It can be hard to deal with ‘big bad’ motivation in any sense; even looking at our Western history we’ve seen war tactics and propoganda that depersonalize and dehumanize our enemies so that soldiers can do their job without consequenting conscience and morale problems. These are themes often glaized over in action movies, where it’s more engaging to have the main character blasting villains away in triumph instead of contemplating the horror of his own actions.

On the rare occasion, however, this can become the subject of a film. It’s addressed brilliantly in films such as Platoon and a little bit in Apocalypse Now; the Vietnam war obviously being a very dour subject when it comes to mixed interests. Even softer narratives placed in the setting of wars have touched upon these concepts, such as The Boy in the Striped Pajamas and Empire of the Sun.

It would be amazing to see a video game that, like Platoon, sincerely considered the consequence and morality of mindlessly slaughtering grunts, or the motivation these grunts have to keep getting back up and asking for more. Even the contemporary ‘bests’ in the gaming market today like Call of Duty 4 and Gears of War are completely insincere at the worst of times, and present shallow objectiveless waffle at the best.

Metal Gear Solid have always been almost paradoxically anti war in narrative and philosophy, but reward players for

I actually think Mass Effect is commendable in this sense, and I think this is due to the exploratory nature of RPGs, because during the playthrough of the story a lot of information about every faction is revealed, to obsessive degrees, and it really helps shape the dynamics of the characters.

I remember in Fable 2, I downloaded the ‘Into the Future’ expansion, and I really enjoyed it, but I didn’t lend the time to reading each collectible item’s story, something which actually hindered me when a puzzle came up that required knowledge o

I saw fault in this, not because it required that I read a little of the back story, but because the game never explicitly encouraged me to do so. That puzzle was immediately cut off from me because I was not interested in navigating Fable 2′s terrible pause menu to get at the item descriptions.

and due to not having the urge to read the book first time, I ended up rather confused in one of the puzzles. You could argue that this isn’t so much as a bad thing

Blue Dragon has a number of small stories that you are able to follow by reading bookshelves, and I was focused on reading them the first time I found them because I understood that I could not take the text with me and this meant I might not find the stories again. There is a major problem with this method, however, in that you can miss one of the shelves and entirely lose any context for the rest of the story and if you were to leave the game for a while and come back, something which had to happen in my experience, so that I didn’t kill it for myself, you might entirely forget what the story was about in the first place. For those reasons, I think I can safely rule out that alternatives.

One character can read so they go to him and it becomes a more interactive environment. Possibly even decode stuff by decyphering letters in their alphabet. Gradually reveal the story.

Back stories are interesting as well. I think I like Mass Effect (or, perhaps by lineage, Baldur’s Gate’s) method of back story delivery. It’s carefully paced with follower dialogue, so you are gradually given lore on certain members of your party without it feeling forced.

If we rev up to 88 miles per hour and go back to 1972, only a few months after pong was released, we could witness, first hand, those first baby steps towards the mega industry we saturate with our pocket money today. I’m talking about a company named Magnavox and their release of the first ‘home gaming system’, which was named the Odyssey.

Though the console was apparently crippled by misinformation that it would not play on all television sets (if not because it looked like it belonged more in a lab then in anyone’s living rooms), it still sold a significant 100k units, as it played Pong on a television screen. We see more individual console released, each with specific but basic games, but it wasn’t until four years later in 1972 that the ability to play more than one game on a console was introduced. Cartridges caused a huge change in video games, with the ‘Fairchild Channel F’ being released with a number of different games available to play. Suddenly there was market potential to increase sales by selling individual, and cheaper to construct games. Moving forward again, it wasn’t until 1983 that we see any familiar names, such as Nintendo releasing their first console, the Famicom, in Japan. Prior to this, Atari had the largest market share, and the rest of game developers were generally independent developers.

It was also in 1983 that America almost lost their market for video games entirely; due to a lack of interest caused by a general disenchanted feeling towards the fledgling industry it almost collapsed. This crash spread through to 1986, at which point Nintendo took a big risk and ported the Famicom to the US as the Nintendo Entertainment System or ‘NES’ for short. It had been slightly updated, but was in essence the same console. By taking this risk, Nintendo helped revitalise the industry in America and the west. The NES was a strong console through to 1990, with another recognisable name popping into the equation, Sega appeared as the strongest competition to the NES with their new ‘Genesis’ console. Pong The Fairchild Channel F The competition between the companies forced both to improve the hardware developed, in 1991 the Super Famicom/Super Nintendo Entertainment System was released, which had updated power, graphics and in general better games.

James

This rivalry continued to push Nintendo and Sega into creating more technical machines, but another 4 years later and another of the biggest names in consoles pushed into the market: In 1995 the Playstation was released by Sony and, though Japan was slow to take to it, in the west the Playstation was a huge hit. Sony, Nintendo and Sega were all now competing for the market share, and though they were still considered a big development company, Sega was coming out worst in the battle of the consoles, their new console the ‘Saturn’ did poorly and in 1996 when Nintendo released their answer to the Playstation, the Nintendo 64, Sega were losing more then they could afford to. Their last attempt at a console, the Sega Dreamcast, is widely acknowledged as technically brilliant, but unfortunately it still did not sell well enough to keep Sega in the ‘race’ and they stopped releasing new consoles since, becoming a video game development company instead. The Playstation 2 was so succesful, it was even released in this tacky pink colour. Again we move further forward to 1999, and we now see the huge effect that Sony had on opening up the market even more, when the Playstation 2 opened with a phenomenal reception for both die hard gamers and casual alike. The Playstation succeeded with good marketing and a good image, the added bonus of having a DVD player inside the console gave a full impression of a home entertainment machine, and was an obvious incentive for many people who otherwise would not have been interested. This generation of consoles brought the Nintendo’s Gamecube into life, and we saw the inclusion of Microsoft with their console, the X-Box. The Xbox itself brought with it many new ideas and improvements upon the basis that Sony, Nintendo and Sega were building up. Their console came with it’s own storage device, and the online system was developed into an easy and fun experience. Xbox Live was launched, which suddenly levelled the playing field between consoles and PC games, which had been online for several years before. The market for video games seems to have grown exponentially during this period while consumers were waiting for the latest generation of consoles, the generation we are currently in. First to be released was Microsoft’s second attempt, the Xbox 360 in the Christmas 2005, which boasted High Definition gaming, improved power and an even better online service.

Then we saw the Nintendo Wii released almost a year later in 2006 and since their launch they have pushed a marketing campaign that was even more successful than the Playstation 2’s. It seems the Wii has managed to introduce the aspects of casual gaming into mainstream media, people who had not been interested in games even after the success of the Playstation 2, have been introduced to new types of games, like fitness and sports games that emulate their real life counterpart in more than just visuals. The Wii has a unique system that defies conventional console controllers by being motion sensitive, which opens up a whole new way to control and interact with video games. The Playstation 3 was released last year, in 2007, but it has not had a high critical success and the console is very expensive. Despite this, it is still selling in huge amounts in Japan, across America and in Europe.

To this day, however, the Playstation 2 is still the best selling console of all time, though the Wii seems to be making a fair attempt to break that record. I believe that games now are more popular because they’re becoming more realistic, and when realism is not applicable, more interesting and fun, and people are now beginning to see video games as a good method of entertainment, and equally as a level of escapism.

They are one of the most foregrounding platforms of interactivity in the multimedia industry, primarily due to their already massive, but still growing presence in the entertainment business, not to mention the everyday lives of so many people the world over, including myself. I play games; not only as a physical amusement but also as a form of escapism through my ability to empathise with characters, mostly fictional, but this is a trait many consider the backbone to our humanity.

Many would consider our ability to emphasise with fictional characters an advanced level of intelligence, in fact many would consider empathy on it’s own a higher thought process. We do not see empathy in wild animals, and so it is an important emotion to consider, and this empathy is so much enhanced in video games that you can almost become the character you’re playing as, which allows developers to take people into other worlds and narratives, ones that break the conventional boundaries of standard storytelling. This is most eloquently expressed through role-playing games, a favourite category of mine, as you shape the course of the game play through the way you develop your characters and their subsequent strengths and lifestyle. When you have such close control to your characters development it allows you to connect freely to their emotional portrait, but it is important to make the story engaging and the characters authentic enough that you can actually relate with them as well. What has become quite popular in games like this is the ability to customise not just the skill range of your characters, but the look of them as well. Of course, when you look at so called ‘MMORPGs’, massively multiplayer online role playing games, this is an obvious step needed to distinguish characters apart, but when you are given advanced levels of customisation in a single player game it may seem like a somewhat pointless exercise and yet now we’re starting to see this customisation bleed into other genres of video game. Sports games, action games, even games that defy conventional stereotypes like the Wii’s Mii Channel, which seems entirely based off of making customised avatars for you and your friends. What do developers hope to achieve?

James

They know that gamers want to model their characters so that they can feel most attached to them, whether that is customising your hero to look like yourself or just making him look cool, we definitely can put an emotional investment in a character that, if only visually, we associate with, this is something impossible for motion pictures and one of the many strengths of the gaming genre. Interestingly, the obvious opposite of customisable characters does not automatically detract from this ability to emulate with the protagonists we see in games.

It is not often that you see reoccurring characters in generic role-playing games, and even in sequels there tends to be more of a focus on a reoccurring theme as opposed to making a direct character sequel, though there are of course exceptions to this.The reason behind making new characters is part of the interesting parcel these games offer. Kingdom Hearts has an interesting mix of new and old characters. A great example where this is the case is the game ‘Kingdom Hearts’, which was fairly unique because it involved some of the best-established characters you might imagine. Its story relies heavily on the relationships between the main character Sora, and his newfound companions Donald and Goofy. These are the same Donald and Goofy that have become staples in the Disney line up of characters, and even Mickey Mouse plays a big part in the game. Specific focus falls on Sora’s search for his old friends, who have gone missing, and he is often confronted with having to choose between his new friends and his old ones. Ironically, for the audience we’re actually more familiar with the characters that Sora is only just meeting and the ones we are searching for are slowly introduced to us. Of course, here is the games emotional backbone in the new characters we are meeting, but our pre-set attachment to the older characters does not subvert our ability to assume the role of the main character in an emphatic manner, in fact, for many who like Disney movies I would say it is an encouragement to be able to connect between the custom characters and the already familiar ones.

Disney is such a massive image to work with, and it must have been daunting using such defined characters, and yet Kingdom Hearts was a blockbuster hit and an amazing game. I have a lot of respect for the developers and I’m sure it is not as easy to use pre-defined characters as the game makes it out to be. Some styles of games do not lend themselves to the same level of attachment we can develop in games like Kingdom Hearts, for example, nobody feels too emotionally attached to the character of Pac Man as he is very abstract, and a lot of games rely on similar styles. This is where role-playing games are a stronger style; because where their roots are attached to character driven game play and more focus being placed on creating an enjoyable story, everything is more believable, aside from the occasional dragon, and players can suspend their beliefs to really engage with the story. Where other games could still be considered good as long as they play well, even with a superficial story, role-playing games can be dull without their often-epic plots. Looking at abstract characters like Pac-Man, we may be able to conclude that games are more popular now then when they were first developing because of similar reasons. Games are much more engaging when the character you are trying to connect with is not made up of a limited number of blocky pixels.

Perhaps, even, this may be why Mario was so successful? After all, his was the emotional tale of a poor plumber (or carpenter, originally) who was merely trying to rescue his girlfriend from an angry, barrel-throwing monkey, and who can’t sympathise with that? It’s interesting how the freedom developing in games has opened our views of story telling for a mass audience, when you have alternative methods of playing through a story it, much like the attachment formed to a character, can really bring the world that the story is based in to life. Looking at other story telling methods, books and movies, each has flaws and bonuses but I have had growing confidence that when done right video games have more potential to entertain and reach their audience. Books have always been able to capture the reader’s imagination because they rely on the reader’s imagination, and that is something that games are able to do as well due to the fluidity of the narrative. Movies are so set in their narrative, it commonly becomes a problem when they are based off of books to begin with and fans are not happy with the translation. People develop their own ideas of what characters should act and look like, and though gaming has developed this problem somewhat more now that games are becoming more cinematic, there is still a much larger element of freedom for characterization and theme. Even so, a book cannot veer off in any direction the reader chooses, nor a movie, and this has been the case of games in the previous decade, but advances in technology mean more and more immersive worlds can be created with more freedom and more customisation. Of course, this will not always be the case for everything, and some games are not well crafted, the stories and characters aren’t likeable and the illusion is spoiled, but this is only to be expected in such a large market, not every movie is a blockbuster. When thinking about connecting a character on screen to the person controlling them, the ultimate aim would arguably be Virtual Reality. Of course, at our current level of technology we are starting to border on augmented reality, but we have not developed immersive programs that even touch upon any level of believability. While we are waiting, I suppose the best we can look for is the innovation within the video game market to supplement us.

Virtual reality requires some level of physical interactivity and some level of emotional interactivity as well, which are both quite difficult to achieve effectively. Nintendo have been bridging the gap between our technology now and the technology we predict for the future with their latest console, the Wii. It allows a lot more physical context sensitivity within games, and what I mean by this is a physical mimicry of what we are seeing on screen. For example, when a character goes to swing his sword we can command this by using the same action. This is an obviously effective way to create more fully immersive environment. Nintendo, and the release of this latest console, have brought us into an interesting age of gaming by expanding the market almost exponentially with a broader range of advertising and target audience by revolutionizing the way the general public views gaming. This may be a great thing for the industry itself, especially with the ideals that are driving the company at the moment with such experimental ideas such as motion controls and the Nintendo DS’s touch screen sensors, we may be looking at another generation of innovation and originality. There are troubles brought on by the increase of the gaming market, however, and looking at the Wii at the moment I am not sure if the innovation they have managed is to be praised or feared. As a very active gamer, I often go out of my way to find the best and most interesting games available on the market, so obviously I bought a Wii when it came out and eagerly awaited all the games that have been released on the system. In my observations of the current video game market, I’ve developed the opinion that innovation developed on the hardware, the consoles and peripherals themselves, can actually lead on to hinder originality and game play in the video games that use them. It seems most developers are able to make games that utilise the basic, and obvious ways to use the hardware but they are no longer challenged to look beyond that because they are no longer forced to distinguish their game from the current market. Especially when the current market has just been expanded, doubled in size, there is less worry about taking a loss on any projects done, and this can either let developers take their time to make interesting and well developed games or, in what seems to be the majority of cases, release games that are below average quality. Looking at Wii games that have been released so far, they are no more innovative now then they were 2 years ago, before the console was released. In fact, initially the Wii seems to have had the reverse effect for most developers. Instead of being forced to distinguish their game with truly original game play, the audience that the Wii has opened up allows them to rehash old systems and ideas without worry, and the new control system has given developers an easy way to make a game seem innovative without really being so. Games that may have worked well on older consoles may seem awkward when ported over onto a new system, because it is so different games need to be designed for it and not in the same manner as before. Shaking a Wii controller madly may be different to mashing a button, but it is no more interpretive to the game play and merely replacing older controls is not progress. As an example, I would ask ‘what is the most innovative game on the Wii so far?’ to which I think many will answer with Mario Galaxy, certainly a very fresh take on the platforming genre. Having played it, however, I began to wonder if the game play would not actually be better on a GameCube controller. This is a personal opinion, of course, but even, the Wii has actually diminished the game play of it’s own flagship game and that just seems absurd. Perhaps it is merely a matter of time; the Wii was only released a year ago and is still at a very young stage in its development. It may only be that developers are not used to making games for the system and as they get used to the console and it’s new controls we’ll see the benefit of having such a unique system. To support this, we can look back at the first year of the Nintendo DS. From viewing the successful games, critically and commercially, the majority of the top ones weren’t particularly innovative in their use of the Nintendo DS’s touch screen. Listing off games from the first year of release, like Mario Kart DS, Mario and Luigi: Superstar Saga, Super Mario 64, Pokemon Dash, these games that are considered good, but not because of the hardware that they are on. It wasn’t until later, after we started seeing new projects that had been developed after people got a sense of what the DS could do and where they could take it, the market was suddenly flooded by innovation, originality and genius. Phoenix Wright: A fictional lawyer and big hit star for the DS. In my opinion, the greatest thing that the Nintendo DS has brought gaming is a re-enlightenment of genre. A lot of developers have come out with breakthrough types of unique and often abstract games. For example the game Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, this is a game in which you play as a lawyer and you have to win court causes. Another good example is the game Trauma Centre, which is a game where you use the stylus to perform surgery to save lives. These are the types of games that may not have come out because nobody considered any potential for the western market; by opening that idea up we’re seeing a lot more of these and hopefully, in time we’ll see a similar turn of events with the Wii. In conclusion, the interactive media industry is growing at such a fast pace that all of these theories related to areas like gaming are still new, but I still feel that the most important thing to remember is that innovation is the most important factor when creating new games, there may be no intrinsic problem with releasing similar games if they are popular but if you don’t try something different, how are you going to know what it could be like? High reality games are being developed to come closer and closer to emulating real life, but it is arguably a development of highly realistic visuals that can start causing an even worse moral panic when there is nothing to distinguish games from life. In my view, even the most uninventive games need to start turning more cinematic as opposed to ultra-realistic, with the importance put on excellent core narrative and character development. After all, there is only so far you can keep upgrading graphics and power before it becomes redundant in making the game stand out, whereas a gripping concept and unique game play will keep players hooked for generations.

Regardless, in a deranged attempt to keep up with the times I’m going to review the 20 minutes of demo that was made available to everyone, ever, negating any real need for this review…

It was alright I guess.

Yeah, you heard it here folks! Resident Evil 5: Alright. In seriousness, though, of what I have seen so far? The set pieces are developed enough to stay interesting, though the pacing has been jacked up, even from number 4, so it doesn’t feel anything like a Resident Evil game anymore (minus the standard ‘resident evil’ font that crops up in every damn game and draws the menu back in a poorly executed attempt of nostalgia). I didn’t feel tense once, and thanks to my house mate’s infectious lack of enthusiasm for anything Resident Evil I actually felt a bit disillusioned. Still, I got him back while he was playing Halo Wars by making the game repeat the phrase “All units!” until the characters on screen couldn’t keep a straight face.

Personal inflection of a racist fueled genocide adds another depth to the game.

The usual Capcom standards apply to the visuals, yes the graphics are wonderful and draw you in to the African setting. My biggest problem with the game, though, is the menu, which is a little cumbersome and gets in the way when you’re trying to not die. I have to ask, guys, what.. what was wrong with a pause function?

The inclusion of a co-op mode could be an inspired move, though it’s not nearly as well executed as the team-play involved in Valve’s Left4Dead, and as we know – there is no I in team but there is an I in AI, if that even makes sense. No, no I think I just butchered that and I’m going to stop.

James

Chris

Lego Batman captures the feel of Gotham extremely well within the Lego universe, the city seems dark and dank, the villains of Gotham truly come across as nothing less than mental and the adaptation of Danny Elfmans original score from the first Batman film to the game helps to make the player feel as if they truly are Batman.

The main problem with this game is that it is a Lego game; but in the same way this is its saving grace. Problems arise from the fact that it is simply “the same old, same old” the game really doesn’t offer the player anything new and if you are a veteran of the Lego Star Wars and Lego Indianan Jones games you will know what to expect from the very start.

In saying this however the game offers far more content than the previous games by the fact there are now twice as many levels, this is due to the aspect that you are able to play thought the game as the villains aswell as the Gotham heroes. There are more upgrades available aswell as a new unlockable feature known as Data which gives the player an insight into the history of Batman and other playable characters.

One of the biggest problems with Lego Indianan Jones is that the game got very stale, very quickly due to the aspect that more often than not you play mainly as Indianan Jones and if we learnt anything from Lego Star Wars its that one of the better aspects of the games was being able to play as multiply characters for different effects.

The way Lego Batman gets round this is by giving Batman several suits and upgrades to constantly keep it fresh and interesting.The suits offer a great insight into Batman’s world aswell as keeping the challenging aspect of the game open i.e you may need one suit for one task, and a totally different one for another.

The best aspect of the game for me is playing as the villains, this offers alot more in terms of game play than just playing as Batman and Robin in the hero missions. In the hero missions Batman and Robin use suits to keep the gameplay challenging and fun which is fine and I understand that that is a suitable solution to the two man problem.

However the villains have their own superpowers to a certain degree and I found them to be far more interesting and more enjoyable to play as, for instance playing as the riddler or bane gives you the option to; as the riddler control people and as bane lift objects normal characters couldn’t with super strength. In making this point it does seem to be that most of the well known villains have unique powers while everyone else just has super strength, this is kinda upsetting as I feel they could of really ran with the superpower aspect.

Overall the game is fun, it doesn’t take itself too seriously and the characters are made of Lego, what more do you want?, however I do think that its time the team hanged up the ol’ blocks and perhaps tried their hand at something else. If this was the first Lego game then I would give this a 10 but because this is the third in the series I cant, its all become a bit too familiar.

If you haven’t played a Lego game before then I strongly recommend going out and getting this game, if you have played the past games then maybe its just worth renting it out because its not really going to challenge and thrill you. As a final note in terms of the graphics an gameplay they are both equally good but nothing special but then if you are expecting amazing visuals from a Lego game, you’ve got a serious shock coming. The game is good honest fun even if now it is a bit backdated.

OVERALL: 7.5

p.s Why not make a Lego Racing RPG…wouldn’t that be mental?

I’ll start by making the point that Gears of War 2, in my eyes, is an almost perfect sequel. Now that does not mean, as a point, that is is a perfect game. What I mean, when I say this, is that it takes all of the elements that I loved from the first game and it builds upon them. The unfortunate side to making a sequel in anything, however, is that you have to take both the good and the bad from the original game. Luckily, Gears of War 1 was a pretty fantastic game.

James

EPIC have made quite a claim, just with their name

Now EPIC themselves have talked about how they have geared their sequel towards being more cinematic, something more deserving of their company title. Playing through Gears 2, you begin to understand exactly what they mean. The story and dialogue have been worked upon, apparently, by some professional writers. Personally, I wouldn’t have noticed, the story itself is pretty bland in its linearity and carries an inevitability to it that holds it back from being a serious work of fiction. It doesn’t help either that Gears of War is full of cheese. Giant space marine type men fighting against hoards of monsters from the depths of Earth is not going to lend itself to anything too sophisticated.

Still, towards the end of the main story arc some nice elements are introduced that could be fantastic if they’re built upon, and in a game like Gears I’m not sure an elaborate tale wouldn’t just get in the way. Case in point, Metal Gear Solid. A fantastic game, but the story (good as it is) does tend to push itself in the way a bit. In this respect, then, Gears is a fantastically balanced game.

Gameplay wise, it’s the Gears formula, and we like it already. Those of whom liked the original will appreciate the closed encounters while experiencing a new, more open level design that comes into play sequentially. It can be a little off putting at first, especially if you’re just hoping for an expansion of the original campaign, but staying with the course is rewarding. The new designs echo the first game and bring a different set of strategies to each fight, and with the occasional niche bit of gameplay (such as tempting out rock monsters to create your own cover, or controlling a crane as both a platform and a weapon) it’s kept interesting and fun.

Gears 2 is longer then the first one too, in sheer story it covers

visually, gears is a treat

boss fights

…but who actually cares about single player nowadays?

Old problems. Dare I say, “HOST ADVANTAGE”

So, score?

9/10

And now it’s rated, I hope you’re sated, it wasn’t slated like I had fated.

…love James

Chris

The game itself consists of three gambling games Fortunes Tower, Keystone and Spinerbox. The idea is to play these games to death in a vain attempt to build your star rating higher, so you can earn more gold, more games and ultimately enter more tournaments.

Its not all bad however, the game does have a niche, upon entering the different level tournaments you have a chance to win exclusive items for the fable 2 game… and thats it, there is also the option to unlock artwork but no one really buys games for unlockable artwork, and thats what it really boils down to with this game, your paying money for content, not the game.

If like most of the U.K, you got this game for free when pre-ordering Fable 2, then thats fine, but if you haven’t and you are actually considering buying the game for the gambling games on it then I warn you, Dont! The games themselves become very boring after a while, although as I have said they do have interesting elements, these elements however do lose their value after the second hour of gameplay.

Overall this isn’t a long review because it isn’t a long game, odds are most people will buy it anyway because of the special items to be used in fable 2. As a stand alone game it falls short, but then it was never meant to be a self proclaimed game anyway. I guess my argument is that it isn’t fun, its boring and I only played it for the content, which I would of been happy just to buy.

OVERALL: 3.0

p.s That being said fortunes tower is quite fun.

It is a different breed to Fable, however, not only because it’s set 500 years into the future, but also because the developers had more freedom, and it’s obvious they decided to have a go at all those crazy ideas they’ve been throwing about. The tone has evolved, much like the style and qualities that the original Fable tried to distinguish for itself.

Of all the elements I remember from the old Fable, the juxtaposition between tremendously dark parts of the story and the tongue in cheek, or plain ludicrous comedy moments is still an odd one. At times the two are kept apart carefully to allow some emotional expansion, but then the game meshes the two together in awkward, conflicting threads. I’m not sure this wasn’t what Lionhead wanted to achieve, though, as being taken into this world as a character and forced to react to all of this is, if anything, an experiment of philosophical merit.

James

Not the kind of protection you were expecting to wear.

The moments of amusement alone make the game worth playing through, and they range from the both the scripted to the incidental. Exploring the expansive maps for gold and treasure only to end the day by digging up a condom and some fermented cheese has a perfect sense of counter intuitive gameplay. It almost makes the gamer question why you really are doing it in the first place. Of course, this could be conceived as a bad thing from a developers perspective, but then there is plenty of other content to be getting on with if you’re not bothered enough to dedicate yourself to get every hidden ‘treasure’.

The rest of the content ranges from the short, but rather epic storyline that I dare not despoil for fear of Chris murdering me in my sleep, to the shorter and usually more amusing quests that set you doing entertaining chores for people who are too lazy to do them themselves. What makes Fable distinctive in it’s approach to side quests is to avoid making too many, to focus the ones they have into amusing little tales that don’t make the player feel like they are merely playing them to complete them. Characterization in the side quests is often the highlight, with the men and women of Bowerstone and the respective townships displaying all manner of weird and funny reasons for needing your help.

Jobs and money in Fable are a low point. It’s a good system, and it’s entertaining enough, but it could be developed into a more interesting side quest. The jobs are repetitive and boring, and most of them are essentially the most basic of one-button QTE challenges put on a loop. Jobs like ‘Bounty Hunter’ and ‘Citizen Displacement’ are more interesting distractions, but do not turn up nearly as much as the others and are not really economical enough to rely on as income.

It seems the world of Fable has, too, been affected by the real estate slump.

The housing market is really where the money is made. A strangely quick 5 minutes of work and you’ve got enough gold to buy out one or two houses and start your empire. In fact, if you’re not inclined to blitz the main story you can build up your riches fairly quickly. The trouble with this is that long before the main story kicks off money becomes a background system, where you log on after a night off the Xbox and you’ve earned enough to buy every house in the main city. A little more challenge might have made this aspect a lot more interesting.

In fact a little more challenge overall would make Fable 2 a lot more interesting. The combat is simple, in a good way, with limited options to develop your character. There is a little bit of strategy involved, but players can discard it at their whim and not see a major negative in playing. For such a dark game, too, the penalties for death are pretty lenient. A cool scar or two and your character is back in the world of the living, because bandits these days just aren’t very efficient at making sure the glowing hero is dead and not coming back.

Oh, and while I’m on a downturn, the water effects are some of the worst I’ve ever seen on a top shelf game like this. Really Lionhead, did you think you could sneak that one past us? Seriously, whatever reason the water has been coded to look like a geletanous, dead shape, you could have used it a bit less. If you can’t be bothered to put the effort in, don’t put so many lakes, streams, coastlines and beaches all over the place. Map design 101, surely?

So Fable, in terms of theme, gameplay, presentation and… hold on, pretty much everything, is a game that manages to mesh both alarmingly inspired moments with unacceptably poor ones. You end up wondering why a company, who show such obvious skill in production and estimation have got such a bad level of consistancy. Fable 2 feels a little unfinished at times, but that is not something consumers aren’t used to in the latest generation of consoles, and.. well, let’s face it, our complacency will give developers little incentive to do anything but this – and it’s easier!

Regardless of the (insultingly) obvious flaws that Fable 2 holds, it more then makes up for it with such an involving world, top gameplay and the much wanted development of the themes and ideas from the old Fable. There are some moments in the game that players will be treasuring all the way up until Fable 3, and in that respect I think Lionhead have achieved a high score of 8.

James

This review is currently under editorial freeze, while we complete the game. You’re welcome to venture forth into the full articles, but be prepared for a lack of punctuation, grammar and.. well, most of the content. Our Warioland article will be finished soon.

The artwork is fantastically detailed, and it oozes from head to toe with character and style. The gameplay mechanics are faultless, and

Some of the early levels are slightly too easy, and some of the later levels can be extremely challenging. There is a defined difficulty level, which has been carefully monitored.

The levels can be quite frustrating at times, if you are struggling to complete an objective, but that is by no means a hinderance. Veteran Warioland gamers will relish in the difficulty of the later level objectives, and they provide plenty reason to return to the game at a later date.

The story is, by far, the oddest aspect of the game. It’s not terrible, but everything just seems a bit odd. It ventures towards nostalgia at times, with some very retro themes.

Warioland gets a high level 9. Held back only by the unfortunate lack of game.

As a curious aside, Warioland: The Shake Dimension has one of the greatest adverts ever made, and it can be found here. Now I’ve given you something to do, I’ll make my leave of you,

James