Mass of Text

I've been playing "catch up" on the Xbox 360 since I purchased it last November, and so many good games have been coming out for it lately that I seem to be farther behind than I was when I first got it. Assassin's Creed, Rockband, Mass Effect, GTAIV, Beautiful Katamari, Lost Odyssey and Penny Arcade Adventures have all been released since I started playing the 360, and those were piled on top of the nearly half-dozen older 360 titles I was trying to dig through. With the exception of Lost Odyssey, I've at least made an attempt to play all the 360 titles I own, so I may actually be nearing the end of my stack. Of course, that doesn't include the Wii titles I am still chipping away at (Fire Emblem, Mario Kart) or would like to start (Baiten Kaitos [technically a Gamecube game], Okami, Boom Blox, No More Heroes, Lost Winds, My Life as a King... amoung others) or the dozens and dozens of DS games I am trying desperately to catch up on (just finished Dawn of Sorrows, although I got the "bad" ending so I may go back and try to get the better one, trying to start The World Ends With You). By then it will be fall, with its promise of AAA 360 titles (Banjo Kazooie, I'm looking at you) and possible surprises from Nintendo on Wii/DS. Just when I get a chance to catch my breath, things will start to really heat back up again.

That being said, however, I seem to be moving through games a little faster than reviews, which is why I am here: This week's item of interest is Mass Effect which, surprisingly, may be relevant to some because it is coming out on PC soon. So, allow us to begin, without delay!

Mass Effect

Mass Effect, at first glance, is BioWare's attempt to take your largest 360 install base (people who love FPS's) and entice them into playing an RPG. The battle system is not your standard RPG turn-based battle system: it is much more fluid and action oriented, leaving a large majority of the 'RPGis' portions to be done between battles. I've personally never played Knights of the Old Republic (a travesty, according to many) but I hear the battle system is similar to how those play. You can still 'pause' combat, when you are attempting to make some kind of choice - to use an ability or switch weapons, for instance - but generally speaking your battles will be much more fluid and fast paced than standard RPG's tend to be.

In many ways, I approve of these kind of steps forward in the genre. The RPG essentials are there - leveling up, inventory management, special skills, party members, experience, etc - but instead of being wrapped around a battle system that has been designed, perfected, and then run into the ground repeatedly, Bioware introduces a completely new, fast paced battle system. Think of it as an advancement of the genre - like Active Time Battle or FFXII's Gambit system - but instead of trying to improve upon the old model, they just threw it out and started from scratch. While I do love standard, turn based combat (Blue Dragon, FF everything, etc) it is nice to see a new twist to the battle system every now and then. Several other games have proven these kind of action-oriented RPGs could work (Diablo, etc) so it's no surprise that Mass Effect's approach works very well.

That is to say, of course, it works whenever you are actually able to battle. The amount of preparation necessary to keep your party up to date and ready to battle is borderline insane. The weapon customization options available to you are deep, so deep that you will often find yourself lost in a whirlpool of tungsten bullets and medikits. With a possible 4 weapons, dozens and dozens of customizable weapon mods and ammo, and 2 other (current) party members to keep track of, you will often (I can not stress that enough) find yourself sitting there sifting through all of your items and messing with your party's equipment for 30 minutes or more. Add to this that you are almost always swamped with items after each mission (one look into a medicine cabinet, next thing you know you are knee deep in Assault Rifles... no wonder these people we came to find are all dead) and the sweet, delicious, run-around-and-kill-stuff parts of the game are completely overshadowed by the constant "YOU HAVE TOO MANY ITEMS, PLEASE SELL SOME" spam you see each time you decide to look down at something. This makes it difficult to play Mass Effect for extended periods of time, as you will slowly begin to become annoyed by the constant barrage of seemingly meaningless, yet utterly important, inventory management.

It does not help, of course, that the menu structure and buy/sell mechanics surrounding items are, at best, an annoyance and, at worst, an obstacle. Sometimes I felt like my character should level up in mercantilism (which, FYI, is not really a stat) because of the work it took me just to search for a new upgrade or sell all of my unwanted items. With no discernible way to search, sort, or even organize the nearly 200 items your characters are dragging with them through each of their dangerous, life threatening misadventures, the process of trying to determine whether an item is worth saving or selling becomes not only unbearable, but moot. You are likely to stumble upon 50 new weapon mods and 20 new guns on your next mission to save someone's puppy (who knows how), so if you did really need it you are bound to run into it (or something better!) during the next fun part of the game. If the game was even the slightest bit more intelligent on how it managed your items - let's start by letting me equip items while at the store, or even just letting me see what my party members are currently wearing while shopping on the Normandy - it might become less of a chore and more of a chance to really customize and tweak your party for each new planet. As it stands now, however, your best bet is probably to just plow through as much as possible, selling anything you pick up as you go. Once you start having a really hard time with enemies, spend 20 minutes (the same amount of time it would have taken you even if you had been updating all this time...) and put your spoils of war to good use.

Another gripe on the battle system is your squad mates which, as is the standard with co-operative AI, are completely useless at best and often a hindrance. I cannot begin to count the number of times my teammates stepped into my line of fire, or would just blindly run out and get killed by the enemy. Other times, they would take cover in some of the better positions... and then do nothing (or next to nothing). The game is nice enough to let you at least manually control their special moves, which is nice in pinch when you could really use another classes ability other than your own. It makes you wonder, though, why the enemy AI does not suffer from the same fate. Ruthless and cruel, the enemy (especially in the early levels) seems to dauntingly out-number you at every turn and often times you end up dead, a fate only further frustrated by the poorly designed auto save feature.

I suppose, however, that is not to say that the AI is crafty more so than the tutorial is, well, non-existent. Even for someone who has been a gamer all his life, the endless list of buttons, menus, options and skills is available to you almost instantaneously, and without proper introduction. In one sense this is nice, because as you replay the game you can get right back in to the action and don't have to waste hours trying to force your way through a tutorial, but a baptism by fire isn't exactly the best way to try to introduce your users to the game mechanics. It took me nearly 10 hours of gameplay before I realized that my mobile APC had a cannon on it - a fact discovered by sheer accident. Of course, perhaps the reason they never explained the APC portions are because it handles so poorly and drives so slowly that maybe giving you something to try and learn on your own would mask the otherwise mediocre gaming experience. Traveling on foot had its quirks (not being able to "run" unless in combat, constant interruptions by loads and, worse, elevators) but trying to drive, let alone fight, in that giant hunk of worthless metal was torture. Add to that the fact that the giant sandworms (or whatever they were) can kill you while in your vehicle in one hit (despite taking nearly a dozen to take down) and the experience as a whole can be quite frustrating.

Aside from the amount of time you have to spend customizing your characters, the overall game system is very well done. The number of different choices available to you - from character customization to item customization to even dialouge options - keep much of the dialog feeling fresh and adds a lot more credibility to the fact that you are, indeed, role playing. In many RPG's, your characters are on a set, linear path that you hardly (if ever) deter from. In large part, the story has been decided and the means by which it occurs was chosen long before you created your character. While much of this is still true in Mass Effect (the game does seem to end the same regardless of your choices) the path that you take to get there can be wildly different depending on if you act as a paragon or a renegade. Having played the game through twice, with the exception of a few major plot points, I felt like I was playing a completely different game. My first time through I was a female soldier class and acted in a largely paragonical manner (is that even a word?), while my second time through I was a male biotic who was as much of a Renegade as I could possibly be. The dialog trees, missions, and even character reactions to me were as different as night and day. Of course, this means nothing if you do not want to replay the game in the first place, which could be feasible if you have had enough of the tired inventory management system. With the story playing out in a totally different manner, and playing as a biotic being almost polar opposite to playing as a soldier, the game was as enjoyable as it was the first time I played through it - perhaps even more so since the biotic class relies on weapons much less and so it was not as important to nit-pick with my inventory.

Of course, if you don't like story, you might as well just give up right now, because Mass Effect stuffed to the brim with story - character development (dialog), plot development ("cut scenes") and background (text) are pervasive throughout the entirety of the game, from start to finish. Every planet you visit has some unique summary written about it, from a few sentences to several paragraphs depending on it's importance, which is no mean feat considering the massive size of the Mass Effect universe. You can talk with your squad mates between missions to learn more about their past, get their thoughts on the last mission, or just chat (the "just chat" options, however, are few in number and largely repetitious). To play Mass Effect without indulging yourself in it's back story and characters would be to rob yourself of the very essence that makes Mass Effect so unique and enticing, but at the same time spending 45+ minutes after each battle to try and see if your lieutenant has heard back from her sister about how school is going on Earth can become very tiresome very fast when all you want to do is gain more levels and kill more stuff (all the worse when you also have to upgrade weapons, sell items, and move between galaxies, all of which take up even more of your time). In some ways, Mass Effect is like a roller coaster: you trudge through the slow, uphill climb for the few fleeting moments of pleasure you get from the downhill rush.

As predicted, the whole Mass Effect "sex scene" story was blown way out of proportion, almost to the point of being pathetic. Someone at Bioware needs to get an award for genius in marketing because this probably drove more publicity for the game and spurred more sales than any other campaign I've seen in recent years. The scenes - neither of which are very long or, for that matter, explicit - have less in them that one might see on prime time TV (say, in your standard episode of LOST). Disappointing to some, I'm sure, but in the end nothing more than a clever marketing ploy.

Mass Effect, while by no means perfect, is overall a very enjoyable game. If you can take the game at a leisurely pace and really stop and experience the world BioWare has created, you will constantly be amazed and surprised at the amount of effort that has gone into creating the game. Of course, if you are impatient, or used to the speed and action of your more standard FPS's, Mass Effect will feel more like work than it is worth. I've personally played through the game twice, and could easily see myself playing through it a third time to play as the engineer class later on, which is a testament to just how much fun I found the underlying gameplay mechanics to be, but it is perhaps one of the most frustrating "good games" I've ever played. You will often times feel that the game is dragging, or even fighting you tooth and nail (bad AI, terrible menus, etc) but if you can overlook a few flaws and stick with the game you are in for one great roller coaster ride. Perhaps, when they release the game for PC this week, they will have many of these problems fixed. If they find a way to make the 360 version better, well, that's just icing on an already delicious cake.

Currently playing:
The World Ends With You (DS)
Crystal Chronicles:Ring of Fates (DS)
Mario Kart (Wii)
Tons of new DS games while in China.

What should be next (Still working on Mario Kart, sorry):
Penny Arcade Adventures: Rain Slick Precipice of Darkness (XBLA)
GTA IV (360)
Puzzle Quest (DS + XBLA)
Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow (DS)
Saint's Row (360)
Smash Brothers Brawl (Wii)
Undertow, (XBLA)

Bold games and completed and most likely. Saint's Row and GTAIV will probably be done together to show how they compare.

What is it good for?

Advance Wars: Days of Ruin (DS)

Please forgive me if, after reading this, you believe me to be a hypocrite, but the truth must be told, if only to absolve my own guilty conscience. Despite my love for S-RPGs, I have never owned a copy of Advance Wars until Days of Ruin. In fact, I never even played one until Dual Strike, and even then, only in passing. Despite knowing about Advance Wars since it first came to America on the GBA, I've never been terribly interested in the game. Perhaps it was the fact that other games caught more of my attention and Advance Wars got lost in the noise. Whatever reasons I have for commiting this foul, evil sin are no excuse: I have forsaken the path of strategy and tactics and shall forever regret doing so.

So, when Days of Ruin came out, you can understand if I merely shrugged it off as "another" Advance Wars game. Pile on top of that how most reviews were calling it the worst of the series so far, and I now have even less reason to become interested in the franchise. I was wrong; so very, very wrong.

When my friend purchased the game, it is as though his DS became permanently attached to his hand, his stylus flying here or there in a frenzy, attempting to destroy enemies and save allies in S-rank fashion. I've never seen someone so engrossed in a game before. As he played more and more, I began to feel "the itch". I had just played Enchanted Arms, which had already gotten me thinking about grids and turns and such, and was looking for a new DS game to play after finishing Trials and Tribulations. At first, the only reason I purchased the game was to play multiplayer with him. Now, I wish I could find a way to go back in time and play all the other Advance Wars when they came out, as my ignorance has made me miss out on a great gem of a game. If you like strategy games at all, think of this as a ringing endorsement and don't even waste the time reading the rest, just go buy it and enjoy it. If you are actually interested in why I like it, then by all means continue reading.

Advanced Wars is perhaps the tactical antethesis of Fire Emblem (another game by Intelligent Systems) which allows it to create it's own niche. In Fire Emblem, you are given a certian number of units and must face innumerable foes and insurmountable obstacles without any of them dying, lest they be lost forever to their digital grave. A proper defense, slow advances and countless item choices are the path one walks to excel at the Fire Emblem series of games. Advanced Wars, on the other hand, usually allows you to collect resources and build units so losing one or two units over a battle is no big deal. This changes the tactical approach to the games to be drastically different.

Perhaps you will use an infantry to lure a strong enemy unit into the firing range of your artillary, or send a recon trudging through enemy territory on a suicide mission to determine enemy positions and unit strength. If the enemy has placed his strength in air units, you can begin to produce anti-air and easily wipe the floor with him. However, since they can build units too, their strategy can be altered at a moment's notice so you must always be on your guard. This kind of dynamic gives the game a more 'RTS' feel, without the pressure of making decisions in real time. Each move can be planned out but, like chess, you must always be thinking several moves ahead in order to anticipate possible counters that your enemy will employ. This is only somewhat true in tactical games like Fire Emblem or Shining Force, since enemy units often recieve reinforcements and you must always be prepared for a surprise, but generally those types of games involve predetermined unit deployment and unit choice so you know your strategy ahead of time. In Advanced Wars, every level is different, which greatly adds to the replay value.

The campaign seems rather standard for the genre, with unit portraits that talk to one another to set up some scenario for the next battle. The storyline, for the most part, goes off without surprises and while it does not wow in any way, it gets the job done. Technically speaking the campaign is nothing more than a fancy wrapper palced around different scenarios, as there are also several dozen more maps that are treated as "training excercises" by the game's story but are in most ways no different from the campaign maps aside from missing some prewritten story. With the campaign levels, this totals to over 50 different maps, which means you will be playing the game for a long time to come. The last level, however, is incredibly difficult. Nothing I've ever played compares to the chaos and challenge of the final level in this game, and this is not a good thing. There are challenges which

That is, if there wasn't multiplayer. With local wifi play (to battle against friends) and even Nintendo Wifi play (to battle against random people or friends over the internet), the game's replay value soars. Don't feel like going 1 on 1 with your friends? Battle as a team agaisnt the computer, or maybe even in a Free For All to see who comes out victorious. The only disappointing part about the Nintendo Wifi is that you can only play against 1 other person (I could find no way to make a 3 or 4 player friend game). I really wanted the ability to play with 2 friends at once in a Free For All. Also, considering the length of time that a turn can take, it is not exactly the most friendly wifi game. The added voice chat with friends is a almost perfect solution to Nintendo's problem: Honestly, I don't care about voice chat with random people. But I do need voice chat when playing with friends and decided what levels to play next or what type of strategies I am working on (Brawl and Mario Kart, I am looking at you). It is ironic that the system that has amazing voice chat capabilities (the 360) hardly ever gets used for multiplayer, and the systems that have the best multiplayer games (Wii) has no voice chat ability. But that is a rant for another day.

To top it all off, there is even a map editor. That's right, not only do you have what the developers created at your disposal, you can create your own maps from just about anything you have seen in the campaign. The replay value of the game is nearly infinite. I've created a ton of my own maps, some to use in 1v1 versus friends and others to make the computers a bit stronger in our co-op 2v2 matches vs the AI, which makes the games that much more fun. You get almost as much joy from huddling around the DS trying to create a level to play on as you do then testing it out and finding new ways to tweak or improve it. It is annoying that the online map sharing has to be limited to a paltry 10x10 map is beyond me, as most of my favorite created maps are 20x20 or more. And while the ability to vote on maps that you have downloaded is great, it is somewhat annoying that you cannot "search" for maps and instead are just handed a random one to try out. Or how to get more than one the "get online, download map, wait, get kicked off" process must be repeated over and over. Why can't I browse maps, or download mutliple files at once? Again, limitations to a system that could have had so much more potential but, as it stands now, the online map sharing and ranking is least a welcome (but frustrating) addition.

Overall, Days of Ruin is a great S-RPG experience and will provide hundreds of hours of gameplay. It represents one of the best values of your dollar in terms of amounts of gameplay you can squeeze out of it and is arguably one of the best games on the DS (although most certianly not the most unique experience). All in all, the game comes highly recommended and is worth every penny to purchase - you'd hardly even begin to scratch the surface if you rented it. Do yourself and your DS a favor and pick it up, if you are even remotely interested in S-RPGs, you can't go wrong with Days of Ruin.


What should be next (Still working on GTA IV and Mario Kart, sorry)?
Puzzle Quest (DS + XBLA)
Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow (DS)
Mass Effect (360)
Saint's Row (360)
Smash Brothers Brawl (Wii)
Undertow, (XBLA)

Uno I just won't review because, let's face it, it's Uno. Although the experience playing it on 360 is poor - the online experience is terrible and it's not like you can play multi player locally. I hope you REALLY like Uno...

Halo 3, well, I don't get the hype. Same basic thing as the first two, Forge is OK but too limiting and hard to share stuff, online is outclassed by COD4 but if you liked Halo you probably already got it anyway, no need for me to talk about it, so scratch that too.

Of court cases and magical appendages

To those interested, I'm done with my first Conan episode and now I'm waiting for someone to complete the ending song and then re-encode the subtitles. I'll let you know whenever it is available, should you be interested in seeing the final results (I'll try and post the original subtitles as well for comparison, although you could just as easily find them on most torrent sites). Now, to the heart of the matter:

Phoenix Wright: Trials and Tribulations (Nintendo DS)

I love the Phoenix Wright series. There's no denying that. To me, it's like I'm getting to experience that "Detective Conan" feeling of investigation, confrontation and resolution at my own pace. So, it may be somewhat unfair for me to be telling you how I feel about the game, because I have a love affair with the genre. That said, if you're interested in such things, the game is very good. It's not as "fresh" or unique as it was when the original came out on the DS (or GBA in Japan), and while many of the jokes are carry over jokes from the previous two games (or "inside jokes" from those two games), as a whole the game still flows very well. Just because it does not match up to the same feelings I had when I played the first one - eyes glazing over after several hours of play, trying to fight sleep as I wanted to hear just one more "OBJECTION!" - does not mean that it is a bad game. To their credit, Trials and Tribulations is a faithful extension of proven gameplay... for better (almost always) or worse (sometimes).

The game does a good job of handling the possibility that this is the first Phoenix Wright game you pick up: The first case is largely a tutorial, a simple, short case designed mostly to explain how the game works. This is great, but I would NOT suggest playing this game first. Without giving away too much, the stories of Trials and Tribulations are very tightly wound to the plot of the first two games. You'll be spoiled left and right to all kinds of plot points and most of the character interactions will seem very bizzare without explanation (a large number of "inside jokes" revolves around the characters involved). While you will still enjoy Trials and Tribulations if it's the first one you've played, you should certainly do yourself a favor and play the first two games (again, preferably in order) to get the most out of the game.

In terms of gameplay, there is hardly much difference between the three, so veterans should notice nothing new here. I will say that, in Trials and Tribulations, I found myself stuck less often, mostly due to better "puzzle" design. What I mean by this is that the actions you need to take are more obvious, but they will usually still be challenging or require at least some thought before you are able to solve them. The game is not easier, per se, it just seems like the cases follow a much more logical progression than some of the other games did. Trials and Tribulations seems to involve some of the largest cases yet, despite the fact that I recall none of the cases reaching the third day (In the original game, it was noted that all cases MUST have reached a verdict by the third day, I presume to help add a sense of urgency or pressure to the plot device. Even so, most of the cases in Trials and Tribulations are over by day 2... they are just 2 very long days!) These cases are accompanied by more investigations and more character interactions during the pre-trial phase of the game... and the only gripe I have with this is that the way you are required to move around starts to become tiresome, especially as you are backtracking to try and find that piece of evidence you've missed or to talk to a character again to move the plot forward. It's not something that destroys the gameplay or the immersion, but it does become frustrating towards the end when you have unlocked several new places to investigate. Usually this method of travel is a necessity, as you can place important, scripted plot elements to begin because you know the player will be forced to backtrack to a certain location, but the pre-trial areas could've used a bit more organization to help with this (small) complaint. The only other complaint is that this is still a port of the GBA games, and is not specifically designed for the DS (like the last case of the first game, or of the new game "Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney"

However, this is nothing more than mere quibbling. The story is top notch, the humor is spot on and the third game really helps to flesh out the relationships between all of the characters. This game is a great way to wrap up the Phoenix Wright trio of games and helped to ease the pain of waiting for the truly DS-inspired version, Apollo Justice (speaking of which, I hope to be starting this soon, too). Not to mention there is also talk of a Prosecutor-inspired "spin off" involving everyone's favorite prosecuting prodigy, Miles Edgeworth, and Phoenix Wright fans really have something to celebrate.

Overall, I have no "OBJECTION!" to this game and, in fact, highly recommend it if you have played the first two. If you haven't, then just "HOLD IT!" while you play the first two games and catch up to the Wright phenomenon. As long as you are willing to "TAKE THAT!" game lightly and allow yourself to get into the humor and characters, you will find yourself enjoying yet another amazing game on your Nintendo DS. (I'm sorry, I just couldn't help myself...)


Enchanted Arms (Xbox 360... apparently PS3 as well, but I played on the 360)

I've said this before, and suppose I should say again, that I'm a large fan of RPG-style games. MMO-, S-, J-, and even Action-RPG's are all genre's that I will generally favor over others when deciding what to play. There's just something intoxicating about leveling up and being a part of a well crafted narrative that really seems to pull me in. Of the above, J-RPGs are usually my RPG of choice, followed closely by S-RPG's (that's "Strategy RPG" to those who don't know, such as Final Fantasy Tactics and the like). Of course, anyone who looks at what I've been playing recently can tell this (Fire Emblem, Advanced Wars, Lost Odyssey, Blue Dragon, Enchanted Arms, FFXII, etc), so let's not beat a dead horse here. When I first heard about Enchanted Arms, it was mainly negative news: "linear gameplay", "random battles", "lots of story"... until, of course, you realize that these people were not disappointed with Enchanted Arms as much as they were disappointed with an entire genre of games. After reading that it combines my two favorite RPG's - the story, leveling and progresion of a JRPG with an S-RPG like "battle grid" battle system, well, I knew I just had to see this for myself.

First, the game has faults. LOTS of them. Most of them DO NOT stem from the fact that it is an RPG, so much as one that is not handled well. The game does involve random battles, something Blue Dragon had done away with and has since spoiled me upon, so initially random battles seem barbaric or, at the very least, archaic. I understand the downsides of having a random battle system and even agree on several grounds. If you want to just progress through the story - or a certian area - I feel you should be allowed without being brutally and mercilessly punished for wanting to do so. Random battle systems usually tend to stifle - not encourage - exploration, mostly because you don't want to have to sit through YET ANOTHER battle when you've been through so many already just to see what is inside yonder chest, or (even more so) to read about some of the game's backstory or other non-trivial event. I don't understand how this makes sense to designers who have spent countless hours meticulously crafting and creating a completely new world for you to explore, considering they must realize that you won't go and search every nook and cranny if you're going to have to fight that giant sewer rat for the 20th time. Aside from these glaringly obvious problems, in order to even accept the fate of random battles, you need to really like the battle system; then, battles become more of a rare treat than they do a constant interruption. Fortunately for Enchanted Arms, that is it's one saving grace, but I will save that for whenever we get around to the games successes... if we even can, the list of faults is not exactly small.

The story - usually considered to be one of the 3 pillars required to even attempt to build a good RPG - is at worst laughably cliche and, at best, hopelessly uninspired. Young, cocky boy has mystical powers and comes to find the truth about himself and his powers through a relentless assult of increasingly difficult fights, only to end up saving the world as the now un-flawed hero. Add onto this fact that the story is told by way of two characters being shown side by side on screen at the same time (similar to, say, Fire Emblem... but using their actual 3d character models and not 2d art) and some incredibly annoying voice acting (who on earth thought that including a "metro" character, complete with annoying, high pitched, whiny voice, would be a smart move?) and you're on your way to simply mashing the 'a' button and trying to make it through the story as fast as possible. In an RPG, desperately trying to skip through the story is the gaming equivalent of the "kiss of death". This ain't no FPS. You aren't here to blow things up or get back to killing guys. You're here for a compelling narrative. Without that, what are you here for? The two remaining pillars, generally, are the leveling mechanisms (equipment, stats, materia, etc) and the battle system. Could two pillars be enough to hold up an RPG? We'll see.

The leveling mechanism in Enchanted Arms is relatively straightforward (kill guys --> gain exp --> become stronger) but with an interesting twist. Your character levels on it's own by means of EXP, but you also have 'SP' which you gain from battles to increase your stats even more or to learn new skills. The twist with SP is that you gain more the more strategically you play. You gain more SP when you do damage over the enemies maximum health, or even more SP when you do damage over 2x the enemies maximum health. Obviously, this could be brute-forced simply by over leveling your characters to the point of one-hit-killing everything... but what's the point, when this only helps you gain in power (which you had to do to brute-force it anyway)? Instead, it is one of the few RPG systems I've used that actually REWARDS you for thinking out how you battle and not just randomly hitting "attack" until the enemy dies so you can move on to the next one. The easiest way to get double SP is to get your characters to "combo" onto an enemy, which means you must first attack together to increase their combo gauge and then release attacks on the same enemy at the same time. The whole process is simple in theory but becomes somewhat more challenging in practice, where unit placement, EP limitations, current combo gauge status and current character status can all come into play. Is one character low on health and might die if you do the combo? These are decisions that must be made. It turns RPG's battling system on it's head: suddenly, you need to be actively involved in every battle in order to get the most out of the system. For those purely in it for the story (I'm SO sorry...) you can tell the game to just automate the battle for you and away you go. Granted, you're missing out on the only thing that makes Enchanted Arms worth playing, so why do that to yourself?

The Battle System itself is not without it's flaws, but it is an impressive blending of RPG and tactical, grid-based battles. Placement matters. Areas of affect matter. You can't just cure everyone unless you are properly placed for it. You can select "Blizzaga --> all" and attack all enemies all the time. Different attacks have different strengths and weaknesses. Your most powerful attacks cost the most amount of EP (think of it as "Energy Points", although I'm not sure if that is the official name or not) so you can't just continuously spam them throughout the battle. Using smaller, lighter attacks to build up combos and then finishing enemies off with your bigger attacks help to maximize SP gains and therefore minimize the amount of "grinding" you'll need to do (more on that later). Overall, the battle system is both impressive and engrossing, as it is perhaps one of the only times in an RPG where you will actually need to apply a strategy to battles other than boss fights. The only questionable addition is the "golems" which you can use in lieu of your actual human party members. Why you would want to use these (except in times where you don't have all 4 members) is beyond me, as they are generally less flexible than any of the human characters. They cannot learn new skills and will almost always require some amount of leveling up after you have received them to get them on-par with their human counterparts. While it would have been cool to have the golems act as an in-battle "swappable" 5th character that allows you to customize your team depending upon your current situation, since the golems do not gain SP unless they are being used the farther you get the less likely you are to use them. The idea really shows some promise - especially considering how many different golems there are in the game already - but, overall, was not really helpful or useful in any real way. Think of it as the "status effect" magic of Enchanted Arms; it's there, but nobody bothers to use it.

By halfway in, I wasn't playing for the story so much as I was playing for the challenge of facing the next enemy or the next boss. Here, perhaps, is the last great gripe about Enchanted Arms: the difficulty is very stupidly paced. There are several "choke" points in the game (for me, anyway) that seem to be designed specifically to make you grind more. I haven't felt like I had to grind levels this bad since I tried to play Final Fantasy III and IV. Granted, there is a difference between a natural level progression - like in World of Warcraft, where you feel you are advancing in some way and constantly moving forward - and pointless level progression, or "grinding", where you are merely being punished by the game for not being powerful enough to face a boss and must run around in some nearby forest to try and kill 100 of the same set of enemies and try again. I understand that these kinds of things can happen in games that don't invoke random battling, since you can chose to skip everything and eventually have to pay for not leveling your characters, but in a game where you are being constantly (and rudely) interrupted in your drive to play the game in order to partake in a battle? The ONE saving grace should be that you don't have to go back and do it again... and again... and again. Perhaps I didn't do enough side quests (except for the last "choke" boss, I doubt it). Perhaps I wasn't approaching the strategy of the battle the right way (unlikely). Whatever the case, the bosses should NOT have been that hard. Even though I did like the battle system, I almost gave up on completing the game because of the time I thought would be required to grind out levels to finish those bosses (in the end, I relied on some skill and a lot of luck to get through the "choke" points).

Somehow, despite all of it's flaws, Enchanted Arms became a game that I just could not put down. If any normal RPG that has no real story, it becomes pointless to play: you are just mashing "a" to get past story and mashing "a" to get past fights, so where's the fun? Enchanted Arms goes from "Hopeless" to "Entertaining, yet flawed" simply by including a fresh, tactically driven battle and leveling system that can really drag you in and keep you playing. It's not enough to make it "incredible", but I do hope that they can make a sequel or reuse this battle system in a new IP that includes better characters and a REAL story. Then, they could actually start contending with the "big guns" like Final Fantasy and Lost Odyssey and help to propel JRPG's to newer and better things. Until then, well... I can recommend Enchanted Arms if you, like me, love Japanese Strategy Role Play Games... just don't expect iconic characters or an interesting narrative. I wouldn't exactly chalk it up there as a "must play" but for a low priced used game you'll get a surprising amount of entertainment from it in between all the big AAA title releases we'll be seeing this year.


For the curious, here's what I'm currently hacking away at in my spare time:

Puzzle Quest (DS + XBLA)
Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow (DS)
Mass Effect (360)

Here there be Azure Dragons

With my first re-subbing of Conan finished (I'll let you know where to get it, if you're interested in seeing it), it is now time to finish my promised blog post: namely, my impressions of Blue Dragon.

Firstly - and most importantly, perhaps - I finished Blue Dragon a long time ago. Probably been over a month since I played it. I can still say, without a doubt, it is one of the better RPGs that I have played in my lifetime.

To compare it to Chrono Trigger would be a great disservice to ChronoTrigger, as that game is one that will stand the test of time as one of the great RPG classics. However, to completely ignore their similarities would be unfair to Blue Dragon. Of course, one would expect Blue Dragon to be similar to Chrono Trigger since it is essentially the same creative minds working on those two games (composer, character designer and game designer were all the same... and all very famous in the RPG genre, although I suppose I can spare you the details if you didn't already know that). So, if you think of Blue Dragon as an 'HD' version of Chrono Trigger... well, you wouldn't be far off. Just do not mistake yourself into thinking it will be a timeless classic. I loved it, and will certainly play it again in my lifetime, but it still won't compare to the likes of FFVII or Chrono Trigger. However, there is nothing wrong with be a "really good RPG", now is there?

Perhaps the two most important elements to an RPG are it's story and characters. With a few exceptions, Blue Dragon excels at neither (I do like the enemies and a few of the major plot twists) but that does not mean that it fails at them, either. The characters fit the style; that is to say, they are your basic anime characters transposed into a video game. They are young (at first glance, exceptionally so, although you come to learn they are much older than they look... somehow), stubborn, and very expressive. What is unique, I feel, from many RPGs of late is that the main character is not "emo". He isn't pouting or complaining or thinking the world is unfair or out to get him. In fact, Shu (the main character) is unervingly upbeat. When he's down he doesn't sulk or cower, he just yells "I won't give up", gets up, and tries again. Compare this to, say, Squall or Tidus, who were more prone to whining and sulking, and it makes for a much cheerier mood. Of course, given the light, cartoony look everything has to it, it is rather difficult to see something as sad or depressing. Expressions and Voice Acting help to overcome this, adding to the depth of emotion available, but compared to a more "realistic" and bland style, Blue Dragon is a much more light hearted experience.

The characters themselves are not as iconic or loveable (no Robo, no Frog, etc) as ChronoTrigger, but the vivid expressions and acceptable voice acting (save marumaro, who sounds more like someone dragging their nails across a chalkboard than anything else) help to give the otherwise bland characters a bit more life. The use of the "Dragons", which more or less act as your actual fighting force (your characters themselves do not attack save for a few special instances, and instead the dragons to everything you command) helps to set the characters apart even more. I wish they had made the 'minotaur' dragon look less emaciated and more powerful, but that doesn't fit Jiro's character. By the end, when you obtain the characters "limit-break" like power, and the dragons go from being ethereal shadows to actual mortal beings, the graphical detail and the power of HD really shine through to give you one of those "wow" type moments that I haven't really felt since first watching a summon in FFVII. I have no idea why you cannot access this power until very, VERY late in the game... but, hey, that's how it is.

Perhaps the worst part about Blue Dragon is that the story starts out very, VERY slow. Between the bland characters, the constant loading and the erratic pace, it is really hard to get into it. The game tries to be epic from the start - you begin the game sitting under a windmill with a calm sky and lullabye-like music, and then 15 seconds later (almost all of which is loading) you are being attacked by a land shark (very FFX "Sin"-esque). By the time you've met all the characters, gotten dragged away from your home and tried to go through all the tutorial type stuff... you start to wonder where this is going or why you care. Nothing seems to really click in the beginning. Even I, as desperate as I was to play a JRPG, was wondering why I had thought I wanted to play one of these kind of games again. Give it a few hours, though, and the game finally starts to take on a life of it's own. I can't tell you where, as it will more than likely differ on when you are finally piqued by the characters or the story, but once you are hooked the mix of character interaction, plot and just standard RPG-faire "level up" gameplay will keep you wanting to come back for more. I can't claim that the story is very original (although, to it's credit, a good bit of it is) and it is by no means complex or thought provoking, but as a mechanism for driving you to want to get farther and see more of it... well, once it gets going, it takes off and keeps going even until the very end.

Gameplay is rather standard by RPG means - nothing fancy like the gambit system or strange like the junction system - but the way you can customize your dragon's class and the fact that you can "power up" your moves so they take longer but pack a bigger punch means that there is a large amount of strategy involved in how you plan your attacks. In most turn based RPGs, battling is rather one sided. You either attack almost all the time, because magic is too costly to use on anything but a boss, or you use magic and summons constantly because it is in great abundance and just attacking would take forever (less damage, single target). Very few RPGs can mix these two perfectly to create a true "strategy" to battling - that is to say, not just repeatedly choosing the same option - but the jobs and skills available to you in Blue Dragon combined with the "power up" make it to where you won't often find yourself "just pressing a" over and over.

Speaking of battling, the level pacing is actually rather lenient, given the genre. I never ran into a boss that was so difficult that I just had to 'grind' and level my characters for hours, which is pretty impressive given that - like Chrono Trigger - you can choose to evade enemies if you so choose. Usually, that means that you end up being under leveled since you skip as many enemies as possible because battling becomes repetitive. The fact that battling involves actual strategy and is more involved - makes it to where I didn't find myself skipping battles too often, so I was always prepared. The only time I had to "grind" was for those extra hard bosses that you can beat after the last boss, and since those are really side quests meant for those who an infatuated with the game and want to do everything and overcome every challenge (read: me) I don't find it very fair to fault the game for that. You'll find that you spend more time enjoying the game than you do mindlessly leveling... always a plus in a game this long. You will get your money's worth out of this game. It was a good 40 hours for the whole game, not including a few miscellaneous side quests and except for those first few slow hours, it is very enjoyable.

Music for the game is, in my opinion, some of Nobuo Uematsu's best work to date. While it may not become as nostalgic as Final Fantasy VII's soundtrack, and nothing can even begin to touch the majesty and power of "One Winged Angel", especially orchestrated or in it's Advent Children form, but the Blue Dragon soundtrack still gets quite alot of playtime on my ipod. From the gentle piano of "Waterside" to the all-out rockin' boss battle music "Eternity", Uematsu really goes all out in his compositions and each song finds it's own way to move you. The music goes very well with each character (the Devee dance music is both catchy and hilarious) and really helps to set the mood throughout the game. Audibly, you couldn't ask for better.

Really, what else is there to say? Gameplay is "old school" but involved, music is superb, the graphics are crisp and refreshingly not brown, the story (eventually) grips you and there is alot of replay potential (did I mention a New Game + option?). Sure, it's nothing new or innovative. Yes, there's some graphical slowdown and tearing. Yes, there's tons of loading. Yes, the game is story is slow. Like any game (even the coveted FFVII), there are faults. But the overall experience far outweighs any of the negatives.

In case you are wondering, no, this game is not quite good enough to be tossed around with games like FFVI, FFVII, or Chrono Trigger. Someone who does not play JRPGs will find almost nothing of interest here, and it's not something they will have heard or perhaps even be interested in playing (as opposed to something like FFVII or Mass Effect, which are either "Timeless classics" or "Action Games with RPG elements"), but for anyone who enjoys a good JRPG I can not stress enough how much you should play this game. You will not regret it, and if you do, I can't imagine how you enjoy other JRPGs... unless you just really, really hate an anime style. So do yourself a favor - go play it. Buy it, even. You won't regret it.

-- Edit --

I forgot to add... what would you like me to review next? Take just about any game I've mentioned in previous posts (Enchanted Arms, Phoenix Wright, etc), or you may also choose Saint's Row (just finished yesterday), Smash Brothers Brawl, my early impressions of Fire Emblem Wii, or my final impressions of Advanced Wars. I haven't decided if I'll start Lost Odyssey or Mass Effect next, but those are possible candidates, too).

It's coming, I promise...

I've been meaning to post about Blue Dragon for some time, but haven't gotten the chance to do so. Been WAY too busy, plus enjoying my free time playing Smash Brothers Brawl and Fire Emblem. I'm thinking about reducing these posts to maybe 1 game each time, to help me get them out faster...

Unfortunately, I may have also hurt my release schedule by picking up another "hobby" - sprucing up the terribly "XCHKS" subs for Detective Conan. It has been alot of fun (it helps that I'm a huge fan of the show) but my penchant for perfectionism makes the entire process very time consuming. I spent an hour last night "fixing" a mere 3 minutes of the show, although I must say that it makes it that much more enjoyable to watch. Hopefully, once I get used to the subbing program, things will go by much faster.

ctl-c, ctl-v

Apparantly, copy-paste is too difficult for me, because I've had this ready for nearly 2 weeks and sitll haven't posted it. So, without further ado, here it is:



I feel as though I've neglected the "ranting" portion in lieu of the deluge of games that I have played recently. That being said, here are a few things that have been on my mind as of late. Granted, they will not be as detailed as the game reviews (I tend to prefer that more to writing down thoughts that end up making me angry or require a very significant amount of research in order to be more fair), but it's at least something to think on.

Firstly, the whole Fox / Mass Effect deal. I have not gotten around to playing the game yet (and if Blue Dragon continues on like it is, I won't get around to it for a while yet), so my comments on this will be breif. This is basically yet another way that video games get singled out over other media (music, movies, books, et al) on "questionable content". Ever since the "hot coffee mod" hit the scene, it is as though games must be squeaky clean, positive reinforcement learn-fests before they are approved by the media. The woman who went off on Mass Effect (basically saying it contains full frontal nudity when it does not) eventually retracted, admitting that once she actually saw the game she obviously saw herself being in the wrong. She went on to state there is more sexually explicit content in your average 1 hour showing of Lost or Desperate Housewives than there was in this 40+ hour epic adventure. The fact that even the loony Jack Thompson didn't see enough in this game to fight against it shows that either hell itself has frozen over, or it was really no big deal (I personally believe the answer is "both").

Next, we have the presidential race. I've yet to dive TOO deep into the race, as I've already grown incredibly tired of this campaign. It started so early, and people have been speculating and guessing and prophesying for so long that I grew both bored and apathetic. I know who I want to be MY candidate, I can do my own research. I don't have to watch disingenuous attempts at "involving the american public" through the You-tube debates, or at all this baby kissing and hand shaking. I don't care about Hillary's every movement nor Guiliani's insane comments. Perhaps I've become incredibly jaded in just the past 4 years, but now it seems to be "same old, same old". Haven't we been here before? "Washington Insider vs. the "breathe of fresh air" outsider. Candidates trying to fight it out as to who is capable of NOT being the same failure as the incumbent. This all sounds... familiar. I certianly didn't need all that extra lead in time they were throwing at me, starting so incredibly early to try to build up the hype machine and raise even more money (I thought we were supposed to be stopping all that? Whatever happened to campaign finance reform and working away from money buying the seats?) These fools do next to nothing while in office - not on immigration, not on security, not on protecting our freedoms or net neutrality or tax reform, big government and over-budgets, a busting sub-prime market.... the list goes on and on - and yet they want me to pay attention to them now? Where do people find the energy to back this kind of rhetoric? Some of these people have been in political power for years, even decades, and they have what to show for it? Once I get passed my primary, and we start narrowing down candidates for me to focus on... then I can get more into it. But right now it's really just tiring to keep up with news about how these people try to undermine each other and slit each others throats day in and day out. I speak in generalities, of course - not EVERYONE is like that in all aspects - but most talk shows or internet sites, or even news stories certianly make you feel as though this is always the case. Anything to grab some eyeballs and captivate audiences, eh?

So much for not being "too deep into the race"! I didn't know I had it in me, really. Serious topics aside, here are a few tidbits about the group of 360 games I've played recently but haven't had the chance to comment on yet.

Gears of War

I've actually played the game before, but I've never really owned it (and just recently started "reviewing" things again) so now seems as good a time as any to mention it. For the most part, I absolutely refuse to touch the game as a "single player" experience. That is not a statement against the single player campaign, either; the story, characters, gameplay and pacing are all very good. But, having now played through the game twice on co-op, playing the campaign with just one person feels very "boring" or bland, despite the fact that Gears of War is, indeed, a very high quality game. Graphically the game does impress - even more so in HD - although I can't really say that the game inspires a sense of awe or amazement (perhaps this is coming from a present perspective on the game, as compared to when it came out over a year ago). The graphics are indeed great and you'll be hard pressed to find even newer games that look significantly better (though there are a few), but to me the "wow" factor almost always stems more from style than it does from technical prowess. I can say "wow" to pictures of Crysis, yet generally feel no recolletion of the games pictures aside from a few trees and rocks. Maybe some sand. (Also, I've never played the game...) Gears gives me much the same feeling. Characters aside, the graphics impress but are generally "forgettable". You go from some boring, drab, run down building to another boring, drab, run down building... and the process kind of repeats itself. Oh, and in case the buildings weren't bland enough for you, you also go underground only to be surrounded by even more boring scenery like rocks! The rain during that factory level is rather cool, and as I've said before the Characters are well done, other than that it's just more boring, "realistic" looking graphics that focus too much on earthy, dark tones than it does Style. No More Heroes leaves me more impressed overall Graphically than this game does, if only because it oozes a very unique sense of design. However, graphics really mean next to nothing to me in terms of games. It's nice to move forward in terms of more detail or more action on-screen, but without the right style you really can't do much to stand out.

So, obviously, the most important part of Gears is gameplay. The "cover" system seems to give Gears a significant boost over just about every other series in the genre, adding in a nice layer of strategy/pacing where most games tend to be more about "run and gun" or being fast with the trigger. Active reloading really highlights the extra level of strategy and attention required to do well in the game. You can't just constantly spam reload and expect to blast your way through enemies. A well timed active reload, though, can shave seconds off your reload times and really help you out in a pinch.

As with any kind of game like this, the co-op really makes it shine. I admit that playing the game just by yourself can be fun, but playing with a friend makes the game all that much better. The most confusing part of the game is how the story is centered around 4 characters, yet the game remains only 2 player co-opable. Perhaps Halo 3's 4 player co-op has me spoiled, but Gears of War practically screams for it to be enabled for 4 players. Hopefully Gears of War 2 will up the ante and allow 4 friends to take down the Locust together.

Pacing is kind of a mixed bag, something that is also important to me in shooter/adventure type games like this. I do not like finally overcoming a hard or difficult part only to die and have to repeat the process over and over again. A few times is acceptable - blowing through the game would not be fun, either - but being stuck at the same area for nearly an hour really starts to frustrate. I will admit I'm not the best player out there, but playing on co-op and on the middle difficulty setting should not see 2 people stuck for nearly an hour. The hardest parts in the game are, arguably, where you "split up". This makes it doubly difficult because, firstly, you do not have anyone to back you up or cover you and, more importantly, you cannot be ressurected if you die which means that you BOTH have to start over from the last checkpoint. Co-op can allow two people with unequal skill to play on the same level, and these "splits" can really slow you down when one player has a difficult time getting through their portion of the level. It makes the game less "fun", makes the good player feel bored and the bad player feel worthless. I can appreciate that the designers probably wanted to challenge players in these portions but couldn't they have been a little more forgiving, especially with regards to checkpoints? At least not having to replay the entire split would have made things a little more bearable while keeping the difficulty up.

Sp, I guess this game has a multiplayer component? I don't really know. I really enjoy the cover system and the game mechanics from a single player perspective... but it seems like it would be incredibly boring in multiplayer. I've played local multiplayer with friends, and that wasn't nearly as much fun as teaming up in campaign or as other multiplayer games (Smash Bros, Halo 3, etc). I guess if you really like the system but want the challenge of facing a human opponent you might play this over live, but I don't really see it as being something I would enjoy doing (even just to get the acheievements).

Overall, the game is definitely worth playing. If you're like me and just want to experience the campaign, grab a friend and rent the game over the weekend - it is easily beatable in 1 sitting, or you could break it up over a few if you are playing on the higher difficulties. COG tags, acheivements and multiplayer could keep you coming back for more, if you like collecting things or flexing your muscle over live. Even I have played the game through multiple times. My last playthrough was the third time I've beaten the game and it is just as fun as it was the first time. The game is still $50 for a reason... because it is a stellar 360 exclusive. Even if you are like me and don't particularly care for the genre, it is worth it just for the co-op experience.

Crackdown

Crackdown can be gracefully summed up in two words: Agility Orbs. While on the surface crackdown

seems like a "GTA-clone" - a title which has now completely replaced the original term, "Sandbox

Game" - after playing it for about an hour you will see that this can hardly be farther from the

truth. Crackdown involves a large open city that requires no loading (in fact, didn't GTA have loading? and lets you go anywhere you want and do anything you want. Honestly, that is where the comparisons stop, which means that they are just the same genre of game. Beyond that, they couldn't be more different.

GTA is a rather slow paced game. You work your way through the game's "narritive", perhaps indulging yourself in one of the world's many glorified mini-games to increase your "stats", make some money or gain access to new items or areas. Outside of the missions you generally have very littl reason - or desire - to pick fights with people as it will either get you killed or in trouble with the law. Ironically the main draw of GTA is not the sandbox elements (although that makes the game more fun by giving you the opportunity to take the game at your own pace and freedom to do whatever you'd like to do) but in the expertly crafted and cleverly driven narrative contained within. There are many true "GTA-clones" that do not sell nearly as well as Grand Theft Auto for this exact reason. Saint's Row, for all that it added to the "sandbox" mechanism, just doesn't cut it when compared to the story of Grand Theft Auto. Why else would Rockstar be able to sell both Vice City and San Andreas, not to mention the entire collection of "stories" games, when 85%+ of the sandboxing elements in these games are the same as they have always been. Ooooh, they added motorcycles, big whoop! You can finally swim? Game of the Year CONFIRMED!

Look, Grand Theft Auto and many any other sucessful series - Zelda, Final Fantasy, Halo, Call of Duty, etc - are games that largely maintain the core elements of their genre while pushing the genre forward with smaller, more controlled innovations, high production quality and excellent Narratives. Let's face it, Link has been doing the exact same thing since the original Legend of Zelda - navagating a large and compelling overworld and navagating perilous dungeons to expand his arsenal and finally fight Gannon/Vatii/Windfish... whoever. It's the same game! But the games sell well not due to individual parts, but taken as a whole; a sum of its parts.

So where does Crackdown fit in all of this? Well, as someone who is guilty of calling Crackdown "that game no one wanted that came with Halo 3 Beta" and "how original, yet another GTA clone" I feel compelled to prevent you from making the same mistake that I made. Crackdown takes the sandbox idea and gives it a shot in the arm. Your character starts out far from "normal" and just becomes more and more superhero-esque as you proceed through the game. From the start you can already jump several stories high, allowing you to climb buildings, scale mountains or clear obstacles with a single bound. Grand Theft Auto generally starts you off slow... access to only the first town, only a couple of missions available, not much you can work on until you get the story going. Crackdown throws this out the window. You turn the game on and, if you want, you can go straight for the last boss. Considering that you make him weaker by defeating all of his underlings I'm sure it would make things alot more difficult, but you really can do ANYTHING you want. You are limited solely by your current "skill levels" (you probably can't scale some buildings without getting your agility up first) but, for the most part, the world is your oyster.

What's even better is, the game throws action at you almost non-stop; the streets are crawling with gang members (who, by the way, don't seem to like law enforcement) and if you really thin their ranks in a short amount of time, they send "hit squads" to really make your life interesting. You aren't waiting around for someone to cause trouble, or driving through large cities trying to get to your next mission (perhaps the greatest downfall of Grand Theft Auto being so massive in scope). In fact, it's usually so much fun to jump from rooftop to rooftop, sniping enemies or sending heat-seeking rockets into a group of unsuspecting Volk that you will probably forgo driving entirely (that, and civilians have this bad habit of always jumping out in front of you, which gets you in trouble with the law...).

Agility Orbs really add to the sense of exploration and reward you for climbing huge structures and making big leaps of faith. But since there are more than 500 of them scattered throughout the city, the act more like pez candy than they do anything else. You get one, and from that vantage point you can see at least 3 others. Next thing you know, you've collected 40 and you are the complete other side of the map... and going strong. I can't quite put my finger on it but something about jumping from rooftop to rooftop, jumping 35 feet vertically and hundreds of feet horizontally just feels fun no matter how you slice it. Add in the addictive "collecting" quest behind agility orbs (encourages scaling buildings and big jumps) and hidden orbs (encourages exploration and clever thinking with some difficult jumps) and you can entertain yourself for hours on end just trying to collect them. On paper it sounds ludicrous, I know, but once you start playing they are like Lay's... you can't eat just one! (Can I even say that? Is it copyright protected or something? In fact, do they even use that slogan anymore?)

The game is not without flaws, though. In order to acheive this faster paced, more "action/arcade" style of gameplay it has to sacrifice any semblance of a strong narrative ("Bad guy X is in charge of bad thing Y, go kill him!" is hardly a storyline) and compared to the main gameplay, the "side quests" feel lacking or annoying. Driving a car is about as easy as trying to firmly grasp a wet bar of soap - you can do marginally well at slower speeds, but you might as well walk at that point. Boss's, especially the later ones, are more an excercise in patience than anything else. They are ALWAYS the same, the only thing different between them is the number of small-time lackeys that you will have to take out before you get to them (hence my most of the last bosses are in buildings and other closed enviornments, where you are forced through narrow passages and rooms and therefore cannot help but face all the weaker enemies). The strength of the core gameplay, however, helps to augment the tedious nature of the "main story"... especially since round-house kicks to the gut and rockets to the face NEVER seems to get old.

Co-op is a plus for this game, but no split screen co-op is a crime. There's no way it isn't feasable to do 2 player co-op on the same screen; it just screams of a way to make more people purchase copies of the game or invest money into Xbox LIVE. I appreciate that co-op is there - and that it was available over LIVE - but making that the only option is just mean.

You can easily extend your enjoyment of the game, especially if you are a completionist type. Stat points, agility orbs and Hidden orbs will keep even the most meticulous of collectors busy for dozens of hours over normal game play, if not drive them a little insane (why, oh WHY can't they show us where that last orb is. If you have 499 out of 500, isn't that ENOUGH? Just show me where that last one is. Even a hint would be great. You can keep track of which ones I've already collected - how else do they not respawn? - so help me out. Show me on a map where the ones I collected were, or start showing orbs on the map after I collected 75% plus. Having to comb over that insanely huge city for ONE orb is grounds for cruel and unjust punishment). Vehicle races, time trials, and leaderboards extend play for the more competitive amoung us, giving proof of bragging rights between friends... or the world. I think... I haven't really used them yet (too busy with the real game!).

Crackdown takes the tried-and-true "go anywhere, do anything" sandbox method and ratchets up the action to keep you on your toes. Seemingly Limitless enemies, collectable items, time trials and side quests give offer up plenty of entertainment and leave you always doing something. "Supply points" provide a great long-distance travel mechanism, while attempting to not totally ruin the size and scope of the world (they also help keep your full on ammo and give you a wide selection of guns as you "borrow" them from the other gangs). Free downloadable content gives you a little more to do, and pay content even throws in some new vehicles and more side quests to do (although, admitedly, I've never downloaded or played the pay conent). This fresh new take on the sandbox genre might not last you as long on the main story as Grand Theft Auto would, and lack of a true "story" leaves you with very little purpose or direction, but the gameplay is just plain fun. There are so many used copies floating around that it is a crime - no pun intended - for you to not own this game. There is plenty to do and see (and kill!) and you will have a very hard time putting it down. In a genre where everything has to live in the shadow of Grand Theft Auto, Crackdown does very well in making a name for itself and definitely deserves your attention.

Call of Duty 4

Anyone who knows me knows that I'm not exactly a "fan" of first person shooters. I can play them and enjoy them, sure, but I generally do not do so on my own dime (Half-Life being the exception. You could also count Metroid Prime but, honestly, that's adventure). Owning a 360 comes at a price, though; First person shooters do so well on the system that one can't help but run into several "quality" titles every now and then, even if it is a genre I'm not exactly fond of.

So, when I was offered the opportunity to play Call of Duty 4 multiplayer, I reluctantly accepted, mostly because they needed my 360 anyway and I wanted to keep an eye on it. Multiplayer with people I know is perhaps the one saving grace to a first person shooter, outside of a truly emmersive story (hence my caving to the Half-Life series). Ever since Goldeneye on my N64, first person shooters have redeemed themselves in my eyes with a quality multiplayer component. I remember next to nothing of Halo 1 and 2 campaign, but have tons of great memories of 16 player LANs with epic, hour long capture-the-flag matches and nail-bitingly close Slayer matches.

Unfortunately, Infinity Ward seems to have something against playing system link but also having mutliple people on the same console... so even though there were 5 of us, only 4 of us could play. I offered to sit out, but since there was an extra copy of the game... why not play single player? It would at least give me something to do while waiting for them to finish playing.

From a single player perspective, the game did not "break boundaries" in any way, really. I like how it played, and the story was interesting enough (especially how the two stories wove together by the end). Certianly not up to Half-Life standards, but it gets the job done. Some of the "non FPS" levels provided a nice break from the staple "first person, run and gun". Shooting that huge gun from the airplane, providing your character (on the ground, not the one you were playing currently operating the gun) a chance to escape was especially fun. The "stealth" level was also nice to play, although the directions sometimes seemed ambiguous and would sometimes get me dangerously close to a guard... or worse, caught.

It is not a long affair - I beat the game within a 24 hour time period, without even really trying. I played some Galaxy, met with some friends, you know... lived a rather normal life. It is not as though I really had to play the game non-stop to beat it. 6-8 hours, maybe less if you are really good. Then again, I didn't play on the hardest difficulty except for 1 level, and if you played on that I'm sure the game would take you alot longer (but be alot more frustrating, too).

Multiplayer seemed to have much more promise, mixing RPG like elements (leveling up, gaining access to new items, skills, etc) to the standard FPS gameplay (run and gun, shoot, grenades... why am I explaining this?!?) and even using a class system to allow you to customize your guns and items. While I haven't played it myself, friends I know who are big FPS buffs play Call of Duty 4 multiplayer more than Halo 3 mutliplayer, and that's saying something. Personally, though, I don't really like playing FPS's multiplayer without friends, so I've never played and therefore can't really vouch for the system. I can safely suggest it, though, as many people I know would whole heartedly support it (and they are usually very picky).

This game kind of comes across as a toss up. The main story is fun, and if you are really itching for a good FPS then it is worth, at the very least, a rental. You can most definitely blow through the main game in a weekend, even perhaps on veteran. If you've been playing Halo 2 multiplayer for the last few years, then a purchase is almost assuredly in order. The RPG elements give you something to work towards while you play (besides, you know, just being the best and winning all the time) and that can definitely add to the "addictive" nature of online gaming and rank-climbing. On the console versions you can even "reset" to level 1 once you reach the level cap, all for a special symbol being placed next to your name... and you can do it 10 times! Experience doesn't even seem to be tied directly to how well you do (you get more experience for more kills and winning, but you don't move backwards for losing or doing poorly) so even on your off days you can make some progress and those of us (me) who aren't as good could slowly work our way towards those higher ranks. It's more than likely that you already know whether or not you want this game (actually, that you already OWN this game or not, considering how many it has sold) but if you are on the fence, well... you are definitely missing out.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly...

Assassin's Creed

It is kind of difficult to put into words just what is so amazing about this game. Despite watching two other people play most of the game (including seeing several plot twists and even the ending) I still felt a need to go out and obtain a copy of the game for myself. This is the kind of game that is both fun to play and fun to watch, where literally anything can happen and you are ENCOURAGED to use environnments and stealth to your advantage, while not being forced into doing so if you don't want to. Sure, anyone can probably take on 20 guards at a time once they get the "core" mechanics of the game down and nothing really changes from the first boss to the last one, but that core gameplay is so good that you can play through at your own pace and honestly never really notice it.

There are some, however, that did complain about how "repetitive" it was and how boring it became... and it makes me wonder just what game they were playing. Is Halo 3 "boring and repetitive" because you basically spend the entire game shooting enemies? Is Super Mario Galaxy "boring and repetitive" because you spend most of the game jumping? Hardly. So what is the beef with people and Assassin's Creed? Why is it so special that it deserves this criticsm? Pehaps people were over-hyped for the game. Perhaps they were expecting something bigger, or better, or different than what Ubisoft ended up providing. But that would make me wonder... what exactly were they hoping for?

Now I admit that the game does have its share of flaws. The story, as good as it was, falls flat on its face in the end because it amounts to nothing more than a big tease. The game does a fairly good job of not forcing you to do anything you don't want. You can use rooftops or "blending" to avoid guards and confrontation in general. The main story, however, takes it to a near minimum, requiring only 2-3 "investigations" before you are allowed to assassinate your target... which means you could literally blow through the main game if you really wanted. Someone who takes time to explore the city and accept all the side quests, however, could spend hours on just one assassination mission alone.

This is really the only point of ontention I have with the game: the "investigations" are generally well mixed and offer a fair amount of variety of things to complete (albeit, some of them are fairly boring; sitting on a bench, listening to a conversation? Not exactly the pennacle of interactive entertainment...) but your choice of "optional" side quests is very limited in scope. Not counting collectable flags and templars(AGAIN with punishing 99/100 collectors? ugh!), optional quests include one of two options: saving citizens or climbing to look out points. Now, these acts in and of themselves are not terrible. Saving citizens is both fun and challenging because it makes sure to throw several guards at you at once, theoretically making it a more challenging engagement then you are used to. When done correctly, they are entertaining diversions to the stealth, run around and ignore guards style gameplay. The problem arises when there are citizens trapped in large, market like areas... and it seems as though there is a never-ending flow of guards to face. Sure, 4 or 5 are OK but once you are on guard 10 or 11 because that pack of 7 guards roaming that area found you (which they almost certianly will) it can really seem to drag out the fight, especially since you originally intended to only be fighting a few men and be on your way.

Climb points are much more fun, as they tend to have you go into interesting portions of the city to "synchronize" and give you an idea of what is in the area. Climbing anywhere and everywhere almost never gets old, a few of the larger buildings present almost puzzle-like challenges that require more thinking than just holding up on the stick and waiting, and the wide-pan view of the entire freaking city from way up in the air never fails to impress. It provides you a good escape from running around on rooftops or sneaking around in the streets, and in my opinion gives the game alot better pacing and flow then just trying to steamroll your way through the main events in the game (which would surely agitate and frustrate me). Sandbox games allow you to "go anywhere, do anything", but rarely does one encourage it so openly.

Flags and Templars add a "collectable" aspect to encourage even more exploring but with no in-game interface for keeping track of which ones you have already gotten and which ones remain, it can be frustrating to complete (even with help from a map) and usually offers only smaller diversions for players who catch them out in the open on their way to other areas or while on the run from guards.

What Ubisoft could have done to make the game feel less "repetitive" (a designation which I firmly deny to be true but entertain as a possibility nonetheless, as obviously someone feels it is true) would be to add in a greater number of "side quest" options and pull back on the number available in a given area. No one wants to feel like they should complete the same task TWELVE TIMES or more before having "finished" and area and preparing for the boss, but if you want to rescue all citizens or climb all viewpoints you just might. Instead, put a max on perhaps 2-4 (a larger cap for viewpoints, perhaps upwards of 8) and add in some other tasks to mix it up a little. Maybe pretend that the templars built "secret underground tunnels" and have Altair find and "explore" 2 of them, opening them as "waypoints" between different areas of the city. Or maybe an "Assassin's Challenge" to see how many guards Altair could stealthily kill in a set amount of time; that would even allow you to compare results with friends over xbox live. Maybe have a "training camp" similar to the tutorial area in Masayf where Altair is required to perform a certian number of moves in a give time frame. As you can see, turning those 12 "save the citizen" tasks into 3 or 4 groups of 3 or 4 tasks each would help to increase the variety of gameplay and keep the game from feeling "repetitive".

Overall the game represents a refreshing and exhilirating experience supported with meticulous attention to detail and enviornment design. The "little" things never fail to impress, from the unique camera angles available as "memory glitches" during cut scenes (that generally give a more cinematic feel to the story unfolding before you), the amount of care that must have gone into creating each city and character, and the "back story" behind the TRUE story. If you only go through the game with putting for the minimum amount of effort and never read any of the emails, pay attention to the detail given to you in each investigation, or watch the more cinematic camera angles in the cut scenes, then you really are missing out of some of the true entertainment and "magic" that this game possesses. Participating in the story as it unfolds, watching the characters interact and seeing Altair's transformation from "know-it-all" rogue to "inquisitive, learned informant" plays out very well and helps to slowly dole the truth behind the story to you in bits and pieces that give you just enough information to cause you to think, without unveiling the true secrets until the appropriate times. Some twists are more expected than others, but sometimes it is not the plot twist itself that remains interesting, but the journey that led to it. Altair's (and Desmond's) role in the whole thing become some of the most intriguing parts of the whole setup, and again, the story fails by seemingly dropping the game to an "end" sequence in a big tease of a cliff hanger more than a true "resolution" one would expect. In many ways, it plays out like an episode of LOST, but without the smoke monsters and attractive female lead character.

It is hard to recommend this game as a "rental" because in order to fully appreciate it you need to approach it with an inquisitive mind and not be straining to beat the game within a certian time limit. Truly exploring the world and story could push your play time well over 20 hours, and while collectable flags and templars can add several more hours on top of that, it still wouldn't scratch the surface of most RPG type games. I suppose if you think you can somehow squeeze that whole 20 hour play session into one rental period then by all means save the money; as fun as the game is, it does not really have any replay value outside of a full completion. Just know that you will probably miss out on alot of the game by restricting yourself to a certian time frame and trying to brute-force your way through the game. I would instead recommend a purchase; the story and gameplay are worth the monetary investment and freedom from time restraints, especially considering you can find the game as low as $30 to $40 already (depending on if you are looking to buy the 360 or PS3 version). The game is just plain fun, the story is cinematic and engrossing (even if a bit predictable), and the production values and attention to detail are top notch. Hopefully, the brisk sales will encourage Ubisoft to release "downloadable content" in order to expand on the game and keep us involved until they can release a sequel.

Well, there you have it. Four more games put on the chopping block and disected for your reading (and, perhaps, wallet's) pleasure. Considering that Super Tuesday was this week, and several other major stories have been brewing as of late (5 huge fiber optic cables in the ocean accidentally go offline in 1 week? sounds fishy to me...) expect the blog to shift back to a more half/half rant and review style then it has been as of late. For those interested in games, though, here's what I'm currently playing (and, therefore, you should expect reviews for coming shortly):

Title, System (comment)

Phoenix Wright: Trials and Tribulations, DS (This has been completed, so definitely this one)

Blue Dragon, 360 (completed for the most part, few achievements aside, so you'll see this soon)

Halo 3, 360 (completed, but don't expect multiplayer to be talked about much on my part)

Undertow, 360 XBLA (Played through single playet campaign, at least)

Uno, 360 XBLA (Played it some... isn't that enough?)


Games I'm currently playing that you'll see in the future:

Enchanted Arms, 360 (Just started... expect within a month or so. It is a JRPG so it may take a while)

Advanced Wars: Days of Ruin, DS (Also just started... expect campaign impressions soon, but replayability will keep it being mentioned for a while)

Viva Pinata, 360 (Been playing off and on, kinda far so I have initial impressions but there's alot of game left here)

Overwhelmed

Boy, am I behind! I've so many games to catch up on - no thanks in part to just having gotten my 360 - that I'm going to be busy for a while. Add to that the fact that 2008 already has some killer titles coming out as early as February (Apollo Justice) and continuing throughout the summer (GTAIV, Brawl, etc) that I'm not going to be in a "gaming drought" anytime soon. That being said, here are my personal impressions on the latest titles that I've played.

Super Mario Galaxy

We'll start off with the Wii, and you can't possibly talk about the Nintendo Wii without mentioning Super Mario Galaxy. Mario games, as of late, have not exactly been my cup 'o' Tea. Super Mario Sunshine (GameCube) did not exactly strike a chord with me; not only did I not collect all the shines, but I didn't even beat Bowser. I borrowed "New Super Mario Brothers" from a friend hoping to see if it was good enough to warrant purchase, and while I can say I enjoyed the game on some level overall I felt it lacked any real pizzazz and never did finish it or buy it. So when Super Mario Galaxy was first announced, I approached it with a certain level of trepidation. Being burned by the last two 'true' Mario games instilled no sense of loyalty in me and I couldn't even imagine how the Wii Remote could be used to "enhance" a game like Mario. I was content to love Mario 64 and, perhaps eventually, pick up Mario Galaxy. The Intention was to purchase my most desired game - Smash Brothers Brawl - and once Galaxy reached "player's choice" status or whatever they call it for Wii, finally give it a whirl. After all, even Sunshine was fun to a certian extent, and a Nintendo game generally has enough Polish to be worth a purchase at some point, regardless of being "Game of the Year" quality.

So here I am, 120 stars later, and willing to admit that I should not question what a plump, platforming plumber can do to a grown man. Galaxy grabs you and hooks you into simple, addictive gameplay so refined that it's almost impossible to convince yourself to put down the Wiimote for anything. You really get that "Just 1 more star" mentality and pretty soon it's 1am and you're wondering when the sun went down and why you haven't eaten dinner yet. In an era where First Person Shooters and RPGs seem to rule all the sales charts and be the apple of every critic's eye, this little gem goes down as the game that just might be able to top Mario 64 in my opinion as the best Mario game.

Hands down, the best feature is the crazy use of gravity. The clever gravity puzzles, the ability to jump off of a high tower and "fly" all the way around the planet to the other side, the gravity changing fields and "oh wow" factor of running upside down on the roof or straight up the wall. It's all there, everything you could possibly image (and more) and it isn't limited to a few over used "see-saw" puzzles (see: Half Life 2). Sure, the gravity is not "logical" or even physically plausible, and it is true that on more than one occasion you'll become disoriented and have no idea how to corectly move mario in the direction you want him to go. These are but small flaws in a system that genuinely takes an old, tired game genre and - no pun intended - flips it completely upside down. Has it been done before? Probably. Is it perfect? No. I found more than one time where I died because I wanted to run left but Mario instead ran right, or couldn't see around corners or in tight areas due to some 'iffy' camera controls, but overall the game delights in so many ways that you do not account much for these.

I've already completed the game (and by complete I don't mean beating the last boss, which can be done with only 60 stars, but having collected all 120 stars) and simply cannot wait to play the game over again. The only complaints I really have for the title lie with it's potential, which may be somewhat unfair. When I say it could have been better, it is not because it was bad or lacking, but because suddenly I can see even MORE they could have done. Perhaps the biggest tease (warning, SPOILER!) is the fact that near the end of the game you can gain access to a "flying" cap similar to that in Mario 64. Unfortunately, this never seems to be utilized in the actual levels and instead is completely limited to the "overworld" area. What gives, Nintendo? Some of the most enjoyable levels from Mario 64 were the stars that required using the flying cap! Shooting yourself out of a cannon and then flying around the level always felt amazing and was loads of fun even without the necessity to have a set "goal" to accomplish. You even went so far as to add it into the game, so why not make use of it? Perhaps I just missed it, but I've collected all 120 stars and still have not seen it available in any of the normal levels. Obviously the hat couldn't be used in several places - ones in outer space that you generally "flew" around in anyway with pull stars or bubbles and the like - but even one measly "observatory" filled with 5-10 "bonus" or comets that would visit some of the bigger planets would've been enough.

I also missed the 100 coin stars and 'collect 8 red coin' stars, which were replaced with 'collect 100 purple coins' stars. The 100 purple coin stars were my least favorite because they generally involved exploring levels down to the most detailed of nooks/crannies, and while 95+ would be easy to find those last few would always take several minutes of not-so-fun backtracking to find. 'Hunt for the 8 red coins' was by far a better system, focusing on exploration combined with innovative or unique collection (flying, climbing, sliding, jumping, fighting, etc) rather than a laundry list of holes and corners to hide things behind. While these levels were generally still "fun" and I'd often find myself discovering new areas or "secrets" within each level I would revisit, overall it was always haunted by this fear of "great, how long will THIS collection take?".

"Comets" were a great way to "up the ante" for more hardcore gamers looking for a challenge, and generally were handled very well. I especially liked the daredevil challenge, as you faced the familiar while being required to not lose a single life. Sure, it could be frustrating at times, but you always knew it was because of something you did, not because you were "unlucky". Cosmic races weren't quite as fun or unique as the N64 versions that inspired them but still added a bit of variety to the challenges.

Overall, Galaxy was an incredible experience and one I cannot emphasize enough for any Wii owner. In all likelihood, though, you already knew that. So let's move on to...

Zack and Wiki

The game doesn't have a lot going for it from a "mass market" standpoint. Cartoony visuals combined with rather bland or uninspiring titles aren't exactly the one-two punch for a best seller, given the target market for Zack and Wiki is not going to be pre-teens. Whatever funding was lacking in marketing, however, must have been because they diverted all of their attention to gameplay, and it shows. Zack and Wiki is a "point and click adventure" which in this day in age has been relegated to "niche" status, barely holding it's own and scraping by as a genre. Games like Sam and Max and Phoenix Wright keep the genre going almost exclusively through well written (and often times humorous) plots more than the sense of "exploring" or puzzle. These games are good in their own right (I can only speak for Phoenix Wright, having never really played Sam and Max) but they fall very short of the genius that is Monkey Island.

So when Zack and Wiki was announced, quite a few heads turned... especially since the Wii platform offers such a unique opportunity to really push the game to a new level. And let me tell you, Capcom didn't just push, they SHOVED. The first few levels may be easy, but the difficulty quickly ramps up and each puzzle offers a unique solution (sometimes even two or three) that make full use of all of the Wii-motes many unique features. Gesture based actions (pushing/pulling), IR sensing (moving/blocking), position based actions (turning keys, attacking with swords) - just when you think you've seen it all, Campcom finds some other way to astonish and amaze you. Wiimote speaker? Wiimote Balancing? Wiimote Shaking? It's all here. And they don't feel "tacked on", either. Each one is deliberately and lovingly thought out to the point that many solutions could not simply be boiled down to "pressing a button". I can't go into too much detail without giving away some of the puzzles in the game, but with any other controller this game would more than likely have to rely too much on it's graphics and story (neither of which are really anything to write home about), and the game would lose quite a lot of its charm and character.

Speaking of which: personally, I enjoy the way the game is presented. It's not quite up to "Galaxy" levels, and the art style is definitely something that will be just as limited by personal taste as it was by artistic direction, but the more anime-inspired cartoon look really gives the game a life of its own. I will admit that I am a fan of the sort of "over the top" emotional response that come from these anime-like visuals, but everything from Zack's little "Victory Dance" to Captain Rose's "Angry" animations will almost always elicit a chuckle, if not an outright laugh. The character interaction is it's strongest point, showing off an impressive set of "emotion" responses that, while canned never seem to get old despite their overuse. There's no real "Voice Over" work, aside from a few simplistic "cheer" or "grunt" sounds (like, say, Mario or Zelda) which is both sad and good at the same time. Generally, new IPs offer the best option to adding Voice to a character because that character has yet to truly be "defined" in the minds of gamers. Zack and Wiki could have reached above and beyond, giving their already strong character line-up an extra level of "depth" with some quality voice work, but at the same time I can see how sticking to text was a better choice. Given the art style, the setting, and the select "voice" already available in the game, I can see how having to listen to this for prolonged periods of time would really start to grate the nerves and serve as a detraction from the overall experience, and not as an addition to it.

Despite it's flaws, Zack and Wiki remains a very solid title with beautiful presentation and ingenious gameplay. The lower price point ($40, and perhaps already dropped to as low as $30) only add to the value packed into this highly overlooked title. While I can safely assume that most Wii owners know about Galaxy and have made up their minds about it, Zack and Wiki seems doomed to be lost forever to almost zero marketing and stylized graphics. For your sake, as well as mine (I want a sequel!), please go buy this game. I can guarantee you will NOT be disappointed (if you are, there is something definitely wrong with you). It's not hard to miss this game when walking through the store, but it's hard not to fall in love with it once you pop it into your Wii's disc slot.

While we're on the topic of Nintendo, let's move to the Nintendo DS:

Final Fantasy XII : Revenant Wings

Most people know that I have an unnatural love affair with Square. In my younger, more naive years, slapping "Final Fantasy" on just about anything would have me immediately place it as a "Game of the Year" contender regardless of having ever even seen or played the game myself. $50 for "Final Fantasy: Cooking with Cid?". SIGN ME UP! But after a punishing myself on Final Fantasy X (who, as a game, I loved, but as a story I despised) and refusing to even acknowledge FFX-2 and FFXI as real games (a true sequel and an MMO? What was Square thinking?) and having my bank account nearly shattered by the release of Crystal Chronicles on Gamecube (loved the idea but could never get enough people/Gameboys/cables to complete it), I've become more skeptical of Square games. Tactics Advanced helped to woo me in a time of betrayal and abuse, but Square no longer gets the automatic seal of approval that it used to from me (This is left to Blizzard and Nintendo, it seems...). I had no chance to play Final Fantasy XII (I finally got my PS2 back, and now own a copy, so I'm working on that fact) but when it was announced that Square would make a "spin-off" of FFXII on the DS I simply groaned out my usual "who cares, another sequel" and went on my merry way. Then, I heard it was an RTS... and I started to pay a bit more attention. An RTS? On the DS? Can it be?!?

Sure, maybe Heroes of Mana did it first, but now we're talking an RTS with the story of an RPG on a system with a touch screen and a rather large world to build off of (FFXII received very high reviews, so I was hopeful here). Not being able to contain my desire for Phantom Hourglass gave me the perfect excuse to add FFXII: Revenant Wings to my Christmas list, and I can safely say it was a good choice.

The game plays sort of like WarCraft III, in that you have "hero" units with abilities and stats above and beyond your normal units. There is no real "resource management" in this game, so the gameplay is much more focused on the battles. The battle system is, overall, a positive for the game. Gambits help to remove the monotony of having to continuously watch all 5 characters and cast their magic spells without completely overpowering them (you only choose 1 spell to auto cast, so any others you still have to go and select manually). The diversity in level design is an added but possibly unnecessary bonus (it's not always "kill everything", although that usually works to complete the level, too) and, aside from the last boss and last few "free missions", you don't have to "grind" out levels. Controls can be somewhat frustrating, especially when trying to select just 1 specific unit/hero. Too much on the screen can make the slightly-imperfect touch screen stand out as a limiting input factor, but overall the touchscreen does a very good job of bringing RTS games to a platform that otherwise would have never worked.

The "Synth" system does quite a bit to overhaul the standard fare "buy better items" syndrome that tends to plague RPGs. You are offered the chance to purchase low and sometimes medium grade "ingredients", or go on a scavenger hunt to find that "high" quality piece that will really give you a big boost in stats. You can also "customize" the weapon to place a bit more emphasis in one area over another (say, stamina over speed, defense over damage, etc) through the use of cleverly worded (but sometimes rather ambiguous) "questions" about the characters or what you might do in certain hypothetical situations. It adds much more "strategy" to actually upgrading your weapons, considering you will have to share ingredients among several different units. So, if you use "high" quality on 1 or 2 characters, several others will be forced to use "medium" or "low"... or perhaps not get upgrades entirely until the next recipe book comes along. It would have been nicer if the game was a bit more forgiving on telling you where you could go to "find" these high quality materials, but perhaps that is a part of the "exploration" elements.

Overall, the game was quite enjoyable and offered a few dozen hours of impressive story telling, character development and, of course, it's fair share of large-scale battles. The last boss and free missions are more an excercise in annoyance than seems fair, but I suppose they are more the "Omega" weapon of this game. Having my level 50 units under constant and relentless attack from level 90 units was neither fun nor encouraging, but I'm sure someone sees this as a "challenge" and will try to grind it out until they can defeat them... but unless I become woefully lacking in games, this option does not seem likely for me. My units did not have enough HP to take on the last boss, so it did take grinding out 5 or 6 levels (and a few weapon / armor upgrades) to finally put an end to him, but if you find yourself focusing more on a core set of units (I tended to try and level them all equally) and play around in the "free battles" more (I only did 2 or 3 free battles up to that point) I'm sure things will go much easier for you.

Overall, the title comes recommended. It is hard to outright name it a sort of "MUST BUY" title, especially given that the DS has a HUGE library of amazing games, but if you like RTS or Final Fantasy I'm sure you can easily become engrossed in this game. My heart will always lie with more "turn-based" strategy games (Final Fantasy Tactics Advanced 2, where are you?!?!) but Square certainly deserves some credit for pushing their AAA productions outside of their established markets and into new territory.

To make this easier on me (and you, the reader) I'm going to break this one up into a few parts. Despite having "finished" or played enough of these games to write about them now, I'll leave it up to my next "rant" to give myself more time to prepare for it, and to not just hit you with a wall of text. Also, it leaves me a nice buffer zone in case I start to get behind in my games (which will probably start happening once I hit all of these 40+ RPGs I've got lying around.)

Left to do: Title (System)

Assassin's Creed (360)

Crackdown (360)

Call of Duty 4 (360)

Gears of War (360)

As you can see, the next post will probably be a little Xbox heavy (although AC and CoD4 are on the PS3/PC as well), so for the curious here's what I am currently chipping away at. You can expect to see mentions of these coming up in the not too distant future:

Upcoming: Title (System)

Blue Dragon (360)

Phoenix Wright 3 (DS)

Brain Age 2 (DS)

Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn (Wii)

Marvel Ultimate Alliance (360)