I've been feeling very unloved lately on Xbox Live. I can't find anyone who wants to play with me. If I jump into a friends room usually within 2 matches suddenly everyone wants to get off line. That happened the other night but before I decided to play something by myself I walked away for awhile. When I came back instead of "going to bed" like everyone said they were, they were playing a private, invite only, match. How subtle is that.
I might not be the best player out there, but I'm fun to be around, mostly anyway, right? I'm competitive but I'm never going to be the best player out there. If I can break even with my kill/death ratio (no matter the game) I consider that a huge success. If you play with me, we might not win but I promise, next to me, I'll make you look good. So why won't anyone play with me?
I know there are friends out there still playing Gears of War 3 but there are also other games out there that I have that I would love to play with people. For starters there's Left for Dead. I haven't played much, if any, of that game but I don't feel confident in my abilities to play by myself. I need help.
And then there's any of the Call of Duty games. While I get bored playing Team Deathmatch over and over again all night long, I love trying out other game types, even if I suck at them. One of the few nights where I actually got to play with other people we played a new game type in Modern Warfare 3 about capturing and holding a flag. I LOVED playing that game type (partly because I had the flag for awhile) but everybody else hated it and wouldn't play it again. Why not spice it up every now and then with different game types or maybe an older version of Call of Duty?
And then there's Halo games. There are game types I had never heard about until I saw someone play them a while ago. Games a lot like soccer or basketball or other weird stuff. I'm up for weird.
I know there's a lot of reasons why it's harder to get online sometimes for a lot of us. I'm not saying we have to spend all out time online playing together. But a night or two a week where old friends can get to together and shoot the breeze while we shoot the enemy would be nice. I'd even go back to old school original Gears of War to play with friends. Hell, if Star Wars Battlefront were still active I'd be there right now.
I know we're all busy but if any body an spare an hour or two to play with me then I won't have to start singing "My Achy Breaky Heart" in voice messages to you all over Xbox Live. You don't want that ear worm taking up residence inside your head now do we?
Monday, January 30, 2012
Monday, December 12, 2011
Gears of War 3 review
So I've finished the campaign on Gears of War 3 and I wanted to think about my impression of the game before I posted a review. You may agree or disagree with some of what I have to say and that's okay . . . just say what you have to say in the comments section.
1) The boys are back . . . but their neutered
This games was cowritten by Karen Traviss who wrote a bunch of Star Wars books and is writing the Gears books. While I've liked her books there just seems to be something off with the characters in this game. Their banter could be a little annoying sometimes in the earlier game but it's what made those characters stand out and have their own personalities. In this game it feels like everyone is the same. The constant banter between Cole and Baird is gone and everyone walks around like a mute. Part of what made some of the characters hilarious was their interaction with Carmine (and his responses). There was a whole promotional campaign to "save Carmine" or "kill Carmine" a year or so ago but the Carmine brother in this game seems nonexistent. So what was the point of those avatar t-shirts except for making money? There was so much potential for the characters in this game, given the history of the planet, but I feel like they've all been neutered.
2) Hello, not everyone is going to read the books
I've only read the first Gears of War book although I own the next 3 or 4. When the game started I had no clue what was going on in the story or why things were the way they were at that time. What made it worse was there was no backstory in the game. If you wanted to know what was going on you had to read the books. There were some things that made sense because I have read the first book, but other things are still lost on me. Since I've told my friends NOT to spoil the books for me they can't tell me anything. So if you haven't read any of the books you're basically going to be lost for a lot of what is going on and the why behind it all.
3) A major case of deja vu
While playing this game I couldn't help but get the feeling that I was actually playing other games. The doors and wires the squad had to walk through to get from one area to another was like the elevator rides in Mass Effect. It's a way to load the next area without a blank load screen. Towards the end the designed gave up that pretense and had their own elevator rides/load screens. And the "farmers" (I think that's what they're called) that all of a sudden came chasing after you like zombies from Left 3 Dead? Been there. Done that. There was even a scene that felt exactly like one from that game. It involved not disturbing ash people just like you shouldn't disturb cars to set off their alarms in L4D. And then there wasn't much story between action scenes . . . kind of like a Call of Duty game. That wasn't like the first couple of games. Who could ever forget the "slow" moment of Kai's death? Or when Dom finds Maria? Or either Carmine's deaths? Gears wasn't a run-and-gun type game. It had story. It had heart. But not in this one.
4) Foreshadowing should be more than 2 minutes before things happen
When you want to foreshadow something you should really lay hints out long before the event happens. Having Dom give up his dog tags before the "event" happens in the next scene is NOT foreshadowing. It's an "oops we forgot to set this pivotal moment up" decision. When Dom is looking for Maria in the second game you see and hear him talking about that long before he finds her. And when you get to the part of the story where he's looking for her he doesn't find her in the first place he looks. Once you have a big pivotal scene like that you have the after effects. And based on previous games the after effects should have had a longer deeper feeling to it than "oh well, let's move one". Whatever passion for life Marcus had been keeping a tight hold on for years should have at least bubbled to the surface a little bit afterwards. But Marcus was just the same afterwards as he was beforehand. While I liked him in the first two games, I though he came across as a emotionless bastard in this game. When they neutered the characters they stripped all emotion from them as well.
5) combat de-evolved
One area of combat that annoyed the heck out of me was the corpser scene. All the other "boss" battles and such in all the other games was about finding a way to kill all the enemies present. There was no "do this" then "do that" and then "boss dies". Going through the 5 stages with the corpser (and to some extent with the final boss battle) felt like battling a boss in an RPG game that evolves as the battle progresses. The first incarnation is a fire demon (attack with water). The next incarnation is a dark demon (attack with light). The next physical defenses are down (attack with your weapon). It's repetitive and monotonous. And boring. There had to be a better way to make that battle more interesting. There's a ceiling so no Hammer of Dawn. Why not have the guys try to position the corpser under a section of roof and blast a pillar down, hopefully not on their heads? There was potential there but I think it failed miserably in the execution.
6) weapon change outs
I could buy that the saw-off shotgun and retro lancer were older guns that Gears retired and moved to something a little more advanced. But where does the One Shot fit in in all that? And what about the Hammer of Dawn? I can't tell you how many battles I faced where the Lancer (or retro) was all I needed to get through an area. In the other games there were several places that only a certain weapon would see you through to the next area. In this game it didn't really matter what you had equipped. So where's the challenge in that? I want a little challenge to my murderous rampages. Is there a guy on a far tower I need to kill that my guns won't reach? Give me a special gun in order to get him. Unfortunately there were no special guns because there were no guys on far ledges that you couldn't reach. Everything was up close and personal so a Lancer and and shotgun was all you needed.
I'm sure I could tell you more things that bugged me about this game, but I want to hear what you have to say. (Just don't get me started on Marcus's hair.) I'll give my review of the multiplayer portion later. Overall I liked the game. I just wished I knew more about what was going on and that the feel of the previous two games was included in this game. The campaign was short but that's a typically Gears game for you. I didn't find it all that challenging to play but I'm glad I played it. I'm now working on the hardcore and insane play throughs. If you want to join me jump on it.
Overall score (out of 10): 8
Combat: 7
Story: 5
Characters: 7
1) The boys are back . . . but their neutered
This games was cowritten by Karen Traviss who wrote a bunch of Star Wars books and is writing the Gears books. While I've liked her books there just seems to be something off with the characters in this game. Their banter could be a little annoying sometimes in the earlier game but it's what made those characters stand out and have their own personalities. In this game it feels like everyone is the same. The constant banter between Cole and Baird is gone and everyone walks around like a mute. Part of what made some of the characters hilarious was their interaction with Carmine (and his responses). There was a whole promotional campaign to "save Carmine" or "kill Carmine" a year or so ago but the Carmine brother in this game seems nonexistent. So what was the point of those avatar t-shirts except for making money? There was so much potential for the characters in this game, given the history of the planet, but I feel like they've all been neutered.
2) Hello, not everyone is going to read the books
I've only read the first Gears of War book although I own the next 3 or 4. When the game started I had no clue what was going on in the story or why things were the way they were at that time. What made it worse was there was no backstory in the game. If you wanted to know what was going on you had to read the books. There were some things that made sense because I have read the first book, but other things are still lost on me. Since I've told my friends NOT to spoil the books for me they can't tell me anything. So if you haven't read any of the books you're basically going to be lost for a lot of what is going on and the why behind it all.
3) A major case of deja vu
While playing this game I couldn't help but get the feeling that I was actually playing other games. The doors and wires the squad had to walk through to get from one area to another was like the elevator rides in Mass Effect. It's a way to load the next area without a blank load screen. Towards the end the designed gave up that pretense and had their own elevator rides/load screens. And the "farmers" (I think that's what they're called) that all of a sudden came chasing after you like zombies from Left 3 Dead? Been there. Done that. There was even a scene that felt exactly like one from that game. It involved not disturbing ash people just like you shouldn't disturb cars to set off their alarms in L4D. And then there wasn't much story between action scenes . . . kind of like a Call of Duty game. That wasn't like the first couple of games. Who could ever forget the "slow" moment of Kai's death? Or when Dom finds Maria? Or either Carmine's deaths? Gears wasn't a run-and-gun type game. It had story. It had heart. But not in this one.
4) Foreshadowing should be more than 2 minutes before things happen
When you want to foreshadow something you should really lay hints out long before the event happens. Having Dom give up his dog tags before the "event" happens in the next scene is NOT foreshadowing. It's an "oops we forgot to set this pivotal moment up" decision. When Dom is looking for Maria in the second game you see and hear him talking about that long before he finds her. And when you get to the part of the story where he's looking for her he doesn't find her in the first place he looks. Once you have a big pivotal scene like that you have the after effects. And based on previous games the after effects should have had a longer deeper feeling to it than "oh well, let's move one". Whatever passion for life Marcus had been keeping a tight hold on for years should have at least bubbled to the surface a little bit afterwards. But Marcus was just the same afterwards as he was beforehand. While I liked him in the first two games, I though he came across as a emotionless bastard in this game. When they neutered the characters they stripped all emotion from them as well.
5) combat de-evolved
One area of combat that annoyed the heck out of me was the corpser scene. All the other "boss" battles and such in all the other games was about finding a way to kill all the enemies present. There was no "do this" then "do that" and then "boss dies". Going through the 5 stages with the corpser (and to some extent with the final boss battle) felt like battling a boss in an RPG game that evolves as the battle progresses. The first incarnation is a fire demon (attack with water). The next incarnation is a dark demon (attack with light). The next physical defenses are down (attack with your weapon). It's repetitive and monotonous. And boring. There had to be a better way to make that battle more interesting. There's a ceiling so no Hammer of Dawn. Why not have the guys try to position the corpser under a section of roof and blast a pillar down, hopefully not on their heads? There was potential there but I think it failed miserably in the execution.
6) weapon change outs
I could buy that the saw-off shotgun and retro lancer were older guns that Gears retired and moved to something a little more advanced. But where does the One Shot fit in in all that? And what about the Hammer of Dawn? I can't tell you how many battles I faced where the Lancer (or retro) was all I needed to get through an area. In the other games there were several places that only a certain weapon would see you through to the next area. In this game it didn't really matter what you had equipped. So where's the challenge in that? I want a little challenge to my murderous rampages. Is there a guy on a far tower I need to kill that my guns won't reach? Give me a special gun in order to get him. Unfortunately there were no special guns because there were no guys on far ledges that you couldn't reach. Everything was up close and personal so a Lancer and and shotgun was all you needed.
I'm sure I could tell you more things that bugged me about this game, but I want to hear what you have to say. (Just don't get me started on Marcus's hair.) I'll give my review of the multiplayer portion later. Overall I liked the game. I just wished I knew more about what was going on and that the feel of the previous two games was included in this game. The campaign was short but that's a typically Gears game for you. I didn't find it all that challenging to play but I'm glad I played it. I'm now working on the hardcore and insane play throughs. If you want to join me jump on it.
Overall score (out of 10): 8
Combat: 7
Story: 5
Characters: 7
Poll Results - How do you display your Xbox 360?
I'm sorry for the delay but sometimes life creeps up on you, grabs you by the scruff of the neck and just won't let go. I'm better now. Thank you! Here's the (belated) results of my last poll:
I've displayed mine horizontal almost all of the time. There was an experimental period when I tried it vertical but it just didn't feel right. I wonder if Zenra's comment about it being a matter of age might have something to do with it. Or maybe it's all that advertising I see. They always have it vertical. It seems that younger people like it vertical and they're more susceptible to advertising than us jaded old folks.
I did have a sales clerk at Gamestop (a young one) tell me when I was buying a new Xbox 360 a while ago tell me to use it horizontal because standing it up on end was what was causing all the Red Rings of Death. Really? I got the RRoD on my first machine and I never stood it up. I guess that's the intelligence of today's youth for you.
The Wii on the other hand just doesn't look right when used horizontally. I don't know why, it just doesn't seem right that way. The PS2 could be done both ways and you could even swing the logo around on the front to match the way you had it set up. Maybe it's my history with the SNES and PS but I never considered playing the PS@ up on end either. It just never felt right. And there was not RRoD to worry about on that machine.
I guess it doesn't really matter how you display it, but how you play the games for the Xbox 360. As long as it works for you, you can be a backwards-stand-on-it's-end type of gamer . . . just remember to let me win.
How do you display your Xbox 360?
Horizontal = 3 votes
Vertical = 0 votes
I don't have an Xbox 360 = 0 votes
I've displayed mine horizontal almost all of the time. There was an experimental period when I tried it vertical but it just didn't feel right. I wonder if Zenra's comment about it being a matter of age might have something to do with it. Or maybe it's all that advertising I see. They always have it vertical. It seems that younger people like it vertical and they're more susceptible to advertising than us jaded old folks.
I did have a sales clerk at Gamestop (a young one) tell me when I was buying a new Xbox 360 a while ago tell me to use it horizontal because standing it up on end was what was causing all the Red Rings of Death. Really? I got the RRoD on my first machine and I never stood it up. I guess that's the intelligence of today's youth for you.
The Wii on the other hand just doesn't look right when used horizontally. I don't know why, it just doesn't seem right that way. The PS2 could be done both ways and you could even swing the logo around on the front to match the way you had it set up. Maybe it's my history with the SNES and PS but I never considered playing the PS@ up on end either. It just never felt right. And there was not RRoD to worry about on that machine.
I guess it doesn't really matter how you display it, but how you play the games for the Xbox 360. As long as it works for you, you can be a backwards-stand-on-it's-end type of gamer . . . just remember to let me win.
Monday, October 17, 2011
New Poll - How do you display your Xbox 360?
So how do you like it? Horizontal? Vertical?
All right, now get your head out of the gutter and vote in my poll. sheesh.
How do you display your Xbox 360?
Horizontal
Vertical
I don't have an Xbox 360
All right, now get your head out of the gutter and vote in my poll. sheesh.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Roll Results - Has Gears of War 3 been worth the wait?
So here's the results from my latest poll:
It actually took me a while to cast my own vote. At the time it came out I had had it with my friends. I couldn't listen to any more whining or bitching. About games or other gamers. I wanted the game but I didn't want to play it with my friends. I would have rather played with no headset and a bunch of strangers. But the call of my friends was too much and for the first week or so of the game's release I played with friends. Only every other night. One night to play. One night to take a break.
When I came to vote in my poll I knew it would be for one of two options, absolutely....or I'm still thinking. When I thought of the online play with friends I started to drift to the other two options. But then I had to stop myself and think. Am I rating playing with my friends or am I rating the game itself?
I voted based on the game itself (minus all the whining friends). And that vote was "Absolutely YES!". Even though I got off to a terrible start playing online that was more to do with getting irritated with players than with the mechanics of the game. If I looked only at the game, I was having fun. I guess that's why playing with strangers and no headset was nice.
I've played more often with my friends and for the most part it's been like how we use to play. Helping each other out. Calling out enemy positions. And working together as a team. That makes me feel so much better. We even worked together over several nights to beat Beast Mode on insane. It took planning and teamwork and we enjoyed every minute of it. (Except for two times when we got to the final round, had one guy left but ran out of time.) I now look forward to more matches with friends in this game.
As to those that voted "Hell no!" I want answers. Tell me why you don't like it.
I already heard from Evil Ric about it and he said it's just more of the same. When I pointed out that Call of Duty games are just more of the same too he said only Gears of War gets his blood pressure up. I actually thinks that's a compliment to the game. You have more invested with Gears so that little things make you angry. With Call of Duty it's ho hum.
No game is going to be perfect or appeal to everyone the same way. But, for me, there is something special about Gears of War. And now if I could just get through the campaign without dying all the time I might like the game even more (if that's possible). Of course I think I bumped up the difficulty thinking I was a Gears veteran so I can handle anything. Although it has been frustrating I'm glad that the third game in the series is still a tough fight and not a cake walk.
Has Gears of War 3 been worth the wait?
Absolutely YES! = 2 votes
I'm still thinking about it = 2 votes
I'm left disappointed = 0 votes
Hell no! = 2 votes
It actually took me a while to cast my own vote. At the time it came out I had had it with my friends. I couldn't listen to any more whining or bitching. About games or other gamers. I wanted the game but I didn't want to play it with my friends. I would have rather played with no headset and a bunch of strangers. But the call of my friends was too much and for the first week or so of the game's release I played with friends. Only every other night. One night to play. One night to take a break.
When I came to vote in my poll I knew it would be for one of two options, absolutely....or I'm still thinking. When I thought of the online play with friends I started to drift to the other two options. But then I had to stop myself and think. Am I rating playing with my friends or am I rating the game itself?
I voted based on the game itself (minus all the whining friends). And that vote was "Absolutely YES!". Even though I got off to a terrible start playing online that was more to do with getting irritated with players than with the mechanics of the game. If I looked only at the game, I was having fun. I guess that's why playing with strangers and no headset was nice.
I've played more often with my friends and for the most part it's been like how we use to play. Helping each other out. Calling out enemy positions. And working together as a team. That makes me feel so much better. We even worked together over several nights to beat Beast Mode on insane. It took planning and teamwork and we enjoyed every minute of it. (Except for two times when we got to the final round, had one guy left but ran out of time.) I now look forward to more matches with friends in this game.
As to those that voted "Hell no!" I want answers. Tell me why you don't like it.
I already heard from Evil Ric about it and he said it's just more of the same. When I pointed out that Call of Duty games are just more of the same too he said only Gears of War gets his blood pressure up. I actually thinks that's a compliment to the game. You have more invested with Gears so that little things make you angry. With Call of Duty it's ho hum.
No game is going to be perfect or appeal to everyone the same way. But, for me, there is something special about Gears of War. And now if I could just get through the campaign without dying all the time I might like the game even more (if that's possible). Of course I think I bumped up the difficulty thinking I was a Gears veteran so I can handle anything. Although it has been frustrating I'm glad that the third game in the series is still a tough fight and not a cake walk.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
New Poll - Has Gears of War 3 been worth the wait?
I HAVE A NEW POLL!!!!
You have until October 1st to vote, so please do so!
Has Gears of War 3 been worth the wait?
Absolutely YES!
I'm still thinking about it
I'm left disappointed
Hell no!
You have until October 1st to vote, so please do so!
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
When gamers get personal
There's no shortage of trash talking when you're playing a video game online. The gamer doesn't matter. The game doesn't matter. But I have noticed an interesting trend. And it has nothing to do with "yor momma".
I have friends that prefer one game over another. Some like Gears of War, other like Call of Duty. Some like both, but I think everyone has a preference of which one they would rather play. But sometimes you just want to play with friends no matter what game they're playing. So CoD fans will play GoW and vice versa.
Every now and then the trash talking against one game gets out of control. Everybody thinks their favorite game is much better than the other one. Gears has wall bouncers, glitchers, lag and what not. Call of Duty has care package glitches, host quitting, camping, lag and the like. Neither game is perfect but try telling that to my group of friends.
But here's the rub. With Gears the complaining gets personal.
Not with other gamers as much as with Cliff Bleszinski. Who's Cliffy B. you ask? He's the designer of Gears of War. It's his baby and he's not shy about that. If something funky goes wrong in the game my friends will gladly tell you how they feel about Cliffy B. If anything goes wrong it's his faulty . . . personally. If Cliffy B. took any of their comments seriously I don't think he would leave his house for fear of being butt rapped by a group of irate gamers.
But Call of Duty is no different to the whining and bitchfest that online gaming has become. You will still hear complaints from gamers about people camping around corners, lag switching (although in order for this to actually happen it will effect the whole team and not just one person) and spawn killing. But what you don't hear is gamers directing their complaints against one person at the companies who developed the games. Why is that?
Maybe it's because there are two different development houses that do the Call of Duty games. Infinity Ward and Treyarch. Gamers might know those company names and which ones developed which games in the series, but there really isn't anyone one person who stands out as the "face of Infinity Ward" or the "face of Treyarch". They're a no one big faceless company so complaining and bitching is done in the the general sense.
With Gears it's specific and direct. One man made Gears of War his personal vision of how a video game should be. And my friends are taking that literally. He's personally responsible for the games so he personally gets all the complaints directed at him (even if he never hears them).
It seems gamers take their games personally . . . whether they design them or play them.
I have friends that prefer one game over another. Some like Gears of War, other like Call of Duty. Some like both, but I think everyone has a preference of which one they would rather play. But sometimes you just want to play with friends no matter what game they're playing. So CoD fans will play GoW and vice versa.
Every now and then the trash talking against one game gets out of control. Everybody thinks their favorite game is much better than the other one. Gears has wall bouncers, glitchers, lag and what not. Call of Duty has care package glitches, host quitting, camping, lag and the like. Neither game is perfect but try telling that to my group of friends.
But here's the rub. With Gears the complaining gets personal.
Not with other gamers as much as with Cliff Bleszinski. Who's Cliffy B. you ask? He's the designer of Gears of War. It's his baby and he's not shy about that. If something funky goes wrong in the game my friends will gladly tell you how they feel about Cliffy B. If anything goes wrong it's his faulty . . . personally. If Cliffy B. took any of their comments seriously I don't think he would leave his house for fear of being butt rapped by a group of irate gamers.
But Call of Duty is no different to the whining and bitchfest that online gaming has become. You will still hear complaints from gamers about people camping around corners, lag switching (although in order for this to actually happen it will effect the whole team and not just one person) and spawn killing. But what you don't hear is gamers directing their complaints against one person at the companies who developed the games. Why is that?
Maybe it's because there are two different development houses that do the Call of Duty games. Infinity Ward and Treyarch. Gamers might know those company names and which ones developed which games in the series, but there really isn't anyone one person who stands out as the "face of Infinity Ward" or the "face of Treyarch". They're a no one big faceless company so complaining and bitching is done in the the general sense.
With Gears it's specific and direct. One man made Gears of War his personal vision of how a video game should be. And my friends are taking that literally. He's personally responsible for the games so he personally gets all the complaints directed at him (even if he never hears them).
It seems gamers take their games personally . . . whether they design them or play them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
