Zombies!? Are you kididng me?

Okay, I promised you a post about zombies . . . and it's going to be a whopper. But first I think you need some back ground info.

On a writing forum I'm a member of we've been having a discussion about the appeal of vampires (and how they've changed through history) as they're portrayed in the media (books, movies, etc.) these days. The more we talked about it the more I realized that from a geek/nerd perspective, it's not vampires, but zombies. We love our undead. Just look at all the zombie killing games that are out there. Hunter the Reckoning, Resident Evil, Left for Dead, Zombie Apocalypse, Dead Space and even Call of Duty: World at War. Just to name a few.

But unlike vampires, the undead have remained creepy. There's no love story between a lonely female human and the undead, but handsome, creature she stumbles across. If one of the undead (handsome or not . . . and usually not) stumbled across a human (male or female) the only thing going through whatever passes for their brains would be "Mmmmm, warm flesh, me hungry". And that doesn't bode well for the human.

With that said, that very same night I had that brilliant epiphany (I thought it was brilliant) I got an email from Borders Books with the subject line "Star Wars and Zombies". Eh? At first glance I thought they were trying to put those two ideas together, but then I figured it was poor editing/proofreading on someone's part and what they were trying to say was "we have new Star Wars books and new Zombie books". It is, after all, the Halloween season. And there's no shortage of suckers for anything Star Wars. As a geek AND a nerd (and a sucker) when it comes to Star Wars I opened up the email and found this book:



My first thought was "Oh, it looks creepy". Then I read the plot details.

Apparently the subject line of the email was not an error, but in fact there are now zombies inhabiting the Star Wars universe. Zombies? In Star Wars? Are you kidding me?

The story is about some virus that spreads rapidly through a prison transport space barge and turns troopers/prisoners into zombies. Seriously? We've seen that before. Hunter the Reckoning happens with inmates in a prison. Dead Space has zombies in space. Now you mix those two together, throw them into the Star Wars Universe and WRITE A BOOK ABOUT IT? Are you kidding me?

Have the geeks and nerds of this world become so infatuated with zombies (like teen girls and the Twilight novels/movies) that we have to tarnish the most Holy of all geek/nerd-doms with zombies? Is that what is going to keep the Star Wars universe relevant to today's kids? Or is Lucas Arts that hard pressed for fresh original ideas that they decided one day "let's add zombies to Star Wars and see what the fans think"?

Well, this fan (and one who buys everything/anything Star Wars related) was revolted. I wanted to throw up. I felt like my innocent childhood of big dreams and epic space operas had been violated . . . by a lurching mass of the undead. Yes, I will most likely read this book. After all I am a Star Wars geek/nerd to the tenth power. Do I think this book will be an entertaining read? Possibly. Will it be great literature? I doubt it. But then again someone did put zombies in Pride and Prejudice. I guess they had to do something to get kids these days to read.

Medic!

I think I've found my calling in shoot 'em up video games. I am a Medic!

I seem to play better when I can hang back a little bit and take time to survey the action before rushing in. Then if anyone falls I can rush to their aide and revive them. It seemed to work well last night while playing Call of Duty: World at War on the co-op story mode with kaiakapero and Pogue Moran.

There was one mission where I didn't get shot down ending up in last stand at all. And I think two others where I was only downed once. I let Pogue charge straight ahead. I kept kaiakapero ahead of me, but always in my sights. And I just picked off anyone they missed and tried to revive them whenever they fell. Of course a lot of times it was kai reviving Pogue and me reviving kai. Still, I think it worked out pretty well.

I use to love running right into the action, especially in Star Wars Battlefront. I wanted to get in there and start fighting. I did find that while playing that game it was to my advantage to take a moment to look over the map or area to see where people were at before deciding which direction I was going to run. Maybe it was just having an overhead map that helped. I don't know.

I struggle sometimes in Gears because I don't have an overhead map and so you never know where the enemies are going to come at you from. You have to rely on your teammates to give you a heads up, but by then it might be to late to help them. Since there's no respawning in Gears (unless you play Guardian or the "territory" game types) it's very easy for half your team to rush into an ambush and get wiped out. When that happens pretty soon you find yourself alone and having to take on the whole team. Now you know why I like Guardian. I get to respawn.

When I've played Gears and hung back a little bit, getting a good look around before charging off somewhere, I seem to play much better. And if I'm the last one left alive (a rare feat at that) I find it easier to play when I can pick my ground and plan for the enemies attacks. Of course it helps to have some well placed grenades too.

I don't have the patience to play as a sniper in the Call of Duty games. And I get tunnel vision too easily that I forget to keep checking around me for incoming enemies. There's just been too many times I've been stabbed in the back while snipping. My brother kai on the other hand loves to snipe. He made a point of telling me about it last night before we got online to play. If you can do it, all the more power to you. It's just not my thing.

The movie Saving Private Ryan was on this past weekend and I was watching the final battle sequence. The interrupter they brought along was in charge of running ammo refills back and forth between the positions. Throw a medic's bag over that guys shoulder and that would be me. Except for the fear, sniveling, crying, "what have I gotten myself into" bit, of course. Because I'm a medic that can shoot. But only when I have to. And I might even hit something . . . eventually.

Poll Results - Game of the Year 2008?

I've had a lot going on in my life the last couple of weeks so I'm a little behind on posting the poll results and my opinions. I know you've been dying to know what I think. Right?

Game of the Year 2008?

Grand Theft Auto IV = 0 votes
Gears of War 2 = 3 votes
Call of Duty: World at War = 1 vote
Fable 2 = 1 vote
Fallout 3 = 2 votes
Dead Space = 0 votes
Left 4 Dead = 0 votes

Okay, let's start with the losers. I'm not at all surprised that Grand Theft Auto IV didn't get any votes because the game came out in the first part of the year and it seemed to be a lot of hype but not much game from what I hear from people who've played it. With the news that a large bit of downloadable content coming out I thought there would be more interest in the game. But what does it say about the game when the additional content they put out for it isn't even for the characters or story lines already built in the game? I'm also not surprised that Left 4 Dead didn't get any votes. I hear it's a great game but almost impossible to play all alone. It's much easier to get through when playing with friends. But with all the games out there it might be difficult to get a group of friends together to play through the game.

I am a little surprised about Dead Space. Everyone I've talked to about that game says it's creepier than BioShock and fantastic. They suggest playing it with the lights out and the sound system turned up (if you've got one) and prepare to have nightmares every night. I own this game but I haven't had the chance to play it yet. I'm hoping to spend a weekend getting into this game.

I'm not surprised Fable II got a vote. It's a good game. There are tons of stuff to do in the game. I know. I've been playing it for hours and I haven't even gotten to the main city yet. I worked as a blacksmith for quite a while, then explored a secret cave by a ship, and I've spent a lot of time playing with my dog and letting him dig for things. Or at least point out where *I* need to dig for things. I love playing RPGs that give you lots of things to explore for and around. I can't stand the "let's confine the player to just the story line" type of game play. On the other hand I have a hard time with "sand box" style games like Grand Theft Auto. You know the ones where you can take on any mission or task that you feel like. I need a little bit more direction than that. With "sand box" games I always take on a task that I'm not up to completing for various reasons. Just like I'm better at playing the Domination game type in Call of Duty than the Deathmatch type. I need a goal to work towards. That's just how I play.

I'm surprised Call of Duty: World at War didn't get more votes. It's a good game with some interesting and different new twists thrown in that aren't in previous Call of Duty games. I also think the general gaming public is surprised by how good this game is in the first place. For Call of Duty fans the odd numbered games are created by a different developer and have always been seen as bad games compared to the even numbered COD games. Call of Duty 4 was a phenomenal game and much loved by COD games that everyone thought COD:W@W would be terrible. When it wasn't, people were shock and I think it's lower expectations prior to it's release might have hurt it for end of year honors.

If I had more people voting on the blog I know that Fallout 3 would have received more votes. I'm surprised it didn't win this poll. I have this game and I've played through the first part (my job in the shelter was "marriage counselor", don't ask). From what I've played so far I think this is great and deserving of Game of the Year honors. It's also a very slow plodding game if you do all the side missions and a very fast game if you stick to the main story line. This game has atmosphere and style which I think a lot of games these days are missing.

I'm really not surprised Gears of War 2 got the most votes. That's the game that most of my friends play on a regular basis (and thus most of my voting readers). It's pretty much like the first Gears with new features like vehicles and weapons and new game types. I don't know if that's enough to make it a great enough game for Game of the Year honors because it plays too much like the first one. That doesn't mean I want the developers to completely change the game play, it's just feels like part 2 . . . a sequel. Which it is.

I think it fascinating and a little disturbing that the majority of games being considered for Game of the Year options were sequels. Have we come to a point in the game community where only the tried and true formulas of existing games are the only place where we get our inspiration? I hope not. Hollywood goes through this swing of copying/sequelizing everything every couple of years. Has anyone seen Bewitched? or Stepford Wives? Or all of the Riddick or Underworld moves?

Every now and then a great game comes along that stands up on it's own, has no predecessor and makes the gaming world take notice. BioShock did that. Left 4 Dead is doing that. And maybe Dead Space. Every other item on my list is a sequel or follower of a previous game. A lot of times those second (or third, or fourth) iterations don't quite have the same shine and excitement that the first game did. Does that make them bad games for being sequels? No. None of these games on my list are bad games. That's why they're in contention for my Game of the Year honors.

So What game did I vote for? Well . . . none of them. I couldn't make up my mind which game stood out above the others. And then the poll closed. Depending on the day and how I feel I might change my vote (if I had made one). In years past there's usually been one or two games that are hands down better than anything else out there. They're natural shoo-ins for Game of the Year honors. This year I think the race is a much tougher and closer one than anyone expected. Maybe by next year I will have played enough of them to know which one really is the Game of the Year in 2008. That is if I don't buy and play any more games between now and then.

New Poll - 2008 Game of the Year?

I put a new poll up and forgot to tell you with a new post. Shame on me. Here it is:

Game of the Year 2008?

Grand Theft Auto IV
Gears of War 2
Call of Duty: World at War
Fable II
Fallout 3
Dead Space
Left 4 Dead

I think it's very telling that the majority of them are sequels. What that says is one of several things. 1) People loved the first/previous games so much they clamored for more . . . and developers gave in, 2) the first/previous games were deserving of a sequel to either a) finish the story or b) finish the advances in game play that the first/previous ones established. or 3) it's easier to copy tried and true ideas than to come up with something new on your own. You've got all the basics designed and built all you have to do is make enough changes to call it a different game (I'll talk more on that later).

Yes, I know I haven't included any games that have come out on other systems besides Xbox 360. Why? Because I haven't experienced any of them. This is my blog, my poll, my rules. Deal with it. As much as I would have liked to play Boom Blox or Wii Fit (in the privacy of my own home, of course) I haven't had the chance. So I'm sticking to what I know because I'm going to have to write about it when the results are in.

So what do you think? I forgot to put an "other" option in so if you think something else is worthy enough for a vote post a comment and let me know what you think. That's right, it's my blog but you have a say in the matter. That doesn't mean I'll listen to you especially if you start yapping like a Chihuahua on caffeine, but at least I'll give you a chance to state your peace. Just think of it as my gift to you.

Poll Results - Game Anticipation

So here are the results from my last poll:

What game are you anticipating the most?

Gears of War 2 = 7 votes
Call of Duty: World at War = 5 votes
Other = 1 vote

I voted for Gears of War 2 because honestly that is the game I was most anticipating based on the poll. If I had had a poll like this a couple of months ago than Fable II would have been top on my list.

Neither game stands out as a knock out killer sequel. Gears is just too much of the same thing and well, Call of Duty: World at War is too, although done by a different developer than the last one. Yes, they add new maps, but that's a given on any shooter sequel. And yes, they add new weapons. Gears adds a couple of grenades and weapons and Call of Duty adds a lot of "new" weapons but keeping the gun play realistic to the time period. And yes, there are some new game play features. Gears now has the ability to stick grenades on the wall, chainsaw your opponent from the bottom up and several different finishing moves for after knocking the enemy down. The fact that that enemy can now crawl out of harm's way is also a new feature. Call of Duty has attack dogs instead of a helicopter and tanks to drive around and blow things up with.

Nothing too innovative in either one of the sequels. We've seen tanks before in Star Wars Battlefront. Along with mines (stinking grenades). We've seen finishing moves too. There's more to games than just the game play though. There's graphic!

While both games show an improvement in the graphics departments I'm not sure it's all a good thing. At least with my eyes. When I was trying to describe the maps to my brother kai while playing the beta of Call of Duty I had one word for them: MESSY. There was stuff everywhere. Places to hide, which can be a good thing, but then again that makes a lot of places to get snipped from. It seems there is a lot more snipping going on the the latest Call of Duty than I ever saw in the last one. And while the "flashback" maps in Gears of War 2 look impressive they also look flat. At least to me. The look of grass and weeds overrunning everything looks more than a splash of green paint than anything realistic. There was something stark, realistic and eerie looking about the mangled areas of Gridlock that just looks abandoned with the new version. And while the new lighting inside the Mansion looks impressive it makes game play tricky sometimes when facing enemies.

Love 'em or hate 'em these two games feel like more of the same thing while playing them. While I enjoyed playing the previous versions and I'm enjoying playing the latest installments I'm not sure how much I would enjoy them if the next ones come out just the same. It's like buying a novel one chapter at a time. Eventually you have to ask yourself if it's worth it to shell out $60 a chapter. So far I think it is, but that might not last much longer.

New Poll - What game are you most looking forward to?

Okay, a new poll is up and this one is going to be a quickie.

What game are you most looking forward to?

Gears of War 2
Call of Duty 5
Other (please specify in comments)

Vote and tell me what game and maybe even leave a comment as to why. The Call of Duty 5 beta testing seems to be going really well, yet everyone has been anticipating Gears of War 2 for so long. If you can't have them both (at least not right away) which one would you buy first? If you're budget is tight like mine you might be able to only afford one.