As loyal listeners of EGR are aware (or those puzzled by my lack of posts have possibly surmised), I haven’t been playing many video games lately. Life takes its toll and when it does leisure activities are, unfortunately, generally the first to go. But all work and no play makes Jack a soggy Sackboy, so while recent hardware troubles have kept me away from both the console and the PC it has given me the opportunity to plunge headfirst into another gaming hobby of mine – board games.

What’s that I hear? Wither that ignorant and plaintive cry? “Board games!? More like bored games!”

If that thought crossed your mind I’d be willing to bet that to you board games mean absurdly long Monopoly sessions on forced family vacations, or perhaps a spontaneous game of Apples to Apples at a party where the alcohol was in short supply. To you I say nay, sir, there is much more out there than the brightly colored Milton-Bradley aisle at your local Toys R Us! Board games, much like jazz music, get more respect in Europe than they do in the States.

Some of our more enlightened readers, however, aren’t scoffing at the idea of board games. They realize that there is a lot of fun to be had sitting around the table with some cards, dice, a few “bits”, “chits”, and your wits. There’s the tangible element of handling real pieces, and compared to XBox Live the trash talk that happens over the table is almost Shakespearean. Best of all there’s the satisfaction that comes from knowing you’ve bested your opponents using your mental, rather than physical, reflexes.

Such enlightened readers have probably played a modern board game, sometimes called “German-style” or “Eurogames”. The Settlers of Catan comes to their mind, perhaps even Carcassone or Ticket to Ride. The editors of Wired realized several years ago that a new gaming phenomenon was brewing and set out to interview Klaus Teuber, the designer of Settlers. It was fairly easy to figure out who to talk to – unlike the video game industry, most board games print their designer’s name right on the box.

But there is still a question appealing loudly for spare change here. Aside from a certain, almost dirty, four-letter word, what do board games and video games have in common? In a word, ludology. That’s a fancy way of saying the study of game mechanics. Rule sets, flow of play, ideal strategies and tactics are all a part of ludology. Whether you’re studying chess or Metal Gear Solid there is an awareness of a) what the rules permit and b) using those restrictions in the most creative, efficient, and above all fun ways possible. The ludology of board games is so important to video game design that most video game schools have required courses devoted to learning about and designing board games. The two are also so integral to one another that some indie game developers actually produce both.

Over the next few weeks I’ll be making several posts (as I catch up on the backlog of video games I’ve missed this summer) comparing and contrasting different aspects of play in both video games and board games. How do board games approach theme compared to video games’ narrative? Which has a higher learning curve, your average new console title or a new Rio Grande Games release? Do board games port well to video games and vice versa? Why is the video game market so much larger than the board game market, despite the latter being relatively easy to create and produce (and selling, often, for similar prices as video games)?

I hope in the process of these explorations to come to a better understanding of how video and board games influence and are influenced by each other, and how we as gamers can learn from both of them.

Let the games begin!
-kylie

I suppose zombies (along with Vampires) are en vogue in almost all forms of entertainment media.  It’s not suprising that the iPhone would have it’s fair share of zombie apps to proliferate the platform.  Of course, not all are winners.  In fact, personally speaking, most are pretty sub-standard.  It’s almost as if simply having popular subject matter guarantees sales and gives the developer the license to phone it in.  This is why I appreciate a game that shows effort and depth despite the presence of vampires or zombies.

Zombie Shock (ZS) is a very arcade style shooter that is much like Space Invaders if it were presented horizontally.  Your main character, Abel, is a scientist who created an AIDS vaccine that goes horribly wrong.  He’s placed in a mental hospital for reasons that I honestly forget and escapes into a world infested with zombies created by his vaccine.  The game has Abel running for his life as he is chased down by hordes of zombies.  To survive, he must gun down his assailants using various weaponry from handguns to shotguns to bowguns to even RPGs.

The control is simple and unique but also frustratingly difficult to master.  There is a virtual d-pad on the bottom left that allows 8-way movement.  Abel runs automatically and it is your job to move him left to right and up and down.  Using your right thumb, you can press anywhere on the screen to shoot.  To aim, there is a virtual stick on the bottom right.  The problem is that the action is fast paced and aiming then shooting can become cumbersome.  In fact, the difficulty in aiming made the game unnecessarily difficult.

Despite this set back, I found plenty of fun in this iPhone title.  ZS is one of those rare titles that really gives you a sense of pleasure everytime you shoot the head off a zombie and that never gets old.  Upgrading weapons and stats also adds some depth to an otherwise simple game play set up.  Add an interesting storyline and you have an engrossing mobile gaming experience.  Be warned: ZS is a difficult game.  Finger dexterity and patience is required in order to fully enjoy ZS.  Otherwise, give up that dollar and download this little gem.

-jj

This week, we talk PS3 surgery, Shank, value proposition in gaming, quality vs quantity, immersion in gaming, more talk about Metal Gear Solid 4.

Games:  Shank,  Lego Harry Potter: Years 1-4, Joe Danger, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World

The concept appeared to brilliantly creative.  It seemed like a logical progression of the first person perspective.  The idea held the promise of a breakthrough in gaming that would breathe life into a industry that seemed devoid of aspiring originality and ingenuity.  You take the role of a “Runner,” a courier or messenger for a new world trapped in fascist censorship.  You see world through their eyes.  You get to experience the exhilaration of every jump, slide, chase, evasion, etc. from the first person perspective.  Mirror’s Edge was a promising title with so much potential that fell short in many ways.

“Disappointing” is a simple, yet apt descriptor for Mirror’s Edge (ME).  One of my biggest criticism of the title was it’s insistence on old school gaming mechanics in a world full of creative invention not seen elsewhere.  For instance, it’s “rinse and repeat” gameplay was frustrating for me personally and got in the way of the experience of being a Runner.  Furthermore, ME seemed to allude the sense of freedom in a world of information slavery.  However, the fact that the game insists that there is only one solution for most of their environmental puzzles seemed hypocritical in my eyes.  Why should I through the gauntlet of heavily armed police when I can simply jump through this window?

I decided to give ME another try after a few years.  To its credit, ME is quite immersive, and I truly felt like I was a Runner.  The sense of making grandiose leaps, last second dodges, heart-racing escapes, etc. were all conveyed well.  My second time through appeared to be much more entertaining due to the sheer fact that I already knew the solutions to the puzzles.  As a result, I could concentrate on other aspects of the game such as running from the police and dodging their eager bullets.  Speaking of which, the sheer number of adversaries and the extent of their fire power is ridiculous.  I’m an unarmed and unarmored Runner; hunting me down with a gatling gun or worse seems a tad extreme.

I’m saddened that the developers made some key mistakes with an IP with such promise.  ME is one of those titles that could be stellar with a little more polish and forethought.  I feel the biggest problem with ME is that it seemed to have an identity crisis and didn’t know what it wanted to be.  One on hand, it seemed like a thrilling adventure/action game.  On the other hand, it appeared to be a environmental puzzle game.  If ME stuck to one simple premise (i.e., simulation of extraordinary athletics and acrobatics), then it would have been a much clearer and better experience.  Let’s hope that it gets a second chance to wow us like it should have before.      

-jj

The Transformers has a special place in my heart.  It marks a significant part of my childhood, and it conjures warm memories of morphing robots fighting the forces of evil and makes me smile reminiscently.  During the same time of my youth, I was introduced to the wonderful world of the NES.  Being a gamer and a fan of Transformers, you would expect that I wanted a Transformers video game.  The problem was that early offerings were less than stellar, and, even at an early age, I had a discerning eye and high standards.  I learned early on that licensed games were not worth your lunch money, and it would be advisable to stick with the source material.  

Times have changed.  Games have evolved.  Licensed games have become better and better over the years.  In fact, one title in particular, Batman: Arkham Asylum, was so good that it was a contender for GOTY in my eyes.  This was not a fluke nor was it a revolution by any means.  It was, however, a sign that game developers are beginning to understand what it takes to make a decent licensed game.

I theorize that the developers at High Moon Studios grew up with Transformers much like I did.  As a result, they had intimate understanding of what makes Transformers so worthy of such a rabid fan base.  This, however, doesn’t automatically mean game will be an enjoyable experience. You still need to be a skilled developer.  With this in mind, I decided to write this review in two parts: JJ the Fan and JJ the Gamer.  I feel this would give a better understanding of my different views of Transformers: War for Cybertron (WFC).

JJ the Fan:
It was almost pure fan service.  Hearing the stoic voice of Optimus Prime gave me chills and conjured fond memories of the good old days.  Seeing the classic bickering between Starscream and Megatron was welcome as it spoke to the Transformer traditionalist in me.  Seeing all the classic, G1 Transformers lovingly recreated in digital form was a pleasure to behold.   

Like most fan boys, I hate when people take liberty with the source material and change things.  I will not spoil things, but I will say that certain characters were changed dramatically to the point where the overall cannon would have to be altered to accommodate such changes.  Most people will not care.  This is not the case for the hardcore fan such as myself.

Overall, it was a pleasure experiencing Transformers again.  Interacting with my favorite characters, transforming them, engaging in battle with the evil Decepticons, and experiencing the Cybertronian Civil War was a pure delight.  If you are a big of a Transformers fan as I am, this is a no-brainer purchase for you.

JJ the Gamer:
WFC isn’t a pretty game.  Not because of the engine or frame rate (however, I did experience some screen tearing) but because of its gritty look.  I always envisioned Transformers as shiny robots, gleaming with a sleek sheen that screams, “I’m cool.”

Understandably, the Transformers are at war, and I shouldn’t expect a nice, clean look in a battlefield.  Speaking of aesthetics, the sound design is top notch in WFC.  As I stated before, hearing some familiar voices really added to the overall experience.  However, even if the voices aren’t familiar, the sheer quality of the voice work can be appreciated by anyone.

Being on the Unreal engine, WFC was developed on stable, proven foundation.  Some might complain about the fact that the engine might be overused in many games, but I feel if it isn’t broke then don’t fix it.  It’s like building a house.  The foundation must be solid.  The frame could be a template used by many others; this, however, doesn’t mean that individuality and creativity isn’t possible.  The tools might be the same, but it’s how you utilize such tools that will separate you from the rest.  Unfortunately, this is where WFC falls short.

WFC is woefully deficient in the creativity department.  The game play can be summed up as “see Decepticon, shoot.”  Worse yet, all the boss fights appear to scream, “shoot the big red spot and win.”  The missions are also quite simplistic.  Does this mean that WFC is bad?  Not at all.  However, it wasn’t as much fun as a game as I thought it would be.

Most of the gameplay in WFC centers around gun fights with some vehicle missions spread throughout.  This would be fine if there was some strategy involved.  For me, it felt most of the gun fights were mindless.  Furthermore, there is no cover-and-shoot mechanic which only forces you run and gun most of the time.  

Because of it’s simplicity, more advanced gamers such as myself will be bored.  It doesn’t help that WFC is quite short, less than 10 hours of actual gameplay for me.  Simple and short wasn’t a winning combination for me.  On the bright side, there are some interesting moments in the game, particularly toward the end when you play as Autobot jets.  Also, to its credit, the transforming mechanic worked well in that there situations on the game that really called for vehicle form rather than robot form to be successful.

I can’t go without mentioning the multiplayer.  To make up for the fact that the campaign was a tad short, High Moon Studios decided to add a rather robust multiplayer set up.  Like the rest of the game, the multiplayer doesn’t do anything novel.  In fact, it mimics Gears of War unashamedly, even adding a Horde-like mode called Escalation.  I do like the customization options for your avatar and the ability to skill up.  However, as I said before, these are almost standard in contemporary multiplayer games.

It sounds like I didn’t care much for WFC.  To be honest, it wasn’t a great game for the sheer fact that it lacked creativity.  The good news is that WFC lacked any major flaws.  In fact, you can say that it is polished well due to the lack of bugs.  However, it’s simplicity was a turn off for me.  The overall experience was average to good.  JJ the Fan would without hesitance recommend WFC for the hardcore Transformer fan.  JJ the Gamer, however, would have to recommend it as a rental or discount purchase.  It’s a good weekend lay but not one for a LTR.

-jj

Do you remember when you were a kid and pretended that you were God?  The sense of ultimate power was a rush wasn’t it?  The mere thought of omnipotence would give you an unbridled sense of exhilaration.  Wouldn’t be fun to play God again as an adult?  Welcome to Godfinger. 

I think creation games taps into our inner need to feel self important and to exercise ultimate control.  If you’re not a control freak like myself, games like these could still appeal to creative minds.  Godfinger from ngmoco is an interesting mobile game.  As a God, you use your finger to create people and things.  Presented in 2D, you start with a simple, brown planet with a couple of followers.  Using your powerful God finger, you create rain to quench the earth.  You then create plants and fields for your workers to harvest and create gold, all with the touch of your godly finger.  This gold can be used to buy upgrades such as houses, more plants, or other things your world may need. 

As interesting as this concept may be, the execution lacks polish.  First, navigating the 2D world can be cumbersome especially when the world becomes very large.  Also, the sole purpose seems to be harvesting for gold so that you can continuously upgrade.  This can be problematic for those who seek richer goals and more depth.  To make matters worse, your gold has an expiration date.  If you don’t gather your gold in time, it turns into rust.  This forces you to check your world quite often.  As a result, Godfinger became a hinderance and less of a mobile game than it should have been.  Mobile games should allow you to come back whenever you can without penalty.  Mobile games exist to fill in free time whenever that may be and not interfere with regular, day to day activities.

To its credit, Godfinger has excellent presentation.  The visuals are cartoon-like and cute, appealing to the inner child in all of us.  Also, it’s free.  Although, some items require real cash for you to purchase.  However, you can easily play the game without having to pay a single dime.  If you have a lot of free time and patience, Godfinger can be a rewarding experience.  However, for the impatient ones with little time on their hands, Godfinger is one you may want to skip.

-jj

This week, we share our hopes for PAX 2010, Halo players, narrative and immersive games, simplicity in gaming, Summer of gaming, stagnation of Japanese development, growing strength of DLC.

Games:  Limbo, Hydro Thunder, Castlevania HD, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, Monday Night Combat, Lara Croft: GoL, Deathspank, Mirror’s Edge, iPhone games: Fragger, Zombie Shock, City Story.

This week, we talk yellow death of PS3′s, loot hoarding, Castlevania games, Metroid-esque games, Team Ninja games, giant undersea creatures, God of War games, the joys of XBox Live, future of consoles, the problem with Sony’s game plan, licensed games becoming good, the pros and cons with god creation games, no gaming drought.

Games:  Deathspank, Limbo, Transformers: War for Cybertron, Godfinger (iPhone).

Kojima’s vision always seemed too bloated and overzealous in my eyes.  I would sigh in discontentment anytime a Kojima cut scene would commence since I knew I would be sitting there in noninteractive mode for a good spell.  Sometimes I felt that Kojima was being too preachy and overly obtuse in his use of philosophy in his games, namely Metal Gear.  

Having played Metal Gear Solid 4 (MGS4) for a second time, I can safely say that Hideo Kojima was ahead of his time and a philosophical artist without equal in today’s gaming industry.  Having played it a second time, does my opinion of MGS4 change?  Greatly so.

Originally, I felt that MGS4 was a very good game with some glaring flaws.  The irony is that, now, those “glaring flaws” are supportive to the main strength of MGS4.  These so called flaws were the overly drawn out, dialogue heavy, and intrusively dogmatic cut scenes that encompassed a large chunk of MGS4’s content.  The problem, at the time, was that cut scenes are not interactive content and, as a result, do not contribute to the gameplay.  The problem is accentuated when they reach massive lengths (e.g., 90 minutes in one instance) and break the flow of interactivity.  

Now, having witnessed a great shift in today’s gaming climate, I truly believe MGS4 to have benefited greatly from the lengthy cut scenes.  Games have been slowly but surely encroaching on the visual narrative strength of films.  As the years progressed, technology and greater storage capacity have allowed developers to create additional, move-like content in their games.  Cut scenes, over the years, have become more and more prolific the interactive gaming space for better or worse.  

Gaming purists would turn their nose up at putting movies in games.  That being the case, MGS4 wouldn’t even be considered to be a video game at all for them.  I was such a purist.  However, I am not adverse to change.  In fact, I’m an open-minded gamer and am willing to try something new for the sake of progress and innovation.  Part of being a happy gamer is accepting that “interaction” comes in many forms and “interactivity” can be conveyed in many ways.  

Fact: MGS4’s content is mostly in movie form.  I would guess that 60% or more of the content on the disc is actually in-game engine cut scenes.  To the purist, this would mean that less than half of MGS4 is actually interactive and, as a result, less than half is a game.  I would argue that this is a myopic view of interactive gaming.

As I was playing through a second time, I found myself oddly engrossed in the cut scenes in MGS4 unlike I was the first time through.  I think my purist mind prohibited me from giving Kojima’s story a shot back then.  Having experiencing gaming in a whole new way thanks to titles such as Heavy Rain, I was more open minded and more ready to give MGS4 another chance to truly win me over.  

As I stated before, “interactivity” can be conveyed in more than one way.  In MGS4, my philosophical mind was being engaged and, at times, challenged.  Kojima taps into ubiquitous social issues such as war, religion, and control.  To put it simply, Kojima made me ponder deeply the problems of modern day technology and man’s need for freedom and control.   

Koijma takes time to analyze the inherent weaknesses and strengths of the human psyche and the complicated nature of man’s imperfections.  Such depth and discussion wouldn’t be possible in strictly traditional gaming form; film, in this sense, is a necessary vehicle to fully convey the creator’s intent and vision.  

One could argue that, if the cut scenes played such a pivotal role, the gameplay is not necessary and could be taken out and still have the same effect.  I would make the counter-argument that the cut scenes, although very bloated at times, serve as catalysts for the actual gameplay parts of MGS4.  If I didn’t understand the gravity of what was at stake in MGS4’s world, I wouldn’t have been so immersed in the gameplay.  Understanding the philosophy behind the influential decisions of each major player made my involvement in the game’s world much more engrossing.  As Snake, I wasn’t just stopping a man bent on world domination.  I was fighting to preserve man’s right to freedom and choice.    

The entire MGS series is highly philosophical and, unfortunately, the full breadth of its philosophy couldn’t be conveyed in lesser technologies of older ages.  After two decades of patient waiting, MGS4 becomes the culmination of one man’s deep and complicated view of the world.  War, peace, hatred, love, fear, anger, depression, control, freedom, religion, politics, etc. are all conveyed in MGS4.  However, despite the complexities of the topics Kojima presents us, I feel his view of the world and the entire thesis statement of the MGS series can be summed up by Benjamin Franklin when he said, “Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither.”  

-jj

This week, we talk indie games, the role of graphics for gameplay, grinding in RPG’s, comedy in games, special discussion on Metal Gear Solid 4, character driven vs story driven game, talk of E3 news.

Games: Bioshock, Bioshock 2, Lumi, Decay, Puzzle Quest: Galatrix, Joy Joy, Crossfire, Deathspank, Metal Gear Solid 4, Helsing’s Fire (iPhone).