STRANGLEHOLD

I played 1-2 levels of Stranglehold when it was released, almost 7 years ago, and left me a good taste. It's what I call middle class games: Not outstanding but enjoyable. I bought it from a work mate 2 weeks ago and I've just finished it. It currently holds a 77 in metacritics, and I think it's fair.

The game has some unique systems, reasonably well implemented: The mexican standoffs are simple but enjoyable (it's recommended to unlock the video of the first prototypes, can't help to think they could have done better), the environmental navigation (sliding over furniture) creates multiple eye candy moments, the scenario destruction is probably the most comprehensive I've seen in a game and they also have good localized damage and death animations.

There are multiple so-so systems, such as the amount of enemy classes (enough, but all use more or less the same AI patterns), the boss fights (the excessive enemy health and a heavier weapon is generally the main challenge), animation transitions (too abrupt, although responsive), management of player resources is accessible (health, focus and style points) and mostly works, although relies too much on medikits and the story starts being personal and interesting in mission 3 (sooner would have been better). The scenarios are somehow varied but too indoors to my taste, and the collectible shop is just ok (concept art and prototype videos).

On the minus side, the enemy AI is really poor. Practically all enemies function as simple turrets or run towards the player until point blank. I suspect that forced combat layouts based on dropping wave after wave of mindless foes which can be a little repetitive. Aside from that the level design is clearly improvable: The player is commonly forced into scenarios around which enemies can be spawn practically in any point around 360º. On top of it they're not signaled to the user, meaning you often don't know where they are and need to rely on tracking the tracing rounds or run around while spinning the camera looking desperately where they are. Cover options are limited and lack polish and the game is a little short (7-8 hours). I couldn't try the multiplayer, though. Also I think they could have scaled better the progression in new enemy types and abilities: All player actions are introduced in the first levels, and so users are not requested to master any of them to get to a crescendo moment that test that ability (i.e. a final boss)

As a whole, I can see it's a good representation of the John Woo movies. I actually downloaded Hard Boiled (the first instance of inspector Tequila, in which the game is based) and watched it 20 years after.

GTA 5

It has obviously taken a while, but last week I finished the story mode of GTA V. I had already completed other GTAs (Vice City and Vice City Stories) so no big surprises in general. I don't consider the storytelling of these games outstanding, to be honest.

However, this one has important novelties on gameplay. The first and more important one in my opinion is the addition of a multiplayer mode. This is no easy task, and although the developers seem to have borrowed most of the Read Dead Redemption design, it works fine and it's enjoyable. The progression system could be more meaningful for the player in my opinion, but being the first time they try it's definitively a great step.

The second most important novelty, again in my opinion, is the heist simulations. In several instances of the plot the main characters are all involved on an operation that allows the player to swap between them. This pretty much forced the designers to script each mission 3 times.

Aside from this, you will find the usual sandbox experience (excessively limited to interaction with the police, imho), big world (most of it unused I think) and ironic cutscenes. In any sense a top of the class experience, and a memorable game. Probably worth the 97 it currently holds in Metacritic.

I'm currently grinding the rest of trophies since this is going to be the first game I get a platinum award on. Seemed easier than other games, that's all.

RYSE - The Damocles Legend

I don't commonly post about my project here, but considering this has been what my life has been about for the last year and a half (actually almost 2 years), I guess it makes sense to post something about Ryse - Son of Rome.

Here's the video about the Damocles legend...

REMEMBER ME

Ok, I don't get it. Like a week ago I finished Remember me (thanks to Ramon, who lent me his copy) and my overall impression is fairly good. But for some reason it has a 70 in metacritics. I'm quite sure it should be along the lines of 80. I fail to understand critics on this. WTF?

Let's start with visuals: The art direction is elegant and sophisticated. I've always liked the french SF since the times of Once upon a time... Space. The game world is believable although a little empty. Interesting in any sense. Animations are smooth and well integrated in the combat system, and characters are reasonably good for this generation.

Game mechanics are very decent: The game pivots onto 3 major elements - combat, platforming and 'memory alterations' (in absence of a better name). Combat is fluid and engaging, basically the system used in Batman Arkham asylum but adding an extra layer of complexity allowing users to customize the combos. There is a nice variety of enemies (I believe around 20) which is more than enough to fill up the encounters.

Platforming may be the weakest of the systems since it's a direct rip off from Uncharted. Still works fine although often lacks challenge. Memory alterations are interactive cinematics where you can switch on/off certain elements to alter the outcome. Works perfectly well as a unique selling point, although there aren't many.

There are also some supporting mechanics such as collectables, bosses and chase sequences that add some spice to the result. In summary, a mature design work and a good product. If any, the story is confusing and the memory theme is too present in the world to the verge of unbelievability. But I've seen worse stories in other games and they ranked higher.

So again, I think the ratings have punished this game under its true value. Hope the sales were good, at least.

ALIENS COLONIAL MARINES

You learn so much more from bad games than from good ones... I just finished Aliens Colonial Marines and it's amazing how many lessons on game design you get about how to NOT do things from games like these.

First thing to say is it could have been a good game: The Aliens franchise has lots of potential, very gamey (particularly for shooters), and the number of game modes and mechanics are sufficient. Problem is they screwed it up. You can take a look at a summary of the problems they had on this article.

First the game systems: None of them are really new. All weapons are copied from other games, no unique player skills nor the enemy AI is particularly outstanding. If any, really prone to glitches. Despite the little activity the game has, I managed to play some MP rounds and although playing as an alien is always fun, the only game mode with players available was nothing new to me. In summary, not impressive on this side.

Then the story: They had the actors behind Hicks and Bishop on the original Aliens movie, but they're scarcely used. The plot in general has empty characters and lacks player motivation. The story in general offers nothing new to the franchise, and actually has a turn of events with the inclusion of mercenaries that I'm not totally sure fits with the IP mood.

Even with all this, the game could be a just a forgettable one, but not THAT bad. However it currently ranks 43-48 in Metacritics. That means is really poor. What happened? I think the main problems were:

Press felt betrayed: The demo they sent to E3 looked awesome, but due to performance adjustments the game never looked that good. That pissed off some journalists, who took their revenge on the ratings. This says little of the professionality of reviewers, but I've seen this happening in the past (Bionic Commando)

Glitches: But actually the press was right to give poor ratings to the game, mainly due to AI glitches and lack of art polish. It's common to see team mates teleporting, aliens stuck on environment, poor animations and ragdolls and extremely simple environments.

Funny thing is, player and reviewers can forgive a number of minor mistakes if the game has some good unique selling points. If the art would have been amazing, or there were some really compelling systems I think the glitches would have been overlooked much more, and the game would have been around the 60s in metacritics. But probably due to lack of time they had to cut down on risks (creating new gameplay always takes time) and polish, and the title is now widely considered as a synonym of a bad game.

LAST OF US

The day after it was released, I started to hear people saying it was an amazing game. So often I eventually decided to buy it. Sold out at Gamestop and the mall. I ordered it at Amazon UK. Was it that good?

Ok, I started playing it and it's definitively a good game. Great in some aspects. But not a 95+ in metacritics as it's right now. Why so much hype, then?

On the plus side all game systems are well developed and satisfying. There are different weapons at your disposal and they're all effective, some particularly useful in certain gameplay situations. There are good emotional moments along the plot and being a collector I valued so many pickables at my disposal. There were even some moments with unique systems (I'm thinking on the audio-driven miniboss at the resort). And I really liked the ellipsis between chapters, quite new.

On the minus side, it's a plot-driven game of a story I already know. It shares multiple elements with The Walking Dead - The videogame (zombies, survivors, tough guy who doesn't hesitate to kill when needed, take care of a girl, a cannibal episode, main characters die, QTE moments...) or I am Legend. To me it's not eye candy since the scenarios are old news, you've seen them all in movies, series or other games. So many collecting options often clash against the game chase situations, promoting a slow-pace when the cinematics are so frentic. The progression system (improving the weapons) it's far too cheap. They reuse systems and animations from Uncharted like crazy (even the main character has a suspicious resemblance with Drake) and the multiplayer is just ok.

Don't get me wrong: It's a good game worth of what I paid for it. I just think Naughty Dog has a great reputation and somehow that has transpired into this title. I guess I've been trapped by hype again...

LEISURE SUIT LARRY RELOADED

This is probably the first kickstarter project I funded, like 2 years ago. It's all about nostalgia, since Leisure suit Larry in the land of lounge lizards was one of the first games I played in that PC I inherited from my cousin Pedro. It was one of those old school graphic adventures using a word parser to interact with the game, extremely punishing if you failed and double difficult if you weren't a native English speaker.

Even so, I played that game like crazy. I was around 15 and it had some erotic components so I really felt compelled to finish it. Back in the days it was semi-impossible to know the solution for the puzzles unless you tried and tried. Today it's simply a question to open a browser. I eventually managed to complete it, but never with the top score.

It has taken me a little more than 3 hours to finish it now. In terms of quality looks like a flash game, but it's still enjoyable and they've barely expanded it, it's essentially the same game of 20 years ago.

I wouldn't recommend it unless you're a die hard fan of the series, but I'm happy with my contribution to the project. I really think Kickstarter iniciatives can make a different in the videogame scene!