 40th Day, you have a pretty sizable number of variations to choose from. I was rather fond of the shotgun, although the P90 and sniper rifle come in handy as well. There are numerous customization options for you to choose, ranging from new scopes to larger clips. You can even change the color of your weapons with various skins, add silencers and stabbing devices like screwdrivers/bayonets.
The single-player is not all that satisfying if you play by yourself. This is probably the biggest flaw with the game, although it is rather clear that it is intended to be played with two people. There aren't very many games that can demonstrate human-like reaction in their allied A.I. One of the biggest problems comes from the fact that you can't coordinate simply by saying “pull aggro while I find myself a good sniper's nest.” Having PSN and Xbox Live for online co-op is a great advantage.
In closing, Army of Two: The 40th Day is a solid sequel to a franchise that has a lot of potential. The gameplay mechanics feel a lot like Gears of War, except I would argue that it is more fun to play co-op in Army of Two. You feel like a team working together to achieve the same objective. The story is a bit out there, a terrorist group essentially levels Shanghai with explosives in buildings across the city, but the gameplay shines where it should. Definitely check this out if you have a fix for some co-op action.
Graphics: 8.5
Sound: 8
Gameplay: 8.5
Creativity: 8
Replay Value/Game Length: 8
Final: 8.2 out of 10
Written by Kyle
AC/DC Live: Rock Band Track Pack
Developer: Harmonix
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Release Date: November 4, 2008
Available On: PS2, PS3 Wii & Xbox 360
The success of Guitar Hero spawned Rock Band. Now the success of both is spawning a dizzying number of downloadable songs and packs for users to rock out to. Guitar Hero: Aerosmith was the first standalone music game with a single band as the main focus. Now it's AC/DC's turn in their Rock Band Track Pack AC/DC Live. Unlike Guitar Hero: Aerosmith you only get 18 songs.
Basically AC/DC Live is a bare basic standalone Rock Band game that does not require either 1 or 2 to play. So technically I guess if you were an AC/DC fan and owned Guitar Hero, you could buy this game without having to buy the full versions of Rock Band 1 or 2. That said, there is a downside. You don't get a tour mode and you can't import these songs to either Rock Band 1 or 2. This means that you will have to play all AC/DC songs all the time or you will have to switch between discs. Below is a song list:
Back in Black
Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap
For Those About to Rock (We Salute You)
Fire Your Guns
Heatseeker
Hell Ain't a Bad Place to Be
Hells Bells
High Voltage
Highway To Hell
Jailbreak
Let There Be Rock
Moneytalks
Shoot to Thrill
T.N.T.
The Jack
Thunderstruck
Whole Lotta Rosie
You Shook Me All Night Long
I was surprised at the quality of the tracks since they used live music instead of recordings from a studio. These are still the same great AC/DC songs that you know and love, only with the added atmosphere of having a crowd. I'm particularly fond of “Thunderstuck”, “Highway to Hell” and “Back in Black”, although there is not a bad song in the entire game. Essentially you are paying for an interactive Greatest Hits of AC/DC.
I would pick up AC/DC Live for the sole fact that I am a big fan of theirs. Obviously if you are not then you probably will not be interested in this game. While the game modes support both single player and multi-player, there is no online multi-player or true story mode. It also is a bummer that you have to switch between Rock Band discs if you want to play non-AC/DC songs. Nonetheless, this is a great compilation of songs that make for a decent AC/DC Rock Band experience.
Graphics: 8
Sound: 10
Gameplay: 8
Creativity: 6
Replay Value/Game Length: 5
Final: 7.4 out of 10
Written by Kyle
Assassin's Creed II
Developer: Ubisoft Montreal
Publisher: Ubisoft
Release Date: November 17, 2009
Available On: PC, PS3 & Xbox 360
In Assassin's Creed 2, you continue playing the role of Desmond Miles immediately following the events of the first game. Once again you return to the animus to unravel the memories and secrets stored in Edmond's genes. In the animus, now version 2.0, you play the role of Ezio Auditore da Firenze, Desmond's Italian ancestor in the 15th century. Ubisoft Montreal invites you to re-enter the animus and unravel the mystery of the first game.
The story in Assassin's Creed 2 is more personal and brings the story's two protagonists closer to each other. Ezio's motives throughout the game are fueled by revenge after the murder of his family. In the animus you explore a few cities in the Italian peninsula during the Renaissance, including Florence and Venice. Assassin's Creed 2’s story goes back and forth between Ezio and Desmond in a more involved way than the previous Assassin's Creed. At one point, Ezio's world and Desmond's world intersect in an alarming way, like a rift between realities. This adds an element of terror to the game, perhaps also acting as foreshadowing, that creates a more organic story and reduces the jarring contrast of going in and out of the animus.
Your experience in the animus feels more like a digital simulation in this second excursion. The game often employs effects showing the environments in the animus as being constructed out of digital pieces, creating a more dramatic separation between Ezio's world inside the animus and Desmond's world. The game also features a complete day and night cycle. The areas in Assassin's Creed 2 are teeming with life. A variety of NPCs walk about in the cities with some spaces even feeling crowded. Assassin's Creed 2 looks amazing. There is less visible screen-tearing than the previous Assassin’s Creed game on the PS3 but it is still there. The Xbox 360 version of Assassin’s Creed 2 is known to perform better. Though the cityscapes don't have the same dramatic impact as those in the first Assassin’s Creed, the reproduction of the Italian renaissance architecture is impressive.
There are neither children nor elderly in Assassin's Creed 2 but there are fatsoes. I never really felt like I was in a real living city because most of the crowds of NPCs seem purposeless. The smaller locations and countryside showed the Italian culture better than the big cities though I never saw any wineries or vineyards. I do think I saw some small olive trees in the Toscana map (Tuscany) but those kinds of cultural nuances seemed generally washed over. It wasn’t until later in the game, during the “carnevale”, that Italian renaissance culture really shined through. Assassin's Creed 2 does not have cultural presence as strong as the first game unless you play it in Italian.
Assassin's Creed 2 sounds great, though the English dialogue with Italian accents got on my nerves really fast. Instead, I played Assassin’s Creed 2 with Italian dialogue and English subtitles. That created a vastly more believable and natural experience. Sometimes the quality of the dialog recordings comes off as flat and not quite in stereo, like watching a dubbed movie. Other times, everything sounds top notch. Some parts of the soundtrack are culturally significant and greatly improve the atmosphere of the game while other parts are less inspired. The soundtrack is never over the top. The crowds and environments all sound very natural and create a fantastic ambiance.
The overall gameplay in Assassin's Creed 2 has not deviated much from the original. There is a greater variety of missions, addressing the repetitiveness of the first game. There is a chase sequence and a flying sequence that breaks some of the monotony and they are spaced well apart. Variety is also added by introducing a family villa which you can renovate and derive income from. There are puzzle elements and an expanded use of Eagle Vision. You have a greater selection of weapons, more kinds of enemies, secret locales to explore, and the NPCs have greater utility as well.
The game still relies on collecting items, though this time they have a significant impact on the game. The camera remains a mix of good and bad. The free running gameplay is still hindered frequently by a camera that won’t stay put or thinks it knows better. The default difficulty setting is not any real challenge unless you get sloppy and lazy. Assassin's Creed 2 is generally easier than the first game. There are no invisible walls, as the limits of the animus are still clearly marked and the game still keeps you on a fairly linear path.
Assassin's Creed 2 is mostly an improvement over the first title. There are some performance improvements on the PS3 with less screen tearing and slightly smoother frame rates. The story is improved in the sense that it is more dramatic. Repetitiveness has been reduced and there is the small simulation element created by the family villa. I definitely enjoyed Assassin's Creed 2 more than I did the first game. Aside from collecting all of the treasures and feathers, there is not much else to do once the end credits roll. There are no branching paths in the story and there is no multiplayer. There is DLC that extends the playtime of Assassin's Creed 2. If you enjoyed the first game, Assassin's Creed 2 definitely delivers a superior experience. I am definitely looking forward to the next game in the series.
Graphics: 9
Sound: 9
Gameplay: 9
Creativity: 9
Replay Value/Game Length: 9
Final: 9 out of 10
Written by Angel
Batman: Arkham Asylum
Developer: Rocksteady Studios
Publisher: Eidos
Release Date: August 25, 2009
Available On: PC, PS3 & Xbox 360
Batman Begins and The Dark Knight reset the Batman movie franchise in big ways. They deserted the campy and more kid-friendly path that Val Kilmer and George Clooney had taken the franchise with Batman Forever and Batman & Robin. You can make a similar comparison to Batman: Arkham Asylum for video games. After a string of unsuccessful and often cheesy games based in the Batman universe, the developers at Rocksteady Studios finally bring the series back to its comic roots.
From the first minute that you play Batman: Arkham Asylum, you can tell that this is not your regular Batman game. You play in dark, gritty environments full of lunatics on the loose. The developers tried to take a cinematic approach with camera angles, lighting and storyline to which they succeeded in giving the feeling that you are actually playing in a Batman movie.
The game is full of cameos and Batman history. The Joker headlines the cast of the bad guys. Not a surprise as he is Batman's arch nemesis. Aside from Joker you have his girlfirned, Harley Quinn, Bane, Killer Croc, Poison Ivy, Scarecrow, as well as Tsaz (a serial killer from the comics). Top notch voice talent was recruited with the likes of Kevin Conroy (Batman), Mark Hamill (The Joker) and Arleen Sorkin (Harley Quinn), all from Batman: The Animated Series in the early 1990s reprising their roles. This helps to give Arkham Asylum a certain legitimacy that past games have not had.
All of the game is based in Arkham Asylum and the surrounding buildings, an island off of the Gotham shores. The developers did a fantastic job recreating various parts of Arkham: the medical wing, botanical gardens, sewers, caves, the mansion and so on. The developers did a good job of balancing open roam environments with a reliable mapping system. This gives you the feeling that you have the freedom to do whatever you want, but at the same time, the map makes it hard to get lost or not know what to do.
Speaking of getting around, Batman is equipped with a number of different gadgets. At his disposal is a Grappling Hook, Bat Claw (which can grab baddies as well as pesky ventilation covers), Batarang, Line Launcher (basically a horizontal grappling hook), explosive gel (blasts through walls and glass, but can also be laid as traps for unsuspecting bad guys), and a decrypter to unlock doors. All of these will get deployed at different points of the game and can be upgraded.
Of course, Batman is not solely reliant on his gear. He also has a sick set of melee abilities. After all, Batman is a well-trained martial artist. Joker's goons are well equipped themselves with bars, baseball bats, knives, tasers, rifles and the like. While combat is fairly easy (there is only one main button to punch), you will have to time counters correctly and use stealth tactics when multiple guards are equipped. You will learn quickly that a spray of gunfire takes Batman down within seconds.
Most of the missions in Batman: Arkham Asylum having you go from one point of the island to another, rescuing characters, finding items and foiling Joker's plot. There really aren't side missions, but you can collect these things called Riddler trophies that unlock challenges outside of the main story mode. Collecting enough Riddler trophies will unlock achievements/trophies as well. Then there are a number of boss fights that, for the most part, are good if overly easy.
Batman: Arkham Asylum is the game that Batman fans have been wanting for a long time. With an ample supply of villains, kick ass gameplay, a storyline that arguably is better than some of the movie attempts of the mid to late 90s, and voice talent from the beloved Animated Series, what's not to love about Batman: Arkham Asylum. Throw in some challenges, a 20 minute “making of” video, along with trailers and video vignettes for the game and you have a package well worth the purchase. Whether you are a Batman comic book fan, cartoon series fan or movie fan, Batman: Arkham Asylum delivers.
Graphics: 9
Sound: 9
Gameplay: 9.5
Creativity: 9
Replay Value/Game Length: 7.5
Final: 9 out of 10
Written by Kyle
Battlefield 3
Developer: DICE
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Release Date: October 25, 2011
Available On: PC, PS3 & Xbox 360
Step aside Call of Duty - there's a new sheriff in town. Battlefield 3 launched to an enormous marketing campaign blitz blanket televisions and websites with $50 million worth of ads. On display was a game that looked extremely promising with its awe-inspiring graphics and fast-paced action. The good news is that the game lives up to expectations, perhaps even surpassing them.
While Battlefield has long been a PC gaming staple, console gamers have mostly focused on Call of Duty. EA wants to change that with Battlefield 3. The focus is clearly on multi-player, although a single-player campaign also exists. It seems more like a generic after-thought and is clearly a rip-off of Modern Warfare’s Middle Eastern levels, gunship missions and over-the-top action.
The multi-player is where most people will find themselves in Battlefield 3. Like almost all EA games these days it requires an online game pass, which basically means that if you buy the game used you will need to pay EA money just to get online. We haven’t hidden the fact on this site that online passes are an assault on people’s property rights (and it’s worth noting that Call of Duty still does not use them), so the value of the game takes a hit from that standpoint.
Even with that said, Battlefield 3 is a superior multi-player experience. It feels like the next logical evolution in online shooters while Call of Duty remains unchanged for the past five years. Minor annoyances in Call of Duty, such as the inability to customize your weapon load-out, are addressed in Battlefield 3. Much larger complaints, such as the ever-annoying problem of campers in Call of Duty, are made much more difficult in Battlefield 3 with an emphasis on teamwork and open levels rather than hard-to-find camping spots.
The maps are sprawling, graphically stunning, and highly destructible. You may think that you are safe inside of a building, but have your back to it for just a few seconds and a tank shell could bring the entire wall crumbling down. I am usually not a big fan of vehicular combat, especially in first-person shooters. Battlefield 3 does it in a way that is not only balanced, but actually makes sense. This game would be unplayable if vehicles were not included due to the size of the maps.
By far the most consistent annoyance in Battlefield 3 is the unpredictable nature of spawn points. You will often start a match either facing an enemy or having one within a few feet looking directly at you. This is especially a problem in the Team Deathmatch mode where the maps have been condensed. Other modes allow you to spawn on your squad mates wherever they are on the map, so if you spawn in the middle of a gun fight it is your fault and not the game’s.
Unlike Call of Duty, which does a poor job of encouraging teamwork, Battlefield 3 puts a heavy emphasis on it. Really it is imperative in certain game modes. Try taking out an enemy base by planting bombs without the assistance of your team. This innovative mode gives you two initial targets and a limit of only seventy-five lives. If you run out of lives, it’s game over. The team on defense simply has to prevent both targets from setting off. If both targets do go off, however, a new set of two targets become the focus of action. Ultimately it takes three different sets of two targets to win this mode, so on paper the defense has an advantage, but again, it takes a good amount of cooperation when you are being assaulted with everything from Humvees, tanks, fighter jets and helicopters.
Battlefield 3 is the game for you if you like online first-person shooting action. I would go so far as saying that it is the king of online multi-player. The number of options given to you will satisfy any gamer. Want to be a sniper? Sure thing. How about a mechanic that can repair vehicles? They have that too. If driving tanks is your thing or flying helicopters, Battlefield 3 will give you a hard-on. It plays like a refined version of last year’s moderately well-received Medal of Honor.
Finally a game has come along that can proudly claim to have surpassed Call of Duty in a number of areas. Fanboys from both camps will argue over the merits of that argument. I’ll certainly be the first to admit that it depends on your style of play. However, a few things are indisputable. Battlefield 3 looks like a crisp shooter with graphics that closely resemble real-life while Call of Duty is using an engine that is beginning to look dated. Battlefield 3’s multi-player puts a heavier emphasis on teamwork and its game modes punish camping. I still think that Call of Duty has a better control scheme and streamlined menu system, but it has changed so little that they have allowed the competition to out-innovate. If you have to choose between the two, Battlefield 3 is the more memorable online experience.
Graphics: 9.5
Sound: 9
Gameplay: 9
Creativity: 8
Replay Value/Game Length: 10
Final: 9.1 out of 10
Written by Kyle Bell
Battlestations: Midway
Developer: Eidos
Publisher: Eidos
Release Date: January 30, 2007
Available On: PC & Xbox 360
History buffs have in the past been relegated to reliving their textbook imaginations or real-life combat experiences with first-person shooters like Medal of Honor and Call of Duty or with strategy games like Ages of Empires, Risk and Codename: Panzers. As far as I am aware, no company has attempted what Eidos has attempted. Mixing elements of real-time strategy, fighter pilot, warship and submarine combat, Battlestations: Midway will not just take you to war, it allows you to experience it from every angle.
Sounds like a lot of game, doesn't it? It is, and there's also a lot of learning involved. Battlestations: Midway does a great job of putting the gamer in control. Once you get down the basics with the tutorial, you will start to learn the nuances of the game. Skipping the tutorial outright will cost you big time, although I must say they could have done a much better job making it interesting. Even though you could probably manage the first couple missions on your own, you need to know the intricacies of the game.
Foolishly I thought that I could manage without the assistance of lessons from a bad voice actor. Once I went back and bothered to learn about the game in more detail, I found out that it is really quite deep. Not only are you responsible for your vessel (and any aircraft that may be on it), but you are in command of an entire fleet in some cases. It sounds pretty overbearing, and it can be at times, but thankfully the developers employed quite a few mechanisms so that you are not left stranded when the going gets tough. Units will defend and repair themselves and follow in packs, even though everything can be overridden by the player.
There can be a lot of micromanaging involved. For instance, if a ship is under attack, you can go into a repair menu to assign members of your crew to different areas of the ship. You may have a leak that needs to be dealt with, but your ship can only hold so much water, even with the pumps working. Your ship may catch on fire, in which case you should assign crew to deal with it before too much damage is sustained. If the rudder gets damaged, you will lose control of the ship until it gets fixed. Finally, if your engine fails, the ship isn't going anywhere until the crew makes necessary repairs. Obviously one problem can lead to more problems, and as they build up, the harder it will be to manage.
Now let's talk briefly about the different vehicles you will be using. As I said in the introduction, you will be taking to both sea (above and below) and air. You start the game during the surprise Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor making your way back to your ship after a long night. Using nothing more than a gun boat, you confront the onslaught of Japanese fighters and will need to sink a sub. You will follow up on this mission with a little revenge of your own in the sky and from a ship. Eventually you are going to be protecting bombers and sinking Japanese battleships with an aircraft carrier.
It is all really quite impressive to see in action, whether you are watching the computer carry out your orders or attacking the enemy yourself. The units are authentic in both their look and feel. An aircraft carrier will turn slower than a turtle, your dive bombers will fiercely plunge like a hawk, and submarines will slowly pace themselves under the water. Your aircraft will need to reload their arsenal after a single bombing run and your submarines will need to come up for air. Pretty much everything you would expect from a realistic naval experience you get from this game.
One of the most important tools in Battlestations: Midway is the map. From here you can issue a range of order to your units. Even though you can do this using commands in your regular view, you will only get precise targets with the map. This is where all of the strategy comes into play. Battlestations: Midway becomes a game of chess as you reposition your forces on the map to better respond to the battlefield. You can set multiple way-points, allowing you to take an enemy by surprise, avoid units that may do you harm or strategically place them for future use. You can also set units to follow and defend other units.
If you have been waiting to take control of powerful U.S. military units in a video game, you probably won't find a more realistic and option-heavy game on the market. There is so much that I could write about with Battlestations: Midway that it's difficult to sort out, and I haven't even touched the online multi-player yet. You can face up to eight players over Xbox Live in four vs. four American vs. Japanese battles. The single player is just a taste of what to expect from the epic battles that you will face online. This game was made to be played against humans. With dozens of units taking to the sky and sea, Battlestations: Midway is one of the few games on Xbox 360 that is hard to imagine existing on past hardware. This is a true next-gen war simulation experience that you should not pass up.
Graphics: 7.5
Sound: 7
Gameplay: 9
Creativity: 10
Replay Value/Game Length: 9
Final: 8.7 out of 10
Written by Kyle
Battlefield: Bad Company
Developer: DICE
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Release Date: June 24, 2008
Available On: PS3 & Xbox 360
Online multi-player is beginning to monopolize the time of many gamers. So instead of focusing heavily on single-player, EA is playing along with its consumer base. EA has tried this before. Anyone remember a few years ago when a multi-player focused game hit consoles (PS2 and Xbox) from the developers at DICE? The name of the game was Battlefield 2: Modern Combat. That was 2005. Enter 2008: another multi-player focused game from EA, this time on PS3 and Xbox 360, called Battlefield: Bad Company. What's changed in the three years that have passed?
One major thing that has changed is the technology. There were a lot more limitations with the last generation of hardware that aren't a problem anymore. Seemingly endless maps? Yep. Vehicular mayhem, explosions and, yes, more explosions. You've got it. Battlefield: Bad Company isn't a war simulator, but it's a damn fun and frantic battlefield to play on. You can also play with up to 24 of your friends and enemies in a virtually lag-free environment.
The game teaches you early on that nothing stands between you and your objective. In the single-player campaign, one of the first things you are told to create your own entrance to a building by blowing it up. It's not just that, though. You also get to man a number of different vehicles, ranging from Humvees to tanks. The tank is a particularly useful (and deadly) vehicle in multi-player. Although it lacks agility, it more than makes up for it in power.
The single-player is the perfect place to start in order to get familiar with controls. Unlike some multi-player centered games, Battlefield: Bad Company has an extensive single-player campaign, complete with story and a variety of missions. You play as a private in the B Company with three others in your squad. B Company is composed of groups of misfits and is known by its nickname "Bad Company". There's a good dose of humor mixed in with the action as you make your way across the Russian countryside.
Once you are done with the single-player make your way online to play with the big boys. While the single-player is good, this is where the real fun starts. The lone game mode in multi-player is called Gold Rush. It's a take on your basic offense/defense type base mode, except in this you have to detonate a series of three crates filled with gold at designated spots on the map. The catch: three won't do it. There are a series of three crates, and then another, and another. If at any time the offensive team fails to destroy all three crates within a certain number of lives (which is displayed as a bar at the top of the screen), the defenders win. I am a bit perplexed why this is the only game mode they offer, but it is good nonetheless.
All in all, Battlefield: Bad Company is a purchase that you will not likely regret. If you are looking for a new multi-player game to play for the summer, Battlefield: Bad Company is a good bet. Imagine playing Battlefield with a hint of Call of Duty 4. It probably isn't going to win any awards, but it is a good game to give you an excuse to stay inside in the cool AC and get through the scorching heat.
Graphics: 8.5
Sound: 8.5
Gameplay: 8.5
Creativity: 8
Replay Value/Game Length: 8.5
Final: 8.4 out of 10
Written by Kyle
The Beatles: Rock Band
Developer: Harmonix
Publisher: MTV Games
Release Date: September 9, 2009
Available On: PS3, Wii and Xbox 360
The single greatest band to ever live. There, I said it. The Beatles are without a doubt, at least in my mind, the pinnacle of music in the modern age. You can say what you want about their talent, status as pop stars or encounters with drugs. There is no denying their impact on not just music but society as a whole. Now nearly 50 years after The Beatles formed as a band their songs have been digitally remastered and made available in the form of a video game for a new generation.
The Rock Band franchise is now in its third year. Not a whole lot has changed to the formula since the first in 2007. The Beatles: Rock Band is still about stringing together combos, scoring as many points as you can on a given song and collecting stars based on your performance. What's different is the band, the story mode and the treasury trove of unlockable content that fans of The Beatles will undoubtedly find pleasure in (such as an edited Christmas album that they released in 1963).
The story mode (which can be played with up to four people) is the heart of the experience, although it is worth noting that the developers made all of the songs unlocked from the start so that people can jump right in to play their favorite songs. The story is told through still photographs and artwork drawn up by the fine folks at Harmonix. It spans the entire career of The Beatles from their start in 1960 through the entire decade.
The order of the songs and where they are played are sequential to The Beatles history. Some of the songs are played on stage, while others are performed in studio. The early works take place at The Cavern Club, followed by an appearance on The Ed Sullivan Show, opened their second American tour at Shea Stadium and their Japanese debut at Budokan. Their final years were spent at their Abbey Road Studios and the rooftop of the Apple Corps Headquarters is the location of the final chapter of the game.
Aside from the various locations that the band played at, the developers at Harmonix decided to add a little fab flavor. The parts of the game that take place in the studio have “dreamscapes”, where representative images are shown on the screen while the song is playing. For instance, in “Octopus's Garden”, The Beatles are seen walking around in an underwater environment. Likewise, “I Am the Walrus” has a psychedelic feel that I think The Beatles would even admire. The dreamscapes are pure artwork and can be distracting when playing because of how breathtaking they can be. That said, the distraction is welcome, since it is all part of The Beatles experience.
If you are a fan of The Beatles, or at least appreciate their music, there is a good chance that you will enjoy The Beatles: Rock Band. The entire setlist is dedicated exclusively to The Beatles. Only the most obsessed fan would find the $250 Limited Edition set to be a justifiable purchase. Everyone else should be more than happy with the standard version of the game. I highly recommend that you pick up The Beatles: Rock Band. While the 45 song set list is rather short and quick to play through (you could easily beat it in one sitting), the quality of the songs more than makes up for it.
Graphics: 9
Sound: 10
Gameplay: 9.5
Creativity: 7.5
Replay Value/Game Length: 9
Final: 9 out of 10
Written by Kyle
The Bigs
Developer: Blue Castle Games
Publisher: 2K Sports
Release Date: June 26, 2007
Available On: PS2, PS3, Wii & Xbox 360
In the fall of 2006, with the release of Wii across the United States and world, it looked as if Nintendo's new home console would revolutionize the way we play sports video games. Wii Sports showed us just what time of potential there was with baseball, tennis, golf and boxing. EA Sports showed us what potential there was with football in Madden NFL 07. Yet no publisher has stepped up to the plate for a simulator baseball game. 2K Sports had a chance and they passed it up with their MLB 2K7 release, instead leaving room for The Bigs in June 2007.
The Bigs is to baseball games what Arena is to the NFL. It is much faster paced, higher scoring and over-the-top. That kind of game would seem perfect for the Wii, a casual gaming system whose audience might find traditional baseball too slow. Unfortunately, due ironically to the controls, the Wii version actually is more challenging to get used to than its counterpart on PS2, PS3 and Xbox 360. All of the versions, however, suffer from a game mechanic that puts too much emphasis on hitting homeruns.
The sad thing about The Bigs is that I would rather play Wii Sports than this more fleshed out version of baseball. You have pitching, you have hitting, defense, and team management. All of the essentials of baseball, two of which Wii Sports left out, and they get it wrong on the execution. For starters, Wii Sports has a better batting system in place. There is not 1:1 hitting in place. That is, the movements done off screen will not match on-screen like Wii Sports nearly does. Instead, a flick of the wrist will either hit or miss the ball.
The controls are also my biggest gripe on defense. To pitch, you have to do a certain motion, of which the Wii will not always register it correctly. All they really had to do was combine the pitching motion and velocity with a button press (A or B, for instance), and you would have had a better system. Throwing can be just as unintuitive, as you have to flick your Wiimote in the direction of the base. This is fine for first or third base, but when it comes to throwing to second or home, the game will sometimes get the two confused.