Ok, so undoubtedly since the rise of story-driven game titles in the late-1980s particularly with the Castlevania and Legend of Zelda franchises, there have been those few special games for whom many are enthralled by until they get to the ending and are crushingly disappointed either by the final boss or the conclusion to the games' overarching story. Perhaps the greatest examples of this in recent years are Mass Effect 3 (2012), Halo 2 (2004) and the Final Fantasy XIII trilogy (2009-2014). Now for the first two I have to say that the anger towards their controversial endings was somewhat misguided.
Out of these three examples, Mass Effect 3, the final segment of the massivley popular trilogy of space-adventure epics featuring what many call one of the best video games of all time (Mass Effect 2 (2010 for PC & Xbox 360, 2011 for PS 3)), probably gains the most disproportionate hatred for its admittedly pretty weak ending. Now don't get me wrong, while I didn't perhaps get into the franchise as a whole (with exception to the final level of the first game and most of the second game of course), I do freely admit and firmly beleive that the three not-all-that-dissimilar endings of the third game were pretty bad and didn't represent the full potentional of how the developers and designers could go about ending this truly epic storyline. I don't think its as much a mishandling of the material as it was a struggle to find a suitably epic ending to the story of the franchise and while the epic aspect in this case was more than acheived, the actual excecution and meaning of it was cluttered, flimsy and each different ending on its own and also compared to each other were pretty weak compared to the enticing end of the third game and the heart-stoppingly action-packed ending of the second one.
But did the ending of Mass Effect 3 really ruin the game as a whole? Okay sure, the ending was a pile of crusty wank but the game itself was still suitably epic up until that point, the gameplay was almost as good as in Mass Effect 2 and the impact of your choices in previous games as well as in the current one had a deep, meaningful set of both moral and philosophical implications to them. Regardless of how you look at it, even with the shitty ending, Mass Effect 3 still works as a game and experience. Think of it like having the best 3-course meal you've ever had but when the waiter offers you an after-dinner mint he/she instead sucks on an imperial mint for 30 seconds then spits it at you but then apologises for doing so. ....Ok...that metaphor might be a bit extreme but you get my point. People applauded the game itself for staying true to its predecessors while allowing for a more epic story and more difficult and challenging circumstances within which the refreshingly simple game mechanics could truly flourish. Combining this alltogether with the series' recurring aspect of allowing decicions made in playthroughs of previous games to impact the story of the current one and you have am experience that is emboldened by so many well received strengths even going so much as to include.
Of course this is just the opinion of one person, a man who in fact has never been any good at any of the Mass Effect games. Regardless, even as soemeone who sucked as bad at playing these games as Square-Enix are at convincing everybody that the Final Fantasy XIII trilogy was worth any good will, I have to admit that the story of the Mass Effect series is something so bombastic, large and epic that you have to admire it for its scope as it just manages to elevate itself above the crappy ending at the end of the thrid game. Yet sometimes there might be a bad ending which when looked at closer, actually reveals a clever thematical and narrative ploy to raise the plot of a game from average to hihgly enthralling. Take a step forwards, one of the most famed and popular FPS games of all time, Halo 2.
Image taken from: http://www.avwproductions.com/techheads/wordpress/why-halo-2-is-the-greatest-game-of-all-time/
To all extents and purposes, one could just as easily argue that the Halo Series (2001-) has as much of an epic storyline and plot as that of the Mass Effect games. In Halo as in Mass Effect, we follow an elite corps (in this case the mighty spartan marines) as they combine with the united forces of either humanity or an allied galaxy to fend off the advances of an enroaching alien speacies hellbent on total annihalation. I was perhaps never that into the Halo games as much as my two best freinds Brendan and Sam (aka Thunderrunner487 and Telescuffle respectivley) perhaps best shown by how a good chunk of their millenial memorabilia is tied to the original Halo trilogy while mine was tied to games like Spyro: Year of the Dragon (2000) or Company of Heroes (2006). Regardless, I have to admire the Halo series for combining its likewise bombasitc and enthralling storyline with its refreshingly simple gameplay and sometimes very relatable characters particularly in games like Halo Reach (2010). It is perhaps not too hard then to see why the series as a whole has gained such a widespread following in the mainstream gaming public and why my freind Sam (aka Telescuffle) has pointed out to me that his favourite game in the franchise to this date is Halo 2.
Image taken from: http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/File:Halo_2_028.jpg
But what about the ending to Halo 2 that has so many people up in a tizzy when they talk about it? After all, the game was released in 2004 and so its been quite a while since the initial controversy about Halo 2's ending has died down. If you don't know however, Halo 2 ends with Master Chief (the main character of the series) boarding a battered warship headed towards a swirling sapce battle around planet earth asked by the character Admiral Hood what he is doing before Cheif calmy replies "Sir, finishing this fight" as the game then fades to black after which the credits roll. In a purely thematical sense, I can perhaps see why people were pissed by this ending when the game first came out as it is indeed very abrupt, leaves little closure on the story of the game individually and leaves us unsure about the fate of Master Chief other than his oncoming glory in the fight that he's yet again heading towards.
Now to be fair, this would be frustrating to a first time player. However, contextualised within the game itself and the original trilogy as a whole, the ending to Halo 2 makes a twisted sort of sense. The game itself rides narrativley upon the idea that humanity is in a desperate struggle with the alien forces known as the covenant and the flood, in order to defeat this threat, Master Cheif and the player are repeatedly thrown into harsh and bloody missions throughout with many citing Halo 2 as having some of the hardest in the franchise to date. Therefore, the openess of the ending leaves it up to the player to realise that as the initial threat has been dealth with, there is still much to do and it is only up to Master Chief (and in turn the player, thus creating a narrative connection between Chief and the player) to deal with it and thus 'finish the fight'. This in turn creates an interesting advertising and narrative hook as 'finnishing the fight' was the general tagline of Halo 3 (2007) resulting in a strong narrative link between the two games.
Image taken from: http://www.avwproductions.com/techheads/wordpress/why-halo-2-is-the-greatest-game-of-all-time/
Now personally, my favourite game in this particular franchise will always be the orignal Halo: Combat Evolved (2001) which revolutionised the idea of the modern FPS after the era of Doom and Quake and before Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (2007) came along years later and came to dominate the culture of modern FPS games in the 7th game generation. Arguably, next to games like COD4, Unreal Tournament (1999), Serious Sam (2001), Resistance 2 (2008), Battelfield Bad Company 2 (2010), Halo: Combat Evolved and Halo 2 showed that simple gameplay combined with a straightforward plot intertwined with large scale situations and stakes and threatening situations that challenged your abilities as a gamer and hero could not only create for a grabbing game that shook you to your bones but drew you into its gameplay and story to play more and pay more attention to it. I've certainly experienced this with some series that I've had alot to complain about such as the original Dawn of War (2004-2008) quadrilogy or the Supreme Commander games (2007-2010) but Halo 2, out of most of the games that seemed to define late-6th generation storytelling and gameplay acheived this more than most as Halo 3 went on to become one of the most highest-grossing games of all time and one of the best reviewed and most popular FPS games of recent memory.
So with Mass Effect 3's ending expained in a technincal sense and the ending of Halo 2 explained from a standpoint of narrative storytelling and player interraction through gameplay and dialogue, where does this leave the also controversial ending of Final Fantasy XIII developed by Square Enix and released in 2009?
Image taken from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy_XIII
Now in comparison to the Mass Effect and Halo series, with exception to Final Fantasy VI (1994) and Final Fantasy IX (2000), I've never had a huge amount of interest in the Final Fantasy (1987-) series as a whole or even for most of the individual games. However, as a (for the most part) indifferent game to the franchise, I can understand the attraction of the series within itself as a whole and within the individual games thanks to the enthralling RPG elements, the usually epic storylines, the engaging struggles of the characters and the inclusion of some of gaming's most iconic and nastiest vilains like Final Fantasy VI's Kefka or VII's (1997) Sephiroth.
But anyway, enough contextualising, what about Final Fantasy XIII's ending. Well, this might sound bad, but I really can't remember much about what the ending was like or what it represented. This might stem from how unengaging the plot of the game was or how much I disliked the main protagonist Lightning or how much the game seemed to drag later on or how disinteresting the main vilain was but I really can't remember much about this game's ending. At the end of it all (a nice little reference to Final Fantasy Dissidia's (2008) final boss there for you all) Final Fantasy XIII is a perfect example of not involving your player through some means or another (for me it was mainly the grinding length of the game and the unlikeable main protagonist) which in turn kills the involvement of a player in the game's ending and story. Now I've played good games with one or two aspects that have killed the prospect of a good ending such as Darkstar One's (2006) ending being incredibly cheesy and going against the style and ethos of the game or Max Payne 3's (2012) ending which was severley weakened by the suprising unlikeability of the main character souring the ending.
However, whereas those games were still enjoyable for the most part and were only partially soured by their endings, I didn't enjoy Final Fantasy XIII for the most part, wasn't drawn into the main protagonist's main struggle despite their shortcomings like in Darkstar One and as a result, combining this with the excrutiating length of the game and its disgustingly sequel-bait ending, I couldn't bring myself to remember or care much about the ending after I finished slogging though the game as a whole. Subsequently, when I found out how much of a sequel-bait ending the game had with the onset of overly-expensive paid-DLC and a trilogy that not even the most devout Final Fantasy fans asked for, I felt deflated and disinterested by Final Fantasy XIII's ending.
As a result, I think that the evidence is pretty clear from looking at these three games that it isn't a bad ending that ruins the game, its a bad ending combined with either a bad or unengaging game that ruins the game. Mass Effect 3, despite the ending that essentially went against the entire series and all it stood for, did not ruin the overall experience either I nor many gamers had with the game itself. On top of this, the prospect of cheap DLC soon after the game's release that sorted out some of the narrative problems of the ending sweetened the deal a bit and besides, from my viewpoint at least, I would argue that the ending of Mass Effect 3 was not just down to bad writing but perhaps a great deal of admirable but misplaced overambition. Halo 2 in turn is perhaps a greater example of misinterpreted storytelling a-la the ending to Dawn of War 2: Chaos Rising (2010) that tried something ambitious, pulled it off, but could've perhaps done with being a bit clearer and more elloquent as telling from the general reaction to it. Final Fantasy XIII in turn is an example of how even with great production value and design as well as graphics, a game that does not involve the player on a personal level or interest them as such will fail regardless of the ending and even if the ending is good (which it wasn't in this case), the game will still struggle to rise above it's flaws, especially if it's a poor follow up to a series of very popular games.
But hey, even if you still don't get it, let me sum it up to you guys with this analogy. Mass Effect 3 and Halo 2 are like classy dinners with great service and music where the starter is a 5 star meditteranean tapas and the main course is a perfectly seasoned and well cooked moussaka but the pudding is just a bag of jelly beans served on a paper plate. Final Fantasy XIII on the other hand is a takeout from a crappy 2-star chicken 'n'chips shop where your order is late and wrong, the only music on hand is the same 5 tunes all day from Capital F.M radio and the server has left a hair in your vanilla milkshake when you clearly asked for chocolate.
"Havin' A 'mare" is a blog in which I (Ted Richardson of London) review old and new releases in media such as film, computer games, videos and music. I'll also be reviewing different places to eat and various food products to help satisfy your insatiable hunger for my critique at least once every week.
Showing posts with label Serious Sam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Serious Sam. Show all posts
Monday, 11 May 2015
Respectful disagreement #2: Why bad endings to games do not always ruin them
Labels:
2015,
Castlevania,
Darkstar One,
Dawn of War,
Dawn Of War 2,
endings,
Final Fantasy XIII,
game,
Halo 2,
Legend of Zelda,
Mass Effect 3,
respectful disagreement,
Serious Sam,
Square Enix,
Supreme Commander
Wednesday, 28 September 2011
game review #7: upcoming releases
What with the first of the big releases of the next year already out (Warhammer 40k SPACE MARINE) I think that its a good time to look forward to the other big releases coming out in the near future, and perhaps seeing wether they'll be as great as rasberry and white chocolate cheesecake or as useless as the Kardashian twins (yes I am unfortunate enough to know of theire existence as well).
The first title that everybody is talking about is the much anticipated Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. As I said a couple of reviews back I don't think that the COD series has brought much to the gaming world in terms of new ideas and innovations since the mighty Modern Warfare emerged nearly half a decade ago. The COD series overall still retains it's generic consumer-charm but that charm is deteriorating fast and took a heavy knock with the legendarily crap Black Ops. Things aren't looking great with the upcoming MW3 though because the gameplay looks virtually the same, the graphics have for some reason advanced very little since MW2 and whoop-de-doo, its mostly coloured grey, white, brown and black (just like every other bloody shooter these days). All in all I don't think MW3 is going to be a real cracker of a shooter like say Left For Dead 2 or Modern Warfare were but it does actually look considerably more fun than Black Ops was so I could be wrong.
The other of the biggest two releases coming out over the next several months is of course Battlefield 3. As I've said before I like the Battlefield series quite a bit and my favourite installment to the series is still the underatted Battlefield 2142, I'm not sure however what to feel about this new installment. My gut keeps giving me a sense of impeniding doom about this game but then again my gut is a right idiot who keeps persuading me to pig out on boring snacks like digestive buiscits. It does seem to be quite appealing and fun though, in fact it seems like its taken and combined aspects from many of the battlefield games; the great vehicle driving/piloting of the Battlefield 1942 triology and Battlefield 2, the fantastic reward system of the Battlefield 2142 duology and the intense 'reaction time-workout' shootouts of the online and campaign modes of the Bad Company installments. It could be good, i'm not really sure. I mean there hasn't been must talk about the singleplayer and they seem to have kept the advancment on melee combat on a minimum as usual, but generaly I have an alright feeling about this one.
Now we move onto less popular and less intersting titles. The first of these smaller titles is Resistance 3 which has...wait...this bloody game is already out! Ah whatever, I'm pretty sure I can find a few words for it. Compating it to its two predecessors, Resistance 3 seems to be the most advanced and fun installment of its series yet what with taking many of the greatest gameplay aspects of Half-Life 2 (e.g. no automatically regenerating health, being able to carry at least 12 weapons at once etc) and applying them to the amusing Resistance storyline. It does look to be a promising new game and the graphics are pretty good, the only problem from the sounds of it is its quite formula plot, however it also looks as fun as hell so it shouldn't sting too bad..
The next game that is soon to come out is The Heist: Payday which by the looks of things is pretty appaling. Even just looking at the trailer you can see loads of problems: No plot whatsoever, graphics that make it look like it was made for the Xbox or PS2 in 2001, unimaginitive gameplay and combat scenes that are even more generic than Call Of Duty, no juicy character development, no exciting objectives, no brilliant variety betweeen different enemies and challanges and of course it only has 6 maps. JUST 6 BLOODY, SAMEY MAPS. Oh yeah there are are no missions with more than a minute outside of a building.
Of course there are many other titles coming out in the nexy several months or year or two but if I listed them all then I'd be here for ages so I'm only going to say this once; if you are thinking of gettign any of the new releases later this year just get Resistance 3, Serious Sam 3 and Battlefield 3. The reason why I am saying this is because all the other big releases this year look like utter s***...*sighs*...oh well.
P.S Happy Jewish New Year!
The first title that everybody is talking about is the much anticipated Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. As I said a couple of reviews back I don't think that the COD series has brought much to the gaming world in terms of new ideas and innovations since the mighty Modern Warfare emerged nearly half a decade ago. The COD series overall still retains it's generic consumer-charm but that charm is deteriorating fast and took a heavy knock with the legendarily crap Black Ops. Things aren't looking great with the upcoming MW3 though because the gameplay looks virtually the same, the graphics have for some reason advanced very little since MW2 and whoop-de-doo, its mostly coloured grey, white, brown and black (just like every other bloody shooter these days). All in all I don't think MW3 is going to be a real cracker of a shooter like say Left For Dead 2 or Modern Warfare were but it does actually look considerably more fun than Black Ops was so I could be wrong.
The other of the biggest two releases coming out over the next several months is of course Battlefield 3. As I've said before I like the Battlefield series quite a bit and my favourite installment to the series is still the underatted Battlefield 2142, I'm not sure however what to feel about this new installment. My gut keeps giving me a sense of impeniding doom about this game but then again my gut is a right idiot who keeps persuading me to pig out on boring snacks like digestive buiscits. It does seem to be quite appealing and fun though, in fact it seems like its taken and combined aspects from many of the battlefield games; the great vehicle driving/piloting of the Battlefield 1942 triology and Battlefield 2, the fantastic reward system of the Battlefield 2142 duology and the intense 'reaction time-workout' shootouts of the online and campaign modes of the Bad Company installments. It could be good, i'm not really sure. I mean there hasn't been must talk about the singleplayer and they seem to have kept the advancment on melee combat on a minimum as usual, but generaly I have an alright feeling about this one.
Now we move onto less popular and less intersting titles. The first of these smaller titles is Resistance 3 which has...wait...this bloody game is already out! Ah whatever, I'm pretty sure I can find a few words for it. Compating it to its two predecessors, Resistance 3 seems to be the most advanced and fun installment of its series yet what with taking many of the greatest gameplay aspects of Half-Life 2 (e.g. no automatically regenerating health, being able to carry at least 12 weapons at once etc) and applying them to the amusing Resistance storyline. It does look to be a promising new game and the graphics are pretty good, the only problem from the sounds of it is its quite formula plot, however it also looks as fun as hell so it shouldn't sting too bad..
The next game that is soon to come out is The Heist: Payday which by the looks of things is pretty appaling. Even just looking at the trailer you can see loads of problems: No plot whatsoever, graphics that make it look like it was made for the Xbox or PS2 in 2001, unimaginitive gameplay and combat scenes that are even more generic than Call Of Duty, no juicy character development, no exciting objectives, no brilliant variety betweeen different enemies and challanges and of course it only has 6 maps. JUST 6 BLOODY, SAMEY MAPS. Oh yeah there are are no missions with more than a minute outside of a building.
Of course there are many other titles coming out in the nexy several months or year or two but if I listed them all then I'd be here for ages so I'm only going to say this once; if you are thinking of gettign any of the new releases later this year just get Resistance 3, Serious Sam 3 and Battlefield 3. The reason why I am saying this is because all the other big releases this year look like utter s***...*sighs*...oh well.
P.S Happy Jewish New Year!
Friday, 5 August 2011
Game Review #4: Serious Sam-The second encounter
Sometimes when you're at home you may get angry at someone or something and just want to take your anger out on a bunch of jackasses. Of course this would get your ass arrested really quick if you did it to real people in the street so I suggest playing Serious Sam-The Second Encounter. The reason why I say that about the game is that it is not only fun, funny and offering many ways to explore but it chucks you into so many huge battles with enemies that outnumber you many times over that you can't help but be relaxed by the carnage you can create.
Unlike with the plots of all the games and films I've reviewed so far, I can't really say much about the plot of this game. It's hinted at quite a few times, explained somewhat in the beginning video and hinted at some more through the enemies you face. But the plot isn't important in this game. What's really important is getting your weapons, walking out into rolling fields and then facing off against regiments of enemies all at once in a mad display of carnage and pure fun. The extent of the plot that I did understand was that Serious Sam is humanity's finest soldier and he is being sent through different time periods to do something to some guy who is mentioned through out the game like 2 or 3 times. The main bad guy has no option than to send wave after wave of demons, headless assault troops, biological walkers with fish-looking heads, chain-gun wielding giant scorpions and leaping bull-like skeleton creatures to grind Sam into meaty dust.
Overall there are only 6 settings over the course of the 4 time periods in the campaign: ancient Egypt, ancient Babylonia, medieval Poland, an underground lava cavern, abandoned ancient cities in the Amazon and snowy mountain towns. Despite there only being so few environments you always feel like you've stepped into a totally different world each time you complete a handful of levels and that's really the way the setting in a 1st person shooter should be. One slightly annoying thing about the settings in this game however is that no matter which time period or location you are in, the enemies are always the same, "sigh". But I am however prepared to overlook that because like I said: the environments are nicely balanced and the enemies and bosses are as fun as a bag of drunk parrots.
The weapons in the game are somewhat similar to what you'd find in any other adventure/1st person shooting game but the variety of weaponry you get is fun nonetheless. All in all you get; dual revolvers, a combat knife, a pump shotgun, a double-barrelled shotgun, a sub-machine gun, a mini gun, a chainsaw, a laser chain-gun, a sniper rifle, a flame-thrower, a rocket launcher, a grenade launcher, a ridiculously over-powered cannon that fires rolling cannon balls and of course, a hand-bomb that if you detonate it kills EVERY enemy in the room. These weapons don't have a massive deal of variety between them and the enemies always come at you in big waves and ambushes but the enemies are varied and the weapons fun enough so that this problem is pretty easy to overlook.
Like with the legions of grunts and such that you face in big battles, the bosses that regularly pop up are also uber-enjoyable. They can range from 65-foot tall demons that unleash volleys of miniature suns to experimental bio-titans that dwell in dungeons and have laser beams blasting from their shoulders. With some bosses you can only use certain weapons, for example: with the Mayan wind god that you face off against at the end of the south american time period you can only use explosives which forces you to really conserve your ammunition.
And that's all I can and will say about Serious Sam-The Second Encounter. Partly because I want you all to see for yourselves how good it is and also because it is such a simple game. It's just you (a wise-cracking muscle-head in a white T-shirt and jeans) with a hoard of weapons facing against legions of varying enemies. definitely get this game people because by the laws of gaming I have found that it is bad-ass.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)