Microsoft... We Have A Spelling Problem.

The first piece of news to come out of the Electronic Entertainment Expo in LA was the Natal Experience with Cirque de Soleil.

At the event we learn that Project Natal in now renamed Kinect (pronounce connect), and some of the games including a Star Wars lightsaber game, and Wii Sports Kinect Sports. Also demoed was Wii Fit a yoga game for the Kinect.

All of this would be news, however USA Today accidentally posted a news article about it hours before the even.

Apparently advertising is underway. A recent Google search of the word “Connect” brought up a sponsored link for the device.

Last part of this is that the even was shot Live-To-Tape to be aired in a 30-minute, commercial-free special broadcast on MTV on Tuesday, June 15, 2010 at 3:30 pm ET, and on Nick at Nite, mtvU, MTV Hits, and Logo at 9 pm ET.

I call shenanigans on this however. It is not commercial free, rather it is a 30-minute commercial.

Microsoft hold their Press Briefing later today. More news on Kinect should be coming, such as a price, a release date, and maybe a better name.

Linking it Together: The Legend of Zelda

This is an open letter to the team currently responsible for the new title in the Legend of Zelda franchise: PLEASE don't make the game suck. I've been playing these games since the very original, and feel the same way about them as a fish feels about water; they are my element, and it takes quite a lot to get me to dislike them. I've loved and beaten very nearly every Zelda I've ever played, from the original to Twilight Princess, and so I've decided to talk a little about the series and why it's such a big deal to me.

A long time ago, my Uncle hand an NES, long before my family inherited it, from him. It was one of the greatest joys of my young life to go to his house for a visit, because while there, I could play Super Mario Bros, Megaman, and, of course, The Legend of Zelda. When I was very young, I used to flip out over the game simply because it had a gold cartridge. Really!? GOLD!? I would stare at it in awe, hardly daring to believe that such a game could be touched by my hands. When gazing at it in the lineup, I simply assumed that no game that looked so splendid could be mine to play. The very first time I was allowed o play, I took the controller as if it could turn to dust in my hands. Surely, this would be the greatest experience of my life! The game did not disappoint. Where other games put you on a set path, and said, "GO THAT WAY!", this glorious game allowed you the freedom to go where you would. I was so amazed by this, that the very first time playing, I tried to play the game without even picking up the sword! Shortly after I died, I was able to start the long learning process that was the Legend of Zelda. Ever since that very first game opened the door and put true freedom in my hands, I've been a junkie for those types of games.

Moving forward through time, Zelda II was every bit as good as the original, though it did mix things up with an entirely new gameplay style. The world was enormous beyond imagination, and I never felt like I was running out of hings to do. And so it went. With each new game, I found something new to love. There were frustrations, and difficult puzzles, but as with the very best of relationships, the good outweighed the bad. For twenty years, I would never find a single game disappointing. Zelda was my rock. When Final Fantasy went awry, or Mario became repetitive, or when Resident Evil wasn't scary, or when Metal Gear lost it's freaking marbles, I always had The Legend of Zelda to turn to.

Five years ago, as I bought my Wii, a smile on my face, only one thing was on my mind: The Legend of Zelda: The Twilight Princess. After endless internal debate over what I should do, I had made the decision to purchase the whole new system that would be required to play the ultimate version of the game. Money in hand, I stood in a Meijer for twenty-seven hours waiting. Finally, it was time to play the greatest Zelda ever made. I played the game for days straight, and was not disappointed. Or that's what I wish I could say.

For all that I loved about it, and there was a LOT to love, I found my heart wavering. The Wind Waker and Majora's Mask, easily my two favorites titles thus far, has been utterly massive, with hours and hours worth of adventures and side quests to back up the main meat of the game. With Twilight Princess boasting the largest game world yet, I felt it was safe to assume that it would have even more. Sadly, when I played, I discovered it to have about a much to do as a game boy title. Though truly an excellent game, for the first time, I found myself unsatisfied. Shaking it off, I smiled, thinking to myself, "This was a Gamecube port, after all. They spent a lot of time preparing i for the Wii. Of COURSE something had to go." Nodding happily, I set about waiting for the next title in the series, The Phantom Hourglass.

Hooboy. This was... a problem. The game debuted on the DS, a system that has similar power to that of the N64, home of Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask, two of the most beloved Zelda games of all time. LOgically, with Super Mario 64 DS being an EXCELLENT port, which even EXPANDED on the original, I assumed that here, for sure, would be the sprawling adventure I desired. Not only that, but it was a direct sequel to The Wind Waker. I was overjoyed to receive it as a gift, the very day it was released. And it was... okay. Rather than exploring the possibility of a full 3-Dimensional Zelda, Nintendo opted for a more classic top-down perspective. Not only that, but rather than putting all they could into side quests and an expansive world, they instead seemed focused on replicating the pretty graphics of it's predecessor. Nice though this was, it made for lazy level design, with the game even going so far as to have to do and redo and REDO the same dungeon every time the plot progressed. With padding like this, it felt less like a Zelda game and more a pale imitation of one. With a heavy heart, I returned to waiting.

Finally, The Legend of Zelda: The Spirit Tracks arrived. Unfortunately, we have something amazing here: A bad Zelda game. Never before has this occurred. (The CDi games don't count.) Failing to even get a moment of fun for me, this game has caused me some concern. We have come full circle. Where the original game of the series bewildered me so wonderfully with its open world, the most recent game is LITERALLY on rails. You can only stop the train and get off where the game tells you you can, thus effectively removing ALL exploration.

Rather than rant about the negative experience I had, I'll now make it clear why I'm writing this; there's still time. One bad game does not a broken heart make. I'm not even more than a little concerned. I'm just imploring you, Nintendo, to not let this become a habit. Next week, you will be announcing your newest Zelda game, one five years in the making. PLEASE, before its too late, return to the way things should be. Put that smile back on my face, Nintendo. I know you can do it.

My Experience With The PS3 - Part 1

In late April, I did something that I had never done as a gamer.

I became the owner of all the consoles of the current generation. Last generation I owned the Gamecube and the Xbox, but I did not get a PS2. Yes I missed out on some great games. There is no question about that, but I am just setting up the review as someone who in this generation mainly used his Xbox 360. (Also worth noting that I did not own a PSP at all either)

Since purchasing my 360 in February of 2007, I have logged a number of hours and even got the RRoD. Yes, the 360 is not perfect, but it is what I was used to.

Now I was planning to eventually get the system. There were some games that I wanted to play and now the the war between HD-DVD and Blu-ray was over, (and still to this date the Xbox has no plans of having an add-on Blu-ray player like they did with HD-DVD) I figured that a PS3 would cover my want for both.

Now came the excuse that I needed.

I got a free copy of God of War 3. With this, I justified a purchase of a PS3 slim. (Yeah, I was really just looking for an excuse).

It took me a couple weeks to find one in a store. Eventually, I got a 250GB PS3 Slim.

Unpacking

I have said it before and I have said it again that the lack of HD cables being included with the PS3 is a mistake. Lucky I had a HDMI cable handy. (Seriously go to Amazon, you can find low prices on cables there. Mine was about $7)

Though they did one-up the 360. Not only is the controller rechargeable, but they give you the cable to charge it. Microsoft want to charge you another twenty bucks for that, and for this fact I was willing to give the PS3 a chance.

Setup was easy enough, I just had to tweak a few settings for my TV but I was up and running with WiFi in 15 minutes. After the console update, I was ready to play, but before I get to this, it is a good thing to point out.

Xbox 360 WiFi Adaptor and Play and Charge Kit = $120.00
Playstation 3 = Included

The UI and OS

There is a love/hate relationship here. I love some of the features that the XMB provides. However the lack of it being intuitive is... for lack of a better work... stupid.

I use my 360 to play video, view photos, and listen to music. I expected the PS3 to be as good as the 360, if not better. Sadly, it comes up short.

Streaming Content
I was able to find a great free program for my Macbook that streams over the network. A quick Google search popped up the PS3 Media Server software and it is good, except when trying to playback HD content over WiFi, but that is really to be expected. It still works great though.

Moving Files Through USB Thumbdrive
I only have one issue with this. The fact that Sony wants you to use their file structure on the thumbdrive annoyed me... That is until Porter told me that all I had to do was hit triangle and select “View All”. I like this way better and wish I could set that to default.

I love the fact that I can just copy the files to the PS3 and not be worried about it. It is just there. Absolutely love this! Though wish I could make my own folders on the PS3.

Other Devices Through USB
The keyboard and mouse combo worked well, but I am sad that my iPhone is not supported at all. Comparatively the 360 allows me to view my pictures from my iPhone. While that is not fully functioning, it is still more than the PS3 recognizes.

This brings me to the one thing I HATE HATE HATE about the PS3.

Music
I got used to having custom soundtracks going all the way back to the Xbox. There are some games, albeit mainly sports games, that would be better with the inclusion of my own music. I am only allowed to do this by a game by game basis, and 90% of the games that I have played on the PS3 have not allowed me to play my music.

I know that I might be overreacting, but what is stopping this from happening? Not the game makers, otherwise you would see the same problems on the 360. So this is one thing that I think Sony screwed the pooch on. I want my music while playing some of these games.

This is going to conclude part one. Part two is going to focus on the Playstation Network, Games, and Blu-ray.

--Keith

Super Mario

Every game magazine worth their salt has done some sort of Mario retrospective, or history of Mario gushing heaps of praise on our little video game icon. While I wish I was the first to come up with a Mario history lesson, I'm glad I didn't have to since there's roughly 25 years of history to cover and I am a pretty lazy guy. So instead I will simply share my thoughts on him.

Like many gamers growing up in the late 80's, the Nintendo Entertainment System was the first experience with gaming many of us can remember. I know I toiled away endless hours on Asteroids for the Atari as a youngster, but playing Super Mario Brothers for the NES is honestly my first real video game revelation.

It was unlike anything I had played on the Atari before. There were backgrounds that reminded me of things I drew myself when bored, music that was actually catchy, and something that blew my mind, actual level progression. The Atari games I had played prior were only for getting high scores or beating your friend at simple games like Tank or Pong. I had never before played a game where the levels were actually changing on me and I could see the numbers increase. "How far can this go?" I asked myself once. Is world 8 really the end? It was something to strive for, something that made Super Mario Brothers special, something I will never forget.

And there was one other nuance that made the game of course, Mario himself. The way he moved, gained momentum, threw fireballs, or even growing taller, everything about him was interesting. Mario was the most versatile and fluent character for a player to control at the time. Playing as him you felt like you could do anything, make that impossible jump, or narrowly escape oncoming bullet-bills. It's not hard to imagine what many have said before, that Mario single-handedly ignited what we know as video games today.

For me though, I didn't quite get what Mario did until the later years of the Super Nintendo. I still bought those crappy move-licensed games, or horrible sports games. Occasionally I would stumble across the Mega Man's, Street Fighters, and Donkey Kong's of the gaming world accidentally tasting the golden nuggets of what gaming really had to offer. I started figuring out which games sucked, and why they sucked. I was under the impression that if I was losing at a game that it was my fault, and that others were succeeding where I was failing, not because the game was a shoddy pile of dog poo, (Terminator 2 SNES). I lived in a world of Game Genie codes and awful gameplay design, those were the dark ages.

Fast forward to the N64 years where I first got my hands on....Star Wars Shadows of the Empire. Not the worst game in the world mind you, but also not a very good one. Suffice to say I only past level 4 without cheats. But I mention this game because the mechanics of controlling Dash Rendar were TERRIBLE. The Hoth level was fabulous though. Still, the point is I immediately played Super Mario 64 right after. This was the turning point. I put two and two together. I wondered why Dash would float around after I jumped, or would skate around the floor while running where Mario was...well absolutely perfect and did everything I told him to do.

I noted that controlling Mario didn't frustrate me, and the challenges of the game were not stemming from me struggling with the character but the challenges the game had laid out for me to accomplish. I loved this. And what followed were the best gaming years I ever had.

Mario showed me what quality games were. Mario taught me that games should have a standard, and that Mario set those standards. There is honestly no denying this. Mario set the standard for 2D gameplay, just as he did with 3D gameplay. He revolutionizes every aspect of gaming we know today, and continues to prove his worth with each new iteration.

Mario is easily my favorite video game series of all time. He has never disappointed me and showed me the way to what quality gaming is.

*Yah, Wah, HOOOO!* you'll get that if you play Mario.

Rebuttal: Video Games as Art

My stance on this subject could not be more obvious, as this is a blog about video games of course I will be pro video game. Roger Ebert has made a living discussing movies and therefore will be pro movie. However, he has also started to light a fire under the bellies of us gamers by making the wild assertion that video games are not "art."

Many game websites have delivered their take on this subject and we all agree that video games are indeed art with examples abound, so I need not retread any of their points. I will instead speak simply on this matter categorically why video games are art.

Art Defined:

Before fully pursuing this subject I decided to brush up on exactly how humans define the very word art, and here's a few examples:
1. the products of human creativity; works of art collectively; "an art exhibition"; "a fine collection of art"
2. the creation of beautiful or significant things.
3. artwork: photographs or other visual representations in a printed publication

And so on. Amusingly searching for the definition of art I came across this:
"Myst is a franchise centered around a series of adventure video games. The first game in the series, Myst, was released in 1993 by brothers Rand ..."

While clearly a failure on Google's part, I was still amused that searching "art" would bring up a very specific video game.

Simply reading the three definitions of art that I stumbled across and in no way cherry-picked, anyone can clearly see that Video Games do fall into those definitions. While the third one is clearly pointing out printed material, video games do have instruction manuals which often showcase creative artwork...=) Okay, that's a stretch.

But let us get to the nitty gritty of Ebert's complaints.

1. Games are not art because they require physical interaction on the level of sports.
2. Games have objectives to them, thus they cannot be art as art is not goal oriented but a passive medium.

Reading his article, those were the only two major points I took away from it. He spends most of his article breaking down Kellee Santiago's assertion that video games are art and she goes on to list some examples. All Roger Ebert seems to do is break down her examples with very, very invalid thoughts on them. For instance, he feels that the game Flower evokes no more emotion than that of a hallmark card. He does this from the perspective of someone who has not actually played the game. He even asks ridiculous questions like does the game keep score, or do you 'win.'

Complaint #1:

Ebert feels that because video games require interaction then they are no more art than playing chess, or playing football. While this seems like sound logic, to an avid gamer, it sounds like "To summon Bahamut you need to use the magic command." I mean honestly, does a chessboard tell a story? Do you hear well orchestrated music in tune with the actions you make on the chessboard? Do the pieces evoke any awe inspiring or jaw dropping emotions upon looking at their plastic carvings? The answer to all of these questions is clearly no you stupid fool.

The fact that he lumps video games in with sports amuses me to no end, as there is often heavy debate among athletes and professional gamers in which gamers claim what they do is on the same level as a competitive sport. And with some games, that can be true too. There are games built with a competitive idea in mind, as there are games built with an artistic idea in mind. The fault of Ebert is that he feels all of these games are exactly the same. And this is proven with his notion that he feels they all need to have a 'win' moment, or they are in turn no longer a video game...

Complaint #2:

...And this is how we come to complaint #2. Again, Ebert seems to think that all video games have to have a "win" moment, and end to the objectives, just like any ordinary board game or sport. He goes on to say that even if there are games without this "win" moment, then they are no longer video games, but merely representations of story, music, poetry etc. What? How can something be a representation of a story if it itself tells a story? How can something be a representation of music if it itself offers music? That makes no sense, and is merely stupid wordplay meant to confuse stupid people.

To comment on his logic of this "win" moment in general, do movies not have an ending in which the writer has written? Do movies not mostly all follow the simple formula of beginning, rising actions, climax, falling actions, ending? To say it simply, what is the difference between a movie having an ending, and a video game having an ending? Is it because the pace of the game is dictated by the player? Why does that matter, the content is still the same. The message of the story remains the same as well. Just like a movie, only the pace is dictated by the editors and directors.

I have to take a moment to step away and respond to his last quote in the article that bugs me the most of all.

"I allow Sangtiago the last word. Toward the end of her presentation, she shows a visual with six circles, which represent, I gather, the components now forming for her brave new world of video games as art. The circles are labeled: Development, Finance, Publishing, Marketing, Education, and Executive Management. I rest my case."

What he seems to be getting at here is that art can't involve the processes of Development, Finance, Publishing, Marketing, Education, and Executive Management. And he ends his high horse with "I rest my case" only maddening me further.

Let's take a final stab at what art actually is for a moment. He brings up Michelangelo's works like the Sistine Chapel, or Beethoven's music, or let's for the hell of it bring up that poor starving artist you have seen in your local mall. Michelangelo's work was commissioned, Beethoven didn't write music for the shits and giggles of it, and that poor starving artist has price tags on all his works too. Because business in this day and age has become efficient and more defined that we can have categorical ways of selling art, Ebert likes to point out that the video game trade is nothing more than that in the end, a trade, a business, a job. I wonder how many movies Ebert could have reviewed over the years if ticket prices were free. I wonder how successful movies would be without trailers, sweepstakes contests, TV commercials, actors plugging on Letterman, product placement, and so on. I wonder how successful any movie would be without his "thumbs up" for that matter.

To call Ebert a hypocrite would not be going far enough. He is narrow minded, riding on his own high horse, and demeaning a form of expression like video games that he has no knowledge of, and believes that only his definition of art is the correct one.

It is sad that Ebert speaks on a subject he clearly does not understand at all, it is sadder still that people take his opinion on the subject as fact. It would be similar if I agreed with the opinion of Creationists on Evolution. They have no knowledge of science, and they eagerly dismiss every notion of evolution they can. This is the same with Roger Ebert, commenting on a subject he literally knows nothing about.

He challenges in the article for people to offer him examples as Santiago had. While I still feel his rebuttal to her examples were extremely inefficient, I would be doing my own rebuttal a disservice by not offering my own example.

Xenogears:

This is my pick for a video game that can be called art, easily. This game has more story than most movie screenplays. It has more well developed characters struggling through a defined plot than even the best of movies. The music score it offers is nothing short of fantastic, evoking all the same emotions any piece from Beethoven can give. The game itself gives the player a long journey with many beautiful landscapes.

Ebert would point out that to experience all of these moments in the game the player has to continually compete in the games battle system defeating enemies, thus "winning," the game. Of course, I am giving Ebert too much credit in making a game reference such as "battle system," but I'm just stretching my imagination a bit. Still, why do the game elements of a video game lessen the artistic elements in it? That's a question he doesn't answer.

*Goes to play Mario Paint*

Let Me Play!

Patience has not always been a virtue in gaming. However, these days patience is a must. We must wait, and wait we shall. As gaming became more and more complex, and the medium in which games are played changed and progressed, we as gamers find ourselves doing more of nothing than something.

I for one am quite agitated with how video games have "progressed." It amuses me that years ago I could simply pop in my favorite game, flip the on switch, and boom I was playing. Here I will discuss just how gaming has made us wait far more than we ever had to and why it has caused me such frustration.

First let me briefly delve into what struck me to write this. Yesterday, I fired up my PS3 and wanted to check out the updates to the PSN store. For some wacky reason my PS3 would not connect to the internet, it has never done this before. Thirty minutes later I solve this issue, only to be stopped once again by an update. That took another twenty minutes to download and then install. Finally, that was done, and not to my surprise the PSN store wasn't even updated. So I go and play some Zen Pinball, a quick bite sized game I love dearly. I play the new table I got last week, but I swear I started to fall asleep waiting for it to load...And so the idea for this blog was born.

Gaming Medium:

This is the very first offender to how games over time have "progressed" only to get slower and slower. Now admittedly it started off worse with the Commadore 64, but those memories were quickly wiped away with the Atari and its cartridge based games that immediately started to work right away. Aside from having to blow in those games through the NES era, it wasn't all that inconvenient. Convenient gaming in this respect died right when the Playstation came out. Here we were given a few problems with this CD format. Firstly, of course is the loading times. They got ridiculous. Loading before the game starts, loading before cut-scenes, loading between stages, loading before a round in a fighting game, loading loading loading. You had to get used to it, there was no way around it.

Another problem CD's introduced was the hazard of having to change discs. It was annoying to me for such an advanced medium such as the CD to make me change discs and then remember which one to pop in if I came back months later. What annoyed me most though was that Sony boasted how much more memory its games can contain by comparison to a N64 cartridge, and yet still most great games took up 3 or 4 of them, whereas to play one amazing N64 game I only needed ONE N64 cartridge. A cartridge that didn't load, and that I didn't have to swap out. Oh, and something that didn't die immediately when it got a teeny tiny scratch on it. I have to this day, an old Kirby's Adventure NES cartridge that's missing a large chunk of itself in the top right corner and it works flawlessly still. I have a barely visible tiny scratch on disc 2 of Chrono Cross that causes the game to be unplayable.

Advanced technology my ass.

Updates:

You really can't avoid this anymore, this never used to be an issue in any way. But be it a combination of pirate protection, keeping games working, or keeping things fresh, for whatever reason game developers these days feel the need to update their games constantly and it could not be more annoying. I'm spoiled, I'll admit it, I was used to the idea that I would buy a game and it would be the final product. Now I understand that when I buy a game, they were not done with it yet, clearly they just didn't finish it. I cannot honestly fire up any older PS3 game I have because it will want me to update it, I almost guarantee this. The worst thing is, I'm not even allowed to play it if I'm connected to the internet, there's no bypassing the update. So if I ever want to play Grand Theft Auto, Resistance 2, or any number of games I'd like to go back to someday, I will have to update it. This could take anywhere from ten to forty minutes.

And for what purpose are these updates? Well most of them are to ensure that the new Down-loadable Content or "DLC" they are selling works with everyone's games, it patches them for the DLC to work in other words. But why should I care? I usually don't want the DLC. Very rarely will a game be patched because they want to fix something they didn't during development. It just awes me that I can plug in any Zelda or Mario game without the fear of seeing the dreaded "update" screen and I can't do this with half of my PS3 library.

Installing:

Games load times haven't got better, that's for sure. Now developers are actually having us install our games on our systems just so the load times are bearable. This usually takes thirty to forty minutes too. While this problem mostly pertains to the PS3, the Xbox 360 is not without this issue. Hell even the PSP has optional installation these days. The sad thing is, this really is not the fault of the console believe it or not. This is the fault of lazy developers. There are big badass games that exist on the PS3 with no installation, like Final Fantasy 13....lol, but still it's a HUGE game, no installation, and bearable loading times. But developers like Capcom will consistently have 5GB installations on ALL of there games, for no other reason than that they are lazy.

Logos:

These days, games aren't made by one company. Seemingly, they are made by HUNDREDS (exaggeration) and we are subjected to see who helped make the game every time we fire it up. I remember playing Maximum Carnage on the SNES, and this game drove me insane with the number of companies I had to sift through to finally get to the start screen. This is how it is now for nearly EVERY game made. The worst offenders are the ones that won't let you skip them, which is the vast majority of them.

Conclusion:

So between the loading times it takes to start them up, and the logos, and the possible update to follow, and nixing the loading times with a long installation, or the possibility that your game has a minor defect on it that you won't notice until the game freezes twenty hours in, waiting to play games these days gets pretty intense. Thankfully, not all gaming is like this. Nintendo for instance is still fantastic with the Nintendo DS being cartridge based still, and the Wii games don't usually have a logo problem, they have no installation, and the only thing that ever updates is the system itself and not the games. I breathe a sigh of relief playing those games, games that I know will function immediately without "advanced technology" getting in the way.

*.....loading......loading......*

I posted this in my other blog, but...

I posted this in my other blog a while back, but feel it has a place here. Go ahead and read that blog too, at fultonrants@blogspot.com.

When I was but a young boy, I began playing those most epic of games, Final Fantasy. They have always been my very favorite RPGs, as I am sure is true of many of us, but the feelings of joy and unadulterated happiness I used to feel every time a release date drew near have become dread and horror. Some recent news about Final Fantasy XIII, which I until now hailed as a savior for the series, has turned my very blood cold. This is the last straw. You, Squeenix, have betrayed my trust for the last time.This is a chronicle of how I, a once die-hard Square fanboy, became a bitter, angry Squeenix-hater.

Long ago, when I was around nine or ten, I was a firly lonesome boy. I didn't really have a lot of friends my own age, so I knd of hung around with the younger kids who lived in my neighborhood. We had little in common, but at that age, you were where you were, so I made the best of it. Until I met Dan. Dan was a kid a little bit older than me who lived up the street from me, and had that most sacred of instruments; The Super Nintendo. We hit it off fast, and soon, I was spending hours in his basement, playing Mario and Zelda, talking about Star Trek, and that was that. Until, that is... that golden day, when Dan recieved something new, something I had never thought of before... Final Fantasy III. To this day I remember the first question I ever asked about it: "If it's a FINAL Fantasy, how can there be three of them?" Dan nodded sagely, scratched his chin, and imparted to me the sacred wisdom, that he had, in fact, NO idea. Grinning, we set about playing the game. Here was something i had never seen the likes of before... an overworld. Once you got an airship, you could fly it whereever you wanted. Zelda had had something similar, of course, but not on this kind of SCALE! The turn-based battles that allowed you to think things through, the magic spells, the use of multiple characters at once... it was incredible. I remember sprawling, monstrous summons, and a deep story that I felt like my parents would be mad if they knew I had read. In time, I didn't see so much of Dan anymore, but I will always remember those days, when I first began to become the gamer I would always be. From that day, I regarded Square on the level of godhood, like the great Nintendo or Sega themselves.

The next I knew of Final Fantasy was when Final Fantasy VII came out. I was young, and confuced as hell about the numbering system. Wasn't the last one Final Fantasy III? It would be years before I heard about the now famous numbering SNAFU that led to this, but I simply shrugged and went with it. Unfortunately, when faced with the choice between a Playstation or a Nintendo 64, I had decided to not repeat the mistake of the Sega CD, and went with the 64. This gave me little to no access to the game, but I do remember playing it in pieces at a friend's house. The new 3D graphics amazed me, and I remember being utterly amazed at the speed of the Highwind, and the size of the monstrous Weapons. The story was even better than III (now known to in fact be VI), with a villain driven insane by the awful things that had been done to turn him into a hero. Gone were the short, squat people I remembered; they had been replaced with graphics that looked like humans and were, dare I say it? ATTRACTIVE.

I heard nothing of this wonderful world of games for many years, until I was going to High School. There, I was good friends with a guy named Rick, who had played but not enjoyed his copy of Final Fantasy VII, and so, gave it to me. What ensued was a wave of years passing, during which I became obsessed. I played every Square game I could get my hands on. By this point, I had my own PSX, and a world of possibilities was open to me. I played the Anthologies, thus visiting the original games I remembered, as well as being introduced to many that were new to me. I played the untouchable Chrono Trigger, and it's amazing sequel Chrono Cross. I played Vagrant Story and Star Ocean 2. I played the incredible Final Fantasy VIII, of course, with mounting joy.

Then, it happened. Final Fantasy IX. The game that was then, and in many ways will always be, my favorite RPG of all time. It was not without it's flaws, but Zidane's bright attitude and Vivi's tragic story held me in sway. Backed up by classic gameplay with a few twists, it easily ate hours of my life. With a smile on my face, I couldn't wait to pilot my strangely literal airship on a sea of mist. Thus ended what I now call the golden age of Square, and began what is now tainted forever in my mind as the Age of Squeenix.

The Playstation 2. Arguably the most popular videogame console of all time, this system is still in production today, despite the PS3 having been released years ago. With it came a whiole new wavelength of games and graphics. One day, I flipped open my Playstation Magazine, and there, printed before me, were the three letters I felt I had been waiting my whole life for: FFX. With baited breath, i read the article, frantic for any word whatsoever on this wonderful game. I soon discovered that the battle system I had grown to love would receieve a few tweaks. I had no worries, though. How could SQUARESOFT make a bad game, after all? In the months to come, when the game was finally released, I found myself to be a strange mix of satisfied and dissapointed. The game had indeed been excellent, with voice acting, action scenes, music I adored, and fun, though simple, gameplay. However, a small but inescapable cloud fell over the game. There was no overworld. I had been looking forward to flying a beautiful airship around a lovely, ocean blue planet, eagerly landing in unexplored places to seek all the strange and new secrets the world was sure to hold. Instead, i got to pick locations from a menu, and play a built in sports game.

This sadness was cut short as Square again shot me full of joy, with one of the greatest games they ever made, Kingdom Hearts. This odd mix of Final Fantasy storytelling and art direction with beloved Disney characters and locations was a surprise hit, to say the least. The very idea sounds absurd! However, I loved the game, and my doubts about Square were set safely aside for the time being. Little did I know what awaited on the horizon. Final Fantasy X-2 (Yes, that's said Ten two) was coming. At first, it made sense. "AH," I thought. "THAT'S why they didn't let you fly an airship! They knew they were going to make a sequel, and they didn't want to leave a question as to why you couldn't find the locations you visit in X-2 in the first one!" Nodding to myself, I waited happily for the game... only to be tragically dissapointed. It wasn't a BAD game... it was simply silly and thoughtless, which felt harsh and strange after the fun, deep world of X. Still in denial, I chalked it up to the natural order of things. After all, not everything is perfect every time. Even Square could make mistakes, right?

Shortly after, the Squeenix incident occurred. Square was hemmorhaging money fast after they had spent so much money on their relative failure of a movie, Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. Personally, I found the film to be excellent, but fans in general were crestfallen. They didn't want this new story. Most of them wanted Final Fantasy VII, but on the big screen. (Ironically, they would later get just that, and proceed to complain about it, too. You simply can't please a fan.) This combined with a bunch of other things caused Square to be bought out by Enix, a rival developer, and one who's games I had NEVER enjoyed. With a heavy heart, I purchased the first game to be released under the SquareEnix label, and was pleasantly surprised. Kingdom Hearts II was fun and intriguing, a somewhat darker counterpoint to the original. Maybe, I said to myself, things weren't so bad after all.

Then came the dark ages, from which we have never risen. The days of Final Fantasy XI. The game was designed to be a completely online experience, much like WOW, and frankly, was doomed from the start. Not only did you have to buy the PS2's optional hard drive to play it, but you had to shell out a monthly fee to be connected. I know very few people who even bothered. Those who did paint a bleak picture. Gone were the wonderful characters and events of games past, gone were controlling your parties in a turn based battle, gone were the days where puzzles took time and thought. All of this was replaced with grinding. Grinding, for those not in the know, is when you fight monsters for hours to level up your character to a point where the game becomes easier. They took a beautiful, tried and true system, and abandoned it comepltely.

Heartbroken, I waited for the day when Final Fantasy XII would be released, hoping for something, ANYTHING to dull the pain. Finally, that day came. The classic system had not been restored, so it played exactly like an MMORPG. That was bad enough, but I musceled past it. Suddenly, it happened. I realized what had been removed this time; the story. Where before there had been lovingly crafted tales of fantasy and worlds we could never even imagine, now there was a 70 hour treasure hunt. The absolute low point came for me when, in the course of the "story", a term I use loosely, it became necessary that a world famous Captain, who was in your party, reveal that he was alive and well. Instead of having him do that, they have you, a 17 year old street kid, PRETEND TO BE HIM. The utter lack of logic so defeated me that I broke inside. Not only was Squeenix crushing my childhood, but they were assuming I was an idiot, too.

With that, I put up my Final Fantasy belt. Many games have come and gone since, mostly in the Final Fantasy Tactics and Crystal Chronicles franchises, but I don't have the heart to even rent them. My very soul cries out in torment at the thought of not being first in line for a Final Fantasy purchase, but there is nothing to be done. The only rays of light come from a strange place: the PSP. Oddly, the few Final Fantasy games released on that system, specifically Dissidia and Crisis Core, were actually pretty good. For a while, I thought that this was indicative of things to come.

Suddenly, there seemed to be a silver lining. Final Fantasy XIII was on its way, and it was supposedly turn based again. It seemed to me that they were finally listening to the outcry of the fans, but recent revelations indicate that it was, in fact, not to be. Though the gameplay is of a more classic nature, they have gone one step too far. There are no longer towns in Final Fantasy, because SquareEnix has decided that they are simply "too hard" to program. They also throw around words like "archaic". The joys of shopping, visiting the Inn, of seeing what life is like in a strange new world, are gone. The world map is insanely linear, with no exploration to be had. It has been said to me that the first six hours of the game are literally in a straight line. These accusations, should they prove true, are the death of this series for me.

Final Fantasy was, to me, about exploring a fantasy. I loved the exotic locations, I loved that there were complete worlds to explore, and above all, I loved the quality. I played these games as a child not because of the popularity, but because of what the name Square meant. It guaranteed quality, it guaranteed that even if I didn't enjoy the game, I would be able to see the love and effort put into it by those who made it. No longer. The games have become lazy, and too absorbed with trying to make money off of pretty graphics and shallow gameplay.

Every Final Fantasy since IX has lost some major portion of what once was the very core of the series. X abandoned the beautiful overworld. XI abandoned the classic party system and turn based gameplay. XII ditched the once lovely story in favor of mindless droning. And XIII... XIII has abandoned what was most important of all... the atmosphere. The towns and shops and random exploration that made the worlds fell ALIVE. I once believed that the new generation of systems would bring an end to shallow games.

I hope to the god of games that these thoughts are unfounded, and that, in a little less than a month's time, I can post a retraction with a song in my heart and a smile on my face. However, I can't help but think back to the day I was a small, lonely boy in his neighbor's basement. I can't help but feel that now I know the answer to the question I asked that day. In a world where swords and spells are fast being replaced by grinding and guns, maybe the day has finally come where it makes sense. Those worlds that meant so much to me are gone. Maybe they really were my Final Fantasy.

Final Fantasy 13 - Battle System

While my opinion of Final Fantasy 13 overall is not entirely a favorable one, I also do not think it to be a bad game or bad by Final Fantasy standards in general. With that said, I do think it has the worst battle system of any Final Fantasy game in the main series (yes worse than 12).

For the uninitiated, Final Fantasy 13 utilizes what is called the Paradigm system. This means nothing without explanation of course. What it means though, is that each character has set actions under a specific title given to it, or easier explained they are temporary job classes that can be changed on the fly. Those jobs are, Commando, Medic, Ravenger, Sabatour, Synergist and Sentinel. The goal of the system is to continually keep your party in check using the appropriate skill-set needed at a specific time to either keep your party alive, or ensure the enemies stagger meter keeps going. The main goal of every fight is to raise the enemy's stagger meter to the max, break it, and then kill the enemy quickly.

While on the surface this system seems interesting, it falls apart in various ways. The first major issue I have with the system is what it actually stands for. In this game you can only control one character, that being your leader. The remainder of your team is controlled by the AI and does actions assigned to the paradigm they have set currently. So the paradigm system in the end has one and only one major function, and that is to give the AI only a very specific set of options to use and hope it does what you want. While the AI is limited, you are also unfortunately very limited to your own role and what you decide to do as the leader. To make this easier to understand why this system is not only horrible and tediously restrictive, but also to show how poorly it was implemented I will break up the issues I have found by class.

Commando: I'll start out with the game's least offender of problems. The commando class is essentially the Warrior class allowing the computer to use basically attack and blitz, blitz being an attack that affects many enemies. It is entirely straightforward and keeps the enemies stagger meter up, but does not increase it. How does the AI screw this up you ask? That answer is simple. If I want a team with two warriors, com/com/doesn't matter, the AI will attack whatever enemy I am not attacking, which is fine in some cases I may indeed want that. But I have NO choice in the matter. I can't further edit the Commando class to have the AI combo attack the same thing I am for some swift justice. Only if it is the ONLY enemy left on the field will the AI agree that it should also attack the same enemy I am.

This is just the first phase of the battle system telling me I am not allowed to decide how I want to play the game.

Ravenger: My issues with the Ravenger class stem less from the class itself and more from how the battle system is designed overall. But don't get me wrong the AI still manages to screw this up anyway. This class is the Mage essentially, and only casts offensive magic. Every enemy in the game has some weakness or immunity to one magic or another, however, the AI in all it's wisdom has no fucking clue what that weakness is unless you cast Libra. The game forces you to cast Libra JUST so the AI knows how not to be a retarded mess. Once Libra is cast the AI now knows the weakness, but it's a waste of a turn if you ask me. I KNOW the enemy's weakness 90% of the time without Libra, I've played RPG's since I was a wee lad so these games tend to make it obvious. The mere fact that because I cannot control my party means I have to play teacher for every new enemy just so the AI does what I want it to do pisses me off to no end.

So after Libra, how does the AI still manage to be a dumbass? Well it does manage this, oh yes it does. After an enemy becomes staggered you are given the ability to launch the enemy in the air preventing it from doing any damage at all. Now, I don't know about you but I want this to happen ALL the time. Here's the rub, Ravenger's only ability to launch an enemy is Aeroga (or however it's spelled) point is the AI will tend to not use this spell when I want him to, you know all the damn time after stagger. If I COULD control him that's what I would have him do. Even if the enemy is not weak to Wind, I don't care, I want that beast floating around till it's dead.

But I don't get what I want do I, no I'm playing Final Fantasy 13, the game on rails.

Sentinel: The Sentinel class is a defensive class that allows the user to literally just not die. It provokes surrounding enemies to attack only the sentinel in which next to no damage occurs. Oddly, this is the only class the AI does not manage to screw up, but I still hate it. I hate the idea that I need it (and yes you actually have to use this class). I've played countless RPG's and never was it my strategic prerogative to defend, ever. There was no need for it, even if my mage ran out of magic I'd still prefer it to attack for the measly 15 damage it could do or throw out some items. But again, I'm playing FF13 so I don't get to play the way I want to play.

The enemies in this game after a while literally force you to put up a Sentinel and either heal, or buff with the other two classes just to survive long enough to cast offensive spells. Now this is great for bosses, it actually makes you think you're outsmarting them, but when you have long 7 hour stretches of fighting enemies and waiting for the retarded AI to cast the CORRECT defensive buff (read Synergist section) on every fucking encounter, you start to want to kill yourself. Seriously, it annoyed me that much.

Sabatour: Sabatour is the class that casts debuff effects on enemies, ie slow, pain, etc. This one is funny to me. My annoyance with this class comes from my very own need to develop my own strategy in a game I've come to realize simply won't let me. The Sabatour class is the only class other than Commando that also keeps the stagger meter going without dropping briskly while having the added benefit of causing debuffs on the enemy. I love this, and hate this, here's why....the STUPID FUCKING AI.

So often I'll find myself in a tight bind in this game, nearly dead after some super attack the AI did. I want to heal, but I don't want to lose my stagger meter, and I wouldn't mind debuffing the enemy in the process. Simple solution, medic/medic/sabatour. This works great, fabulous even...until...until the enemy IS actually debuffed. I'm not fully healed yet, and the AI decides to stop doing ANYTHING because it figures the enemy is debuffed enough.

Actual conversation with the TV

"NO NO NO AI, I want you to keep casting slow before I lose my stagger meter! What are you fucking doing???"

So once an enemy is debuffed the sabatour class is actually completely useless and you may as well forget you have one paradigm setting. Oh yes, did I mention you only have 6 different settings to choose from? *sigh*

Synergist: I've saved my most hated two classes for last. Synergist is the opposite of Sabatour, it buffs your party. There are many problems with this class, I'm not sure where to begin. I'll discuss how the AI is programmed I guess. I've played this game for 40 hours now, and routinely see how the AI operates, and I just don't fucking understand its reasoning. My party is Lighting (leader), Hope, and Fang. Hope is the Synergist if you didn't know, and the rules of this game state that if your leader dies, you lose, got it? Good.

So the AI when it first casts buffs casts them on who first? Take a wild guess. NOPE not the Leader! Well what about the Synergist himself? Fuck NO! The order of buff, and this never changes, is to cast it on the third useless character FIRST for no god damn reason. I don't CARE if the third character dies, the game ends if I fucking die! I wouldn't even mind if the Synergist buffed himself so he survives and buffs my leader. But NO he buffs himself last, which makes even LESS sense considering he has the lowest HP and can die very quickly. Again, if I were in control this would never happen. You want to know the shittiest part? Say I have Com/Syn/Sent up, guess who he casts protect on first? The FUCKING SENTINEL!! What sense does this make?

There is more...

You literally get no control in this game, have I mentioned this before? The only control you get is to tell the AI what set of spells or attacks he is allowed to use at a given time. Keyword, SET of spells or attacks. Here we have the Synergist, whom has...how do I put this...an ASSFUCK set of spells that you do NOT get to decide the order in which they are cast.

Actual conversation to the TV

"Hope...Hope! Cast protect on Lighting Hope...Anytime would be great...No I didn't want shell on Fang...I don't want shell at all. Nope didn't want Veil either. What the fuck does that even do (I found out later, and really don't give a shit about Veil). Waste more time please..."

That was a normal encounter folks, one of many...This happened through all of Chapter 10 I'd say.

So here's the deal, instead of allowing the user to further customize the Synergist (or any) class telling it specifically what order you want what, or to exclude this or that, you get NO choices at all and are simply subject to the AI's whims at all times. They will literally go through the order of buffing you with every god damn spell they have. It is a waste of time!

Medic: This is my most hated class for the AI to control. It encompasses everything about how the AI and battle system functions that makes it completely atrocious and every time I see the AI use it I ask myself this, "Why can't I control what my party does?"

Oh boy here we go.

So the healing class, probably the most important class in any RPG in the hands of an AI I can't tell what to do. In Final Fantasy 12 you could tell it what to do. You could specifically set its program to revive, to heal at a certain % of health or whatever, it was your call. The Medic however, is designed thus, to heal whatever character has the lowest hit points at the time. This is a detrimental design flaw, and really the only one that actually breaks the game sometimes. Bosses and some powerful enemies have devastating attacks that will send the whole team to red. You have to HOPE and PRAY that the character in your party with the LEAST HP is your Leader. Yeah that's right, you want your leader to be on the verge of death so the AI will heal it and you'll survive. That's a perfect world though, as I've had countless battles where the AI will decide to heal another character with lower hit points all for the sake of who the fuck cares. So my leader sits there dying, and often does with the next blow while the AI thought it to be a wonderful idea to heal the THIRD character whom means NOTHING at this juncture.

Why is it programmed this way? Wouldn't you ALWAYS want the leader to be alive? Wouldn't you always want it to have top priority? Hell at LEAST heal the leader if it is blinking RED, but fuck that, the third character has less HP, heal that instead. Stupid....stupid....stupid!

Here's another fun flaw in the Medic. The raise spell. What does it do? Brings back a ko'ed character. Fucking useless in a game where if your leader dies you lose the game. So the raise spell doesn't work on one of three characters. OH WAIT! It doesn't work on TWO of three characters either. That's right, the Medic himself also has no fucking use for the raise spell....cause he'd be dead.

It gets better. The raise spell is further useless to the AI because it will never fucking cast it unless BOTH remaining characters have near full HP. I have seen it go through 4 turns making sure both he and I were literally at MAX HP until it used raise to bring the third character back. WHAT....THE.....FUCK?

Conclusion: The sad thing is all of this could have been easily avoided if you were allowed to further customize how the AI operated in their respective class. While my personal preference would be to never ever let the AI control my party anyway, I would have liked more options, more choices. The way FF13 plays now I feel like I have no control, and I'm just paradigm shifting simply to stay alive and allow the battle to play out all by itself. There is no sense of accomplishment, no sense of actual strategy either. The AI just comes out and spams all its debuffs and all its buffs because it was programmed that way. Instead of having strategic uses for any of these classes you are locked in to simply just watching shit happen, oh and casting Libra to make sure the AI doesn't fuck up more.

The intentions of this battle system are clear, it was built for noobs, 5 year olds, people who like games on auto-pilot. This was not built for gamers, not built for RPG players used to setting up sound strategic options against tough foes. There is no sense of accomplishment with this system. There is never a critical moment where you saved yourself or your party because of a decision you made. There are no decisions to make in this game, there's only what the AI chooses to do. Oh, and did I mention you also have an option called "auto battle." Prove to me this game wasn't made for noobs and I'll mail you a cookie.

*lamest battle system ever*

Assassin's Creed Poo (or 2)

Assassin's Creed was little more than a really good tech demo when it came out. It had all the trappings of a great free roam game with stealth and assassination, but was bogged down with repetition and next to zero variability. While many gamers were turned off with this three note fiddle, I personally preferred that game to what Ubi Soft has given us with Assassin's Creed 2.

Story:

The story of Assassin's Creed 2 is arguably better than the first game, it is at least more fleshed out. Clearly the developers went out of their way to make us care about Ezio as opposed to Altiar from the first game. Very generally Ezio is developed over the start of the game. He's a ladies man, gets into trouble, we see his...birth? Yeah, so it really doesn't go into a lot of hard detail like a good RPG or a game where character development matters. I honestly wish I didn't know about Ezio. Everything we were given was too general to like him, and enough to know he has no business being as badass as Altiar was. For this reason I didn't feel like a badass in the game anymore like I did in the first.

The plot itself is more or less serviceable, but exists when it wants to and not when you expect it. By that I mean more often than not you are an errand boy for someone or another and then randomly Ezio will start to pursue his own ambitions. Ultimately it feels exactly like the story from the first game. The only notable differences are the parts with Desmond, and sadly he's even more uninteresting than Ezio. He honestly may as well be the silent protagonist except that he actually talks sometimes, but all he ever says are questions to prompt the supporting cast to tell the player wtf is going on. The only reasons it seems he has to stay with the group he's with is because of his ancestry and his cock wants the hot science chick.

Graphics:

There's not much to complain about here. Graphically speaking ACII does a good job. Lighting, textures, and really good water effects stand out for me. The only problems I notices were sometimes you can be standing on top of a building looking at other buildings and they will literally just start freaking out. It doesn't happen often, but the textures on the buildings will just start jumping around and going crazy. I lol'ed pretty hard watching that happen.

Gameplay:

This is where the game really falls apart. Perhaps the fault of not enjoying this follow up is my own. I played the first installment on the PC, which was a joy to play. Never did I encounter as many frustrating moments as I have with ACII. There are some serious design choices that I find very questionable in this game.

Firstly, a simple task of trying to run someone down. The free running in this game is more than just touchy, it has a mind of its own. I feel like the game is trying to play by itself and ignoring what I tell it. Often when I'm trying to run down a thief or rich nobleman to steal their gold Ezio will decide that he wants to climb the nearest whatever because it's fun or something...

Sometimes I'll agree, and try to climb said object or building. Another supreme design flaw crops up while climbing. Unlike the first game where every building was built like a ladder and you literally just went up, ACII said screw that and for reasons of "realism" tried to make the buildings more puzzle like and not a straightforward climb. This is fine sometimes, but not when you're already frustrated during a chase Ezio starts to climb and you didn't want him to. So frustrated I start pressing random buttons and he ends up leaping like a freak off the building and I take damage.

Even while calming down and trying to figure out the asinine control scheme of climbing buildings I still can't for the life of me ever make Ezio do what I want him to do unless I find the rare straightforward climb building and just go about my business.

But the biggest flaw with climbing is the stupidest design choice I came across with this game. The leap ability (or whatever lame name the game gave it.) About 60% of the game you are playing with a flawed and mentally ill Ezio, and you don't even realize it until you get this ability. It allows Ezio to JUMP higher to grab stuff above him he couldn't reach before.... This has to be the stupidest thing I have ever seen. Ezio has to learn a lot of simple basic Assassin things through the start of the game, makes sense to me. But why in the holy fuck doesn't he learn how to JUMP and GRAB ledges? He actually has to WATCH someone do this to understand the concept. It blew my mind. All those times I watched Ezio try to climb buildings and be RIGHT at the top only to just stare at it as I hold up, and NOW he fucking learns how to jump? What's worse is even before I got this "ability" I saw him nab things higher than those glitched unclimbable buildings I came across earlier. But to actually make it an ability gobsmacks me. This should have been available at the start of the god damn game. Not only that, you shouldn't have to enter a command for it, Ezio should just DO it on his own if shit is too high for him to reach. Further, who's fucknut idea was it to make the Grab command the SAME as the Release command? Should I even have to describe why that was a stupid as fuck idea? Of all the unused buttons on the controller they had to combine grab and release....so I find myself using the shitty jump command, only to have Ezio occasionally not do it, reach for my circle button (grab/release) and have it release me off the building and then I have to go find my controller because I chucked it across the room in frustration.

Another exploration gameplay element I loathed were the 6 stages you collect ancient shit to unlock a door that has the game's best armor in it. I won't delve into how stupid I think their security system is, but let me tell you, it's retarded. The issue I take is with those 6 stages. What are they? They are HUGE platforming areas where you guide Ezio through seemingly endless climbing areas to eventually obtain one damn miserable key. With Ezio having a mind of his own and his gimped climbing abilities, these areas are the shittiest I have ever played since the dawn of 3D gaming, and I am not exaggerating. You can spend 6 minutes climbing around trying to figure out where to go next, and then boom Ezio says fuck you and leaps like a freak off and you start all over again. They actually put checkpoints in these areas, like they knew you were going to hate climbing around this shit. WHO THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE FUN? The game is called "Assassin's Creed," not "Jump from random shit to random shit" for an hour, you want to fucking kill things secretively.

I picked up playing ACII just after I got the platinum trophy on Infamous. I mention this because Infamous's exploration is a lot like ACII. The difference is that it's never frustrating. There's no "run" button, no "leap" button no "grab" button no "release" button. There's move the stick that way press X to jump, shit works. Learn from them please!

Combat:

The combat is largely unchanged from the first game, which is fine. The combat really boils down to waiting for the enemy to attack and counter him. They attack you one at a time just like last time. The only real improvement is now you can taunt, negating having to wait for them to attack you can actually prompt them to attack. There's a new type of counter now, you can take their weapon, but it results in the exact same ending as if you did a regular counter. Ezio does learn some new things, but I honestly can't remember what they were because all you have to do is use the counter command.

Music:

When it's noticeable, the music is astoundingly good. I didn't dislike a single track, and eagerly awaited prompting the next melody. Very well done, a vast improvement from the first game.

Overall:

I enjoyed ACI more than ACII. Somehow they made ACII more complicated for no reason. Sure there were flaws in ACI, but instead of improving or fixing those flaws they added more of them to ACII. It's a shame really, but I was honestly more frustrated by ACII than anything else.

*Ezio used "leap like a freak" attack*

Final Fantasy 7: Overrated?

Since the advent of internet message boards there has been heavy debate about a little game known as Final Fantasy 7. The list of this game's accomplishments is not a short one. It has been decorated as the greatest RPG many times over, it's characters have received similar treatment as being called "best villain" or "best hero" of all time, and the game has been called by a few sources as the greatest video game ever made.

It's no wonder that this game has so much opposition along with it. Considering the psychology of detractors it is easy to point out that it is simply just "cool" to hate it since so many loved it. Instead I will make a point counterpoint list of all the most common complaints about Final Fantasy 7 and show why they are unfounded, and overblown.

Firstly, let's discuss something about opinions. I do not mind anyone who says they did not like Final Fantasy 7, I have a problem with people who call it a "bad" game. It is clearly not a bad game for reasons I will further delve into, and for all the accolades it has received which speak volumes to it more than I ever could. What detractors tend to forget is they can dislike something, but they have to go one level higher to understand if that something is actually bad. For instance, I dislike the Metal Gear Solid series, but I will never call them bad games because I know they aren't. If you cannot understand this perspective then I cannot respect your opinions. This is the sort of thing that gets lost on message boards and popular opinion.

Back to the point of the article...the top 10 complaints of Final Fantasy 7:

1. The story is terrible!

I often read this from haters of FF7, with little else posted. To this day I have yet to read actual complaints about the story other than it has poor translation (look to complaint #5 for that). So what about the story was so terrible? Let's recap it quick shall we? Cloud, a mercenary sets out to make some dough and befriends a rebel group along the way against an evil company called Shinra who seeks the promised land to further their overall power. The main villain former hero Sephiroth discovers his past and causes him to go insane and really just be a thorn in everyone's side from there on, and of course, seeks to destroy the world. Many plot twists and character developments ensue and we have ourselves an RPG.

At no point in playing this game did I consider it to be anything less than what I had played prior. If anything it was an improvement on what had been offered in the past, and that's the bar in which it should be measured (see complaint #6). Square had provided us with the very first cinematic heavy, deeply woven plot line the likes of which the game genre had never seen before. I have yet to find a valid argument to why FF7's story is any worse than what had been offered before it.

2. The characters are underdeveloped and stereotypical.

Stereotypical? Yes. Underdeveloped? No, you didn't finish the game/weren't paying attention. First, let's analyze stereotypical as I love this argument most. Stereotypical by what measure? If your answer is to other RPG's then I lol in your face. Did the game at any point call a character "Warrior" or "black mage"? No. Then by this standard that had been set by RPG's prior FF7 was a revelation. People often point to Crono Trigger as a game with a better cast of characters. While I love Crono Trigger I will say this about its character development and stereotypes all with two words, "silent protagonist." There, suck on that.

Now for the characters being underdeveloped? I do not understand this argument. For the first time in a long time each character was given their own scene of development about what their goals and aspirations were, or stories about their past. Some characters got multiple moments like this. I can't name many RPG's that gave each character their own moment in the sun in that time period but FF7 did it.

3. Cloud is emo.

Ugh...Cloud's entire persona before disc 1 was that he was out for himself, wanted money, cared nothing for others. This is not emo. Throughout disc 1 we see a change in Cloud through his involvement with Aries and he finds a heart for his friends and their struggle. Aries dies and Cloud then finds this "emo" area through the majority of the game. But what defines this "emo" state? Simply, Cloud feels useless, like he cannot help or save anyone and doesn't know his place in life. I dare to find a single person in the world today that has never experienced this at least once, or can't imagine that some have even been consumed by it. How is this not relatable or unrealistic? Cloud lost a close friend right in front of his eyes, does he suddenly become happy? No. Does he dance around with glee? No... Does he exhibit a very honest human emotion? Why yes he does! Then quit whining about it.

4. Sephiroth is a mediocre villain.

RPG's of that era had this going for them, that every villain's goal was to take over the world, destroy it, or do both. Sephiroth is no different from these villains except that we actually get to see his past and know his thoughts. Every villain before him wanted power, control, or whatever. Sephiroth is interesting because he doesn't want any of these things. He's insane really and we get to watch him evolve from hero to villain right before our eyes because of what he learns about himself. He sees the truth, hates it, loathes himself at first and then embraces it causing his insanity. This is interesting, this is not stale, this is engrossing. How is he worse than Lavos from Crono Trigger whom we know nothing about? Or the many final bosses of FF1-5 whom I can barely remember the names of. Many counter that Kefka was a more interesting character. Kefka was good, and definitely a step in the right direction, but he sought only power and to control the world, *yawn* been there done that. Sephiroth wanted to end all life on the planet and use it to travel to other galaxies to spread his hatred for life. Insane! And, interesting.

5. This game has poor translation.

They all did back then. Few people realize the market of video games was just booming around this time and the interest in spending large quantities of money for good translations was a foreign (lol) idea. This is one reason people state the game has a bad story. Well ignore for a moment that the game wasn't translated well, how is the story worse because of it? The actions of the characters still play out the same way in all translations. The points are still understood, and confusion only occurs to people not paying attention (see complaint 7).

6. You can't keep using the excuse of "for the time...."

Yes I can. FF7 came out in 1997 and that's how we measure things. How many people claim Gone With the Wind is bad because movies these days are better, or make more sense? No one, they call it a classic and move on. But for some reason FF7 is not allowed the same treatment. For the time, FF7 did what no other RPG had done. It was a cinematic experience like no other, with solid game play, characters, music, and graphics (see complaint 10). For the time, it was a revelation.

7. Final Fantasy 7 has too many plot holes.

It does? Which ones? I can't find them, everything that was important was explained to me. I played the game 8 times through, and I remain satisfied with the story. That's not to say the game doesn't have a few HUH??? moments but it is a Japanese game, let's keep this in mind. That being said, Japanese plots and stories are batshit crazy let's be honest. Most westerners aren't totally used to some of the crazy shit the Japanese have cooked up in the past, but FF7 is pretty tame by those standards.

8. This game is too easy!

Ah, another favorite complaint of mine. For the uninitiated, FF7 is an RPG, a genre that as I understand it is made to be beaten. The entire point of the genre is to be an interactive storybook. I dare to find anyone complain that an RPG from that era was difficult at all. Sure, strategy RPG's were, some of them, but mainstream Japanese RPG's spoon fed you every step of the way. Can't beat a boss? Grind! Seriously, that is the solution to every RPG and if this defines difficulty to the genre, then I'll prefer FF7's pace any day. The fact that FF7 is fluent in that you do not have to grind to hear the story is a testament to just how well put together the game was as an RPG. That's not to say the game boasts no challenge either. They put Emerald and Ruby weapons in the game for just that reason.

9. The game takes itself too seriously.

This complaint is more common than you think. And the easy response is this: Cloud dresses up like a girl in the beginning of the game. While the game has more moments of whimsical comedy like this, at no point do I feel like I have to mention anything other than that. Conversation over, he cross dresses.

10. The graphics are terrible!

For the time....for the time... Square as few may know, is a graphics whore first and foremost. If at the time they devised a better cleaner look to a game they would have used it. Well that was the best they could come up with for the time. And dammit, it still looks better than 16 bit sprites. I think this complaint stems mostly from those of us that remember the commercials and all they showed us were the cinemas. Yeah, we were all fooled. It was a mean trick. I got over it, but a lot of people still harbor a grudge.

Conclusion:

Final Fantasy 7 will always be one of the all time great games, whether it is in your collection of greats or not. The arguments saying it was a bad game are laughable and just plain incorrect. I could sit here all day and complain about how much I hated the game play of Metal Gear Solid, or the 1 hour cut scenes it had, or how the villains continually sought redemption for no damn reason. But the fact is, Metal Gear Solid invented a genre, it was a solid game with tight controls, great music, and interesting writing. The fact that I hate it, even for some of those reasons, will never take away the fact that Metal Gear Solid is a classic, in the same respect that Final Fantasy 7 is. Insert your own "Metal Gear" here, it's still a perspective that needs to be understood.

*rant over...food now*

Batman: Arkham Asylum ... FINALLY!

It took nearly 25 years, hundreds of developers, thousands of man hours, and millions of kids screaming at their TV for a good Batman game to be made. For the first time in gaming history we are finally able to play a Batman game where we actually feel like we ARE Batman. The developers at Rocksteady got it right, and I'd like to say thank you.

Sure, one could argue that there were a few Batman gems along the way. The first NES game for instance wasn't terrible, it in fact was actually quite good albeit way too hard. But from there, really, nothing notable, and nothing genuinely "Batman." The main problem with superhero games in general is comic book studios or movie studios look to give the rights to developers that have no interest in making a "good" game, but to make a semi-functional game to turn a quick buck.

Here we have a product that lets us do the following: Be a detective, sneak around and attack, use assorted Batman tools, follow a comprehensive comic book-esque plot line, fight known super villains (yeah from time to time they made Batman games where you fought shit that never existed in Batman's universe...so I count it), and finally were able to fight like a ninja.

Rocksteady not only put all of this into one game, they did all of it fairly well. I find some hiccups in the battle mechanics, but it's certainly not the worst I've ever played. It can be closest compared to Assassin's Creed where you have a counter option and an attack option except with Batman they also gave you evade, and combo mix-ups which helps. The main issue I had with the combat was more related to the camera than anything else which sometimes decides to swing the wrong way and I end up dodge rolling into Bane's fist, or whatever you get the idea. It happened enough to where I'd call it an issue.

Aside from that, Rocksteady has made the perfect Batman game. Some complaints running around the internet deal with the fact that the game doesn't offer enough boss fight variety. While I mildly agree with this complaint, I honestly didn't mind while playing. Every boss fight felt natural and part of the story, rather than a forced confrontation with, say Mr. Freeze or something. This game wasn't meant to be a showcase for Batman villains, it was a Joker story so Rocksteady stuck to its guns and I applaud that. There was only one moment where we should have been allowed to fight Harley...but didn't for some reason. That would have been a fun fight by the way, she's a nimble fighter, I would have been entertained.

The only other minor complaints I can even find for this game are in the music department, and Batman's gradual deterioration throughout the game. First, the music had moments of genius, and perfect placement occasionally. Why it has to disappear entirely for half the game is beyond me. It's rare I actually notice when a game is lacking music in places. Artistic choice, or laziness, I'm not sure. For Batman, he gets beat up and tossed around throughout the game, so his suit gets gradually beat up over the course of the game. My issue with this was only that it should have gotten MORE beat up! Seriously, it doesn't look ALL that bad by the end after what he gets put through. So just a pet peeve, love the idea but in practice it juuuuuuust wasn't enough, lol. Oh, and I should mention the voice actor for Jim Gorden was atrocious! Where's the one from Batman the Animated series? They got damn near everyone else, why not him? He really stuck out like a sore thumb in the midst of gods like Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill.

So, if you're like me and have been craving a good Batman game since your childhood, and Batman Forever was the last Batman game you ever played (me) then do yourself a favor and buy this game! Support good development if you can. If your question is "Well is it worth the $60?" I say yes, even though I literally did everything the main story had to offer in one day from 8:00am to 1:00am yesterday, I'd do it all again in a heartbeat. Plus I haven't touched the challenge rooms yet. I would argue this is easily not just the best Batman game ever made, but the best Superhero game ever made and hopefully this becomes a trend.

*I think I still hear Joker over the PA...something is wrong...*

Don't Stop at Gamestop

*sigh* The last straw has been broken. I will officially never shop at Gamestop again. They are either the single worst organization I have ever seen, or they simply want ME specifically to bend over (see picture).

So let's begin with the very first issue I've had with them.

Story #1: Used Games pt.1

Used games. They guarantee them to work right? Yeah I thought corporate policy was the truth once...once. The year was 2001 (I think), I had never in my life owned a Playstation, but had recently acquired a Playstation 2 via Christmas and awesome parents. The PS2 game lineup at the time was less than impressive and so I went on a hunt for Playstation games I missed out on.

Topping my list was Chrono Cross, it would also be the last game I found. I of course found it at a Gamestop, used, and not in its original case. But so what I think, no biggie it'll work. Half a year passes before I actually start playing Chrono Cross because I was playing various Gamecube, and other PS1 titles I got. I made it through the first disk of Chrono Chross, no problem. Keep in mind though, it took me about two months to get through the first disk, (I work, had school, life). I start the second disk, it freezes on the very first cinema you come across. Of course I worked diligently to remedy this shocking problem. To no avail, not even the prestigious toothpaste trick worked. I was thusly screwed having owned the game longer than Gamestop's return policy allows.

Furthermore, it wasn't my fault. I'd like to reference the time it took me to get through disk 1! Considering normal people do not whiz through games JUST to see if they work to know if they have to return them or not, I blame Gamestop for not checking disk 2!

Story #2: Used Games pt.2

So from the first incident I learned never to buy used games that are disc based. Problem solved right? Wrong! I attempted to hunt down a copy of Metriod Zero Mission for the GBA since I somehow missed it previously. It was only like a year but seriously, you couldn't find a single new copy of this game anywhere for some reason. So I resorted to using Gamestop's used games guarantee thinking Nintendo's game cartridges would defeat their so called guarantee regardless. WRONG AGAIN! The cartridge I received would not save my game, and had clearly been inflicted with an action replay device as the game stored on it was beyond human playing possibility. Never the less, it was relatively clear the battery was dead....

Ahem... HOW DID THIS HAPPEN??? I can only blame Gamestop for this, not Nintendo. Why do you ask? This is why. I own something in the neighborhood of 400 battery based games dating back to Nintendo's very first battery based game that actually required you to hold "reset" and push "power" otherwise the save didn't work! Weird, I know. But that game folks, still works, and still saves my game files. Gamestop fails again.

Story #3: The Mouse and the Trap

Okay, this is less a personal incident rather a store policy of Gamestop's that makes me hate going there period. I can't just walk in and buy a game from Gamestop. No, I can't, and you probably can't either. Nope, you have to listen to their 20 minute long lecture about how you should reserve games, trade in your used games, sign up for their reward program and online store, BECOME A F$*@ING TOOL! Admittedly this is normally a 3 minute affair at best. But I ran into one manager that would literally not let me leave. I paid him for the game, he had it in the bag, and did not hand it to me before his lecture.

The first five minutes I was polite. The next 3 minutes I found myself arguing why I do not reserve games, (simple answer: because I can get them ANYWHERE I WANT). The next 7 minutes he spends convincing me that I should reserve games, telling me fables of misfortune gamers who didn't reserve a game, (and *gasp* if I had met that poor fellow I bet he drove across the street to Wal-Mart, bought the game and played it that night!). The last 3 minutes I was asking for my game which he was still holding (if you're wondering it was Mega Man ZX Advent). But no, I wasn't yet convinced that he was right. So instead of like saying 'no you can't have the game yet' like a normal ass, he instead just ignored me entirely and continued his rant. He was absolutely positive he could get $5 from me on some random game. I of course stood my ground, and he eventually relinquished the game without any bloodshed. But of course, I never went back there ever again. 20 minutes I'll never get back.

*interesting note, this Gamestop was located in a mall that got torn down the following summer, revenge!*

A tidbit side story: Once when buying Street Fighter 4 (Best buy didn't have them in yet) I was asked if I wanted to reserve a copy of God of War III. Really Gamestop? Really? That game isn't due out until 2010 or more. I respectfully declined holding back a snicker. Then he suggested that I should reserve Final Fantasy XIII. I couldn't contain my laughter....that is the end of that story.

Story #4: The FINAL STRAW

So here it is, what will permanently keep me away from every Gamestop ever. Three weeks ago I tried my hand at getting the Madcatz TE Fightstick ($160 purchase, nothing to sneeze at). The Wiialert told me Gamestop had them in stock on their website. I acquire one with wizard-like speed and am very pleased with myself as this is about as rare an item as one can actually buy in the game world right now. Days pass, my order remains "pending" instead of "shipped." I email and ask wtf???? only nicer. They respond with "we are currently out of stock on this item and will ship it when we get more in." NO NO NO! I bought it! Why would you let me buy it if you have none!?? That's like if I sold you, the viewer a calculator, you hand me the money, and I say "nope, we're out of stock, fu!"

So ok, whatever, it's a rare item I'll just squat on it. One mere day later a friend of mine tells me I can order them through Best Buy, not online mind you but through their warehouse at their store and do an in-store pickup. Wonderful news, and I do just that! Immediately I cancel my order with Gamestop and receive a confirmation email. Read at your pleasure:

Dear Customer,

Thank you for contacting us.

In response to your request we have cancelled your order.

As a reminder, your payment method was never charged for the canceled items. Any related authorization hold on your credit or debit card account will be released in accordance with your financial institution holds policy. Please contact your financial institution for more information. For Barnes & Noble orders, refunds are processed within 3-5 business days. If your order was placed with a GameStop gift card or Edge Card, please note that any related authorization hold on the card should fall off within 3-5 business days.

Also, please feel free to check out our new website features for your future cancellation needs as we are now offering customer self-service options, like canceling your own order/items.

We value your business and hope to see you again soon!

Best regards,

Tim Customer Service Agent

Original Message Follows: ------------------------
I would like to cancel this order.
PS3 Street Fighter IV Tournament Edition Fight Stick

Thank you!

Ryan Porter
Order Number: xxxxxxxxxxxxx (as this is still an ongoing matter the order number has been blacked out)

----------

Ok, so I'm good right? WRONG! WRONG WRONG WRONG! Today, I got an email telling me they have shipped the item! WTF?? I already have it because Best Buy is a retail demi-god and you suck dildo. So what do I do? I don't want it. So I tell them just that, and even copy paste the original cancellation email thinking this is their problem not mine. Here's the response:

Dear Ryan,

Thank you for contacting GameStop.com.

Upon review of your order, there are no records of any attempt to cancel this order either from our customer service department or by our Gamestop.com website. We do apologize for the confirmation that you received as it was in error on our part.

You will receive an email from UPS with a printable shipping label. When you use this label, you will not be charged for shipping. Instructions on how to complete the return are also in the email. Please use this label to return your package to us. Once received you will be issued a refund for the item, as we have also requested a refund on the shipping to be processed as well.

No record? I have a record and I'm no retail giant! I sent you the record! So ok, they send me a UPS label and junk so I can send it back when I get it, no skin off my back. Except the projected HOUR it will take me to gather this together and send it back, not to mention they won't release my credit card payment on the item UNTIL they get it! IT WAS THEIR FAULT 100%. Not to mention I use FedEx and have no clue where a UPS store is in my area, this whole process is foreign to me since I KEEP WHAT I BUY.

I am beyond frustrated with this company, its practices, and it's current domination in my favorite industry as a retailer. I urge all of you reading this today to not support them if you can avoid it. Send your used games to Amazon, they are a reputable business. Buy new games from Best Buy. Don't stand for Gamestop's crap!

*I am too angry to post something here*