The Last Content Space Marine

I was going to write a post on Blizzard’s new Real ID system, but given that

a) I don’t use Blizzard’s forums,
b) Everyone else has done it already and
c) Blizzard have scaled back the implementation of Real ID-

It felt like a waste of my time and yours. I would like to make a point though that Blizzard have not abandoned these plans merely scaled them back, and so Battle.net users should continue to fight them if they feel their privacy has been infringed.

Instead I’d like to take a look at a phenomenon that has taken off in recent years of video gaming- the sandbox. In case you’re not familiar with the term, a sandbox videogame is one wherein you are given a large open map, and very few restrictions on what you do. Typically, scattered around said map will be many little diversions such as missions, mini games, resource gathering, random encounters and so on. In many respects, a sandbox is very similar to an RPG, and it’s from that genre that a new generation of ‘sandbox shooters’ has evolved. Recent examples include Red Dead Redemption, Crackdown 2 and Just Cause 2.

Strangely, I didn’t really notice the sandbox until quite recently when I picked up Prototype, which makes little sense as I’d been playing GTAIV well before then. I think the reason I noticed it in Prototype was because it was the first sandbox game where I started to notice the shortcomings of the style.

Now, I’m not going to launch into a hate speech about the Sandbox idea- many excellent games have been built around the concept- but you have to admit that it does have some issues that seem to pop up every so often. So let’s take a quick look at the Sandbox, the good and the bad.

The key idea that makes the sandbox so much fun is the freedom that you’re given. Rather than moving from level to level and doing the same things over and over again like you would in a non sandbox game, each time you turn one of these titles on you’ll get a new experience. Pop Modern Warfare 2 in, and while you’ll have a good time playing the single player mode, once you’ve completed it nothing will surprise you. With Red Dead Redemption though, you never know what to expect. Even after completing the main story line, random encounters and strangers who pop up can help keep the game fresh and interesting.

Of course, there’s also the satisfaction that comes from discovering something new, especially if you do so before any of your friends.

However, on the flipside if they are not well executed, sandboxes can quickly become a tedious annoyance. One trend I’d like to see end is this desire for bigger and bigger worlds. All I can say is this- bigger isn’t always better. There’s nothing wrong with having a big sandbox, hell if it’s too small there isn’t much point. The problem is more one of density, and this is a very tough thing to get just right. If the world is too dense, then you never get anything done as you’re constantly waylaid by requests for aid, random missions, gathering a resource you may need later and so forth. If it isn’t dense enough then it defeats the whole purpose of a sandbox as travelling between locations just becomes padding as nothing happens.

It’s hard to get right, and even worse when you consider that there doesn’t seem to be much of a ‘perfect density’. For example, in Red Dead Redemption you don’t want that much happening as there are lots of exploration tasks such as the treasure hunting and survivalist challenges. You’d be put off if bandits attacked every five minutes.

On the flipside of this though is Prototype. Being an out and out action game, you want to make sure the player is never more than about 30 seconds away from something they can get involved in, even if it’s just a random spat between the army and the infected.

I don’t think Prototype did a good job of the sandbox element to be honest. Now it wasn’t awful, but half the time it felt like I just wasn’t doing anything. As dramatic as the travel is, after a few hours running up a building, back flipping off it and gliding to the next one looses some of the charm. Once this occurs, travel is just dull. A little more to do apart from dull mini games would have gone a long way, as would shrinking the map a little.

The best iterations of the sandbox though are still to be found in RPGs. The Elder Scrolls series have done a great job with their worlds. If wondering through the wilderness you rarely go more than a few minutes without something happening, be it a random encounter or something more sinister. Things lurking within the woods always provide a source of entertainment and stumbling across a strange door or daedric statue is always interesting.

Linked to this is the fast travel system- something many sandbox games have. I think this is the yardstick by which you can judge how good a sandbox game is- the more you use the fast travel system, the poorer the game. Think about it this way- if you’re always using the fast travel to instantly move from one mission objective to the next, then it means the world holds no interest for you. If you’re not interested in exploring and looking for other things to do, the game’s sandbox element has failed. On the other hand, if you only use it every so often or when you want to make some progress on the story to unlock more areas, then the sandbox element is clearly strong enough that you don’t feel time spent moving from A to B is wasted, and is going to be somehow rewarding for you.

Just Cause 2 was a game where I was always using the fast travel. I can appreciate how Panau has been wonderfully crafted as a living, breathing island with lots of locations and roads, people going about their daily lives e.t.c, but exploring that world was not rewarding. It took ages to get anywhere, and I never seemed to find anything interesting while I was moving. To be fair though, I’m in a minority here. Most people like Just Cause 2, or at least find it entertaining.

As a closing note, not every game needs a sandbox. Many people have riffed on Final Fantasy XIII, accusing it of being linear (myself included), but if you stop to think about it for a moment, the strength of this game lies in the combat and the combat alone. Everything else is pretty weak, but the combat is an incredible amount of fun, and saves FFXIII from being consigned to far lower scores. Without a sandbox element, the game can focus on quickly shuttling you to the enjoyable bits- and this is probably the best argument against the sandbox idea.

In a sandbox you always need to go looking for the fun. In a linear game, you just need to sit back and all the fun comes to you so long as you keep playing. You’re far less likely to have boring bits. Some might say that’s a pithy attitude to take, but at the end of the day it’s apples and pears. Both linear and sandbox titles can be fun or awful, but it’s important to remember that a sandbox needs a little more effort to pull off than a linear game.

Okay, I suppose a little justification for that is in order.

It may have escaped the notice of less astute gamers (Those who simply look for the amount of blood and tits a game has and nothing else), that Square Enix's name is appearing on a lot of titles lately, and not the standard JRPG titles that SE is known and (at least partly) loved for. This is due in part to Square acquiring companies, including Eidos interactive as well as entering into deals with developers such as Gas Powered Games (The brilliant guys behind supreme commander, one of my favourite RTS titles ever), and Avalanche studios (Relative newcomers but quite popular).

In and of itself, there's nothing wrong with this. Developers and publishers merge and split all the time, sometimes for good, sometimes for ill. Often the most hotly contested issue in such events though is how it will effect the games.

Case in point, Westwood studios. Westwood are the guys who created Command and Conquer and the various sequels to said game. They where bought up by EA, and then released what is in my opinion their opus, Tiberian Sun (Another all time favourite). Afterwards however, due to a long and complex story involving money and EA being stupid wankers (at the time), Westwood was dissolved and absorbed into EA. The Command and Conquer series went on to become a souless husk- still very good games but lacking any of the charm and character of the Westwood titles. Until CnC 4 which of course sucks donkeys.

The problem I have is that Square Enix have only ever been good at one thing- JRPGs. Now, in the videogames industry there is nothing wrong with being a one trick pony. For example, if I see a JRPG with Square Enix written on it, I know it's probably going to be a pretty good title. Likewise, if I see Rockstar's name on something, I will buy it because Rockstar are currently the Gods of gaming. In contrast, I have no idea what to expect when I see EA's name on something.

So what happens when a company who focuses mainly on publishing JRPGs branches out? Well, so far nothing good.

There was supreme commander 2, the bastard love child of SupCom 1 and CnC (in all fairness not a terrible game, but certainly a less than worthy successor). There was Nier, which I maintain is still an atrocity against gaming (but not as bad as Vampire Rain though). What else do we have... ah yes, Just Cause 2.

I hear a thousand angry gamers getting ready to flame the comments section. But honestly, I found Just Cause 2 to be utterly boring. It's possibly one of the worst sandbox iterations I have ever played. Why? Because NOTHING HAPPENS. So much time is wasted travelling around the ludicrously huge map that I just get bored shitless and turn it off. Trying to make something happen just results in a dull by the numbers firefight against a constant stream of enemies until you get bored and go back to what you where doing.

Even when you are blowing stuff up it feels boring and uninvolving. There's never enough ammo for a start, and given the crappy auto aim, that's an issue. You never seem to have enough explosives meaning you need to spend ages emptying clips into things, furthering the ammo problem, and to be honest the entire combat just feels... clunky. A good action game should flow, you should be able to move from point to point, shooting targets, switching weapons and doing whatever you need to do without feeling as though you need to wrestle with the game to get it to co operate. Red Dead Redemption, Gears of War and (especially) Arkham Asylum all managed to do this, as did Mass Effect 1 & 2 to a slightly lesser extent. Just Cause 2 feels horrible in comparison to these games.

I don't know, maybe I just suck at it, but there's no appeal there for me to practise and get good at it. Now when most of my time is spent wondering around doing sweet f### all. And yes, I know there's a fast travel system... but doesn't that defy the point of a sandbox? If you'd always prefer to use the fast travel system, then why bother creating a big open world to explore in the first place? In Just Cause 2's defence though, I was playing Red Dead Redemption too, and compared with that any game goes down a few pegs.

Anyway, back on topic Square Enix's acquisition and partnership of/with several companies means their name is getting around, and sadly I think many of the games are sub par. My reckoning is that this can be attributed to what I call “I Know Better” syndrome. IKB is very common, especially among managers and editors who think they know people's jobs better than the person doing them. It's best explained through example.

Let's say you're a publishing company and want to make more money by buying a smaller company who is producing profitable games. After the acquisition do you:
A) Get High
B) Let them keep making money for you.
C) Interfere with the way they work and change the product.

Organisations suffering from IKB will do C. Anyone with half a brain will do B (possibly followed by A). The reason you bought the company was because it was successful- why would you want to change what they're doing when they're clearly doing it right?

My EA being wankers remark earlier is linked to this.
“Hey, we bought Westwood, a company that makes great RTS games!”
“Brilliant, have them make an FPS Game!”
(not much time later)
“The FPS game flopped.”
“What? Clearly these guys are not profitable after all! Seize all the intellectual property and get rid of the company!”

Wankers. Total, utter wankers.

IKB isn't just linked to the videogame industry though, You can see it in comic books and other media too, when people further up the chain screw with people further down just for the sake of trying to give their little lives reason.

Now I don't think Square Enix is that bad. For one thing, none of this 'new wave' has been awful, and Nier was developed by Cavia, the people behind Bullet Witch (Which I've not played, but has been condemned by everyone who's opinion I care about). So you can't blame SE for that one.

It just really, really worries me that SE are doing such a hamfisted job with these new titles. Even if they aren't developing them, as publishers they have a lot of control over what the final product is like, meaning whether it's brilliant or balls, they need to shoulder some of the blame. Let your companies do their thing in peace. Or if that's the approach you're taking (as I suspect may be the case with Nier), then give them a kick up the jacksee. I don't know how Square Enix is operating at the moment, but they 'aint making great games.

To be fair, it's not like they've brought many franchise down a notch- yet. Remember that Square Enix own the rights to Tomb Raider and Hitman. Not so big on Ms Croft, but I'm a big fan of number 47, and I'd hate to see his games brought down a few notches.

On the other hand, that does offer some great cross over potential...
“Hello 47, I hope you are recovered from your last mission. Your new target is a young man hiding in the dream-future-past. You will recognize him by his crappy lederhosen, sub size T-shirt and Meg Ryan hair. He answers to the name of Tidus...”

That would KICK ASS.

But if you're still not worried about the fact that Square Enix seems to be swimming in too deep water, and cocking up other people's titles- remember this.

They own the rights to Deus Ex.

And Deus Ex 3 is in the works at the moment of writing, being developed by (the SE owned) Eidos and published by Square Enix.

I'll leave you with that thought.

It’s that time of year again, a period in videogaming I like to call the fallow. It’s summer time, so gamers who are so disposed go out and enjoy the sunshine, it’s far away from Easter or Christmas, so parents are not badgered as much for new releases, and the end result is a barren few months with few to no videogames being released, except for minor titles.

What do you do in the fallow?

I’m always at a loss as to what to do in this time of year. Videogames and writing are pretty much my only hobbies (Aside from brewing and drinking), and these hobbies are not seasonal, even if in the case of videogames, supply is.

I’ve completed Red Redemption (One of the best games ever, full stop), and Just Cause 2 is…. Meh. I’m not really feeling it. Its not a bad game by any stretch of the imagination, but there’s just something missing, something that stops me really getting into it.

Last night I plugged in Fight Night 4, and I have to say I’d forgotten how much fun it was. The fight night games are easily the best beat ‘em ups ever, breathing new life into a genre that’s almost as old as gaming itself. Plus it all comes down to skill and timing, not how quickly you can mash your buttons. Let’s face it, that’s the case with most beat ‘em ups. Spamming buttons is usually about as effective as learning to play the game properly.

Except for Gundam Battle Assault 2 on the PS1. That is a beat ‘em up that KICKED ASS. Go and buy it. Now.

Maybe I should go and complete final fantasy 12? I really should get over my hatred of that game, but I’ll need a keg of super strength or a palette of old speck to do that. To be honest though, I’ve been pretty good at completing my games lately, and I don’t really want to put myself through FF12 again just to get through the fallow.

We do have plenty of things to look forwards to soon though, there are many new games on the Horizon including Assassin’s creed: Brotherhood and dead rising 2 (I’m really looking forwards to that one). I’m still not getting worked up about Fallout: New Vegas though. Obsidian have a history of… well… churning out games that end up good, but are so badly f###ing bugged on release it’s a rip off.

So, what do you do for your gaming fix during the fallow? Any suggestions?