From Skyrim, to Dark Souls, to Mass Effect 3: The Current State of the RPG

My apologies for the long hiatus again.  I had some personal things that I was dealing with, and my other writers were busy doing other things.  This equated to zero posts for quite some time, and while it is infinitely regrettable, it was also sadly unavoidable this time around.  

For my first article after my return, I wanted to do another "state of" article about my favorite genre: the RPG.  Because this genre is so broad and is not dominated by a few specific titles, I'm going to go about this in a different way.  RPG fans: read on!

RPGs are one of the better selling genres overall.  Players enjoy the ability to immerse themselves in a game world and play their character the way THEY want to play it.  While this idea is much more prevalent in the open-world Western-style RPGs, Japanese RPGs still offer the same sort of escape from reality.  Everyone wants to be the unlikely hero that saves the world, and RPGs play on this to great effect.  The funny thing about the genre is that we're seeing elements of it everywhere.  Call of Duty brought RPG elements to shooters with their multiplayer level-up/customization system.  The Gran Turismo series has been bringing RPG concepts to gear-heads and racer fans for years with its in-depth vehicle customization options.  Castlevania has been bringing RPG tropes to platformers since the early days of gaming, and Action/Adventure titles like Zelda and God of War have tons of obvious examples of RPG systems as well.  In fact, most modern games in almost any genre have at least some form of RPG elements in them.  The reason for this is because the genre is the primary founder of character customization and player choice.  These two concepts are universally desired among gamers, which has led to their inclusion in so many other genres.  Because these traits are so desired, the RPG genre continues to be one of the most popular genres overall.

What I imagine a corporate meeting to be like.

Let's take a look at all the different RPG series that are still going strong (just off the top of my head):
NOTE:  I am NOT including MMORPGs, as they are part of a whole different animal.

Fallout:  One of my personal favorites, the recent Fallout games have successfully melded the RPG with the shooter.  While not the only series to do so, I'd have to say that Fallout is my favorite "hybrid" game, because the emphasis is put on the RPG, and not the shooter.  The series also offers an incredible amount of customization, a well-crafted world, fantastic writing, and (most importantly) great gameplay.  The games are known for having crazy amounts of bugs, but that hasn't stopped them from selling like hotcakes.  If you'd like to know more about Fallout, I wrote an entire post about it.

Elder Scrolls:  The penultimate Western-style RPG series of its time, and universally hated among the girlfriends of gamers everywhere.  The Elder Scrolls games have been popular for quite some time, but when Morrowind hit the shelves, the series took off.  Oblivion sold extremely well, and Skyrim brought the series to critical mass.  Each installment served to bring Elder Scrolls to even more people who hadn't played any of the series' predecessors. Skyrim was actually my first adventure into the Elder Scrolls universe, and I was pretty impressed.  It was obvious that Bethesda put a ton of work into the game itself, and I genuinely enjoyed playing it.  There isn't really anything that I can say about this game that hasn't already been said.  Score another one for Bethesda.

Skyrim widows.

 

Mass Effect:  Many consider this to be more of a shooter than an RPG (especially Mass Effect 2), but I'm still going to put it in the RPG category.  I have never personally played the series, which is a little embarassing, admittedly.  It never truly appealed to me, but I can't leave it out of the list.  Bioware is one of the best at creating compelling characters, interesting stories, and amazing dialogue.  In fact, Bioware's reputation is nearly Blizzard-like, to the point where gamers will purchase a title simply because Bioware developed it. I personally feel like the Mass Effect games have a little bit too much Gears of War thrown into their combat, a series that I have played through and did not particularly enjoy (the solution to every problem is: find cover and shoot from behind it).  However, I am quite obviously not the majority opinion on the subject, because the franchise has been overwhelmingly successful.  I suspect that this is due to Bioware's ability to craft amazing stories. 

Demon Souls/Dark Souls:  Widely considered to be one of the hardest RPGs in existence.  In fact, Pachbel wrote an entire article about it.  While I don't necessarily find the game to be that hard anymore, I do find it to be quite unforgiving - if you mess up, you're punished with death 99% of the time.  The series' variety of paths/options and interesting take on multiplayer have guaranteed its spot among the top RPGs, and deservedly so.  Dark Souls (but not Demon Souls) is also a rare example of an open-world Japanese RPG.  While the differences between the Western RPG and Japanese RPG are becoming more blurred by the minute, Dark Souls is one of the first "mainstream" Japanese RPGs to use a Western-style world in-game.  The big difference between the Dark Souls open-world and the open world of a traditional Western RPG is that Dark Souls does no hand-holding.  They throw you straight into the fire without any direction whatsoever, and only after soaking you in kerosine.  They don't even tell you the story behind the game, the player has to figure it out themselves from the vague introductory cutscene and the game's item descriptions.  You have to really want it when you're playing games in this series.  Judging from the franchise's success, a lot of people want it bad.

This might as well be the title screen, to prepare you for what's coming. 

Pokemon:  The series that never seems to end.  Pokémon is one of the most lucrative franchises of all time. In fact, only the Mario franchise has made more money than Pokémon. The game itself follows the traditional Pokémon model of urging the player to "catch 'em all" as they proceed along their quest to become a pokéchampion (or whatever it's called).  Every few games, the list of pokémon increases, and a new region is available for exploration.  The games appear to be open-world, but are designed in such a way that they're actually quite linear.  I have not played a Pokémon title since the first ones (Red and Blue), but I have fond memories.  As far as RPGs go, this is one of the easier series to get into and play without having to do too much thought.  The single-player experiences are always fairly easy, but that's to help ensure that the franchise continues to appeal to the broadest demographic possible. 

Final Fantasy:  The series that started it all (depending on who you talk to), and the only series on this list that's older than Pokemon and Diablo. Final Fantasy has been going strong since 1987, which is before most modern gamers were even born. In my opinion, however, Square's (now Square Enix) best works are behind them.  I see the recent Final Fantasy games more as cash-ins than quality titles.  The games are always top-notch in terms of graphics and music, but their stories are impenetrable at times, their mechanics are getting more and more gimmicky, and the progression within the games themselves is usually fairly linear.  Fortunately for Square, the current generation of gamers was not privy to the gems that were pre-FF7.  Don't get me wrong, Final Fantasy 7 is a great game in its own right, but the only reason that it received the hype it did was because it was many-a-gamer's first foray into the Final Fantasy series and RPGs as a whole.  I could probably write a separate post on the evolution of the series, so I won't go into anything else here.

No caption needed.

Diablo:  With the upcoming release of Diablo (one of the most anticipated modern games), this series is stronger than ever.  The founders of the hack-and-slash dungeon-crawler, Blizzard, have done such a fantastic job with the series that it is widely considered to be one of best of all-time by many gamers.  Blizzard is also famous for having some fairly rabid fans, so take any "best of" statements with a grain of salt.  Personally, I love the series, and I can't wait for Diablo 3 to finally be released (May 15th, 2012).  Do I think it's one of the best series of all time?  I don't really care, as long as I have fun playing it.



In Conclusion:  The genre is seemingly evolving with every new release, sprouting new sub-genres and innovative mechanics all the time.  I actually like the direction that RPGs are headed, and I don't fear for their future the same way I do for shooters.  However, RPGs have an inherent advantage in terms of not getting stale, simply because of the nature of the genre.  The genre itself has virtually no limits on creativity, with the only limiting factor being the constraints of the technology available.  My only concern is the evolution of the hybrid RPG games.  While some incredible games have come out of hybridization, if developers buy into that notion too heavily, the genre could become polluted with borrowed mechanics.  Fortunately, there are tons of top-notch developers to ensure that the future of RPGs remains bright.

Call it whatever, it'll still cost us.

So I feel like it's time we addressed purposely withheld DLC micro-transactions, or what I like to refer to as pillaging of gamers everywhere. For those out of the loop, micro-transactions are in-game purchases that unlock or add content to a game. There are several games that get released and add levels to keep the play going or extra characters for a change of pace. Sounds great right? Well so does a steak until you find out that the steak was rubbed all over Snooki's backside. The only game that I will exclude from my extensive list of offenders is Burnout Paradise being as it's one of the originators of this feature - but their focus wasn't money, it was game play.

Did someone say steak?

Let me explain why I'm leaving Burnout out of what I think is a more unfair than fair balance. First: Burnout is a quality racing game that was fun and full of exciting changes - and was still popular over two years after its release. They added so much free content that most people who own it still haven't unlocked everything. They supplemented not having money given to them over those two years by charging for a few special car sets but beyond that about 80% of the game was given away. In addition to this, the whole game got several updates and level changes that kept it fresh without feeling forced. I know what you're thinking too: that I loved it because it's free, but being free doesn't make it good or make it last. Example: I have free crabs, would you like some? If you answered yes: then read the rest of my article, it's for you.

I'll now jump to my favorite offenders: and that would be every other game that has micro transactions and/or purposely withheld DLC, especially from the last year - where we saw so much content released that the content became individual games. Now, games are built around expanding, but not to reward gamers or because they want the game to be the best - it's all just for money. I love Halo, and Halo 2 got me back into FPSs and fueled my love of multiplayer games - but with the 3rd installment we saw that money became a huge factor. I don't blame Bungie so much as Microsoft for how that went down. The reason I use that game as an example is because you can easily see the steps that lead to the eventual pillaging of gamers. The first one was a surprise hit and became an instant classic. The second one changed how we viewed modern FPS and gave us the standard layout for every controller scheme since its release. With it came something new (XBOX live), and the chance to get extra levels to expand on the fun everyone was having - we couldn't wait for it and sucked it up like kool-aid. Then came the fall from grace in my mind: the point that publishers starting making games and withholding content for the sake of releasing it later to make money.

Don't drink the kool-aid, trust me.

                                          

The third installment of Halo was released and it was great too but even on the release day there was talk of levels that were coming out two months later. So why wasn't that content already in the game? Money is the simple answer, but the bigger picture is that companies now knew that they had found the key to forcing people to pay more money for the game they already paid full price for. I know it sounds crazy but here's an example to shine the light down on these dark times. Have you ever played a game online with a friend? Same game, same system and purchased at the same time. Then content comes out and you buy it for your game but your friend doesn't. So now he can't play with you unless everyone plays certain levels or he buys the content. So therein lies the trap: does he buy it to play with you, or should he beg you to switch maps just for his sake? Let's face it, most people don't buy new maps or content to play with the old stuff, so now he has to buy it or feel isolated. 

                                              

'Nuff said....

Micro transactions can be great, but this trend of withholding content for money has got to stop.  It's ruining the games and giving a bad name to game publishers. You see, game companies, we have this cool thing called "the internet." We can see when a game is getting released, and then for some reason content is dropped, and then magically it's added back into the game for the low unreasonable cost of 19.95. To add to this: companies make changes to games that benefit them and screw the rest of us, even if we thought of it first. Two great examples are the XBOX live market place and Diablo 3. Let's start with the lovely marketplace. You may or may not have know this but originally users were supposed to be able to create content for backgrounds and avatars. This all changed once Microsoft saw that there was money to be made, and they've never really mentioned why that changed or apologized for the lie. Diablo is arguably one of the greatest game series ever made and Diablo 2 will forever be a classic. So what's the big deal about a game that hasn't even been released you ask? Well I'll feed you, my little baby birds. The new release will have a market in it which is rumored to allow you to trade or sell items and characters for actual money, something that they banned players for in Diablo 2 - because they didn't get a slice of that pie.

       

Run your pockets homey!

    

Don't get me wrong: I love adding content to a game and I don't mind paying for it, but companies need to at least make it seem like I'm getting something new, and not something that they've just held back to line their pockets. The newest micro-transaction/DLC formula that EA has made popular is my least favorite of all. This is the game pass that they, which has gotten popular with other companies too - although it was all EA's idea originally. This refers to when a person buys a game and must enter a code that enables online play within the game. Without the code, you get no online play and the code is only good once per account - so if you buy a used copy, you have to pay to get a new online pass or you can't play it. Here's the thing makes me lose it faster than George W. Bush in a spelling bee. No pass means no online play and that's even if you already have a gold account.  You can still purchase extra content for whatever game and access it offline.  I know that they did this to stick it to the used game businesses (like Gamestop), but I think they went about it the wrong way. It's a full on pillage job, and we're the villagers being done in by the vikings - one game at a time. So like I said before: I would like this system if it was fair but I still feel like it's unbalanced - but in the mean time these companies will be more than glad to take our hard earned money.  

Join the Protest Against SOPA and PIPA

Due to the numerous blackouts today, this cause needs no introduction.  For those of you that have come across this blog post: consider this a reminder to let your elected officials know how you feel about these bills.  The internet has never and should never be regulated, regardless of the what the supposed intention may be.  While I am by no means advocating piracy, these bills are not the answer to the piracy issues that the entertainment industry faces today.  If you would like more information about SOPA and PIPA, please feel free to check the following informative websites:


https://www.google.com/landing/takeaction/

http://americancensorship.org/infographic.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOPA_initiative/Learn_more

http://blog.reddit.com/2012/01/technical-examination-of-sopa-and.html

http://kotaku.com/5877000/what-is-sopa?tag=sopa

Make sure to take the time to contact your elected officials and let your voice be heard.  Also, be sure to sign some petitions while you're at it.


Thank you for not supporting SOPA and PIPA.  Please stay tuned for a regularly scheduled blog post later this evening. 

Sid Meier's Civilization 5: My Adventures - Episode 2

Welcome to the second installment of My Adventures in Civilization 5.  After a brief holiday hiatus, I am back and ready to tell more tales of treachery and warfare.

My Adventures in Civilization 5 
Episode 2:  Napoleon's Folly

Pachbel and myself decided to try and repeat the success from our previous campaign.  This time around, Pachbel picked the Americans, while I stuck with the Chinese.  Having already achieved a military victory, we decided to try our hands at a scientific victory for this particular campaign.  I figured the Chinese bonus to our Science score would help to that end.  But honestly, how hard could it be to win with technology, right?

Our journey to technological superiority started the usual way: Pachbel and I spawned on opposite sides of a very large map, with Pach ending up in the far east while I was stuck in the northwestern corner.  I started with an abundance of resources at my disposal, while my American ally started in the middle of a desert with nothing but - well, sand.  Unlike last game, we knew it was wiser to simply hang back and try and get a foothold on our respective continents before attempting to join our borders.  It didn't take long for some sweaty barbarians to show up in Pachbel's desert paradise, ready to troll the life out of him.  While Pach dealt with the endless barbarian raids, I scouted my own continent as quickly as I could - secretly hoping to find a world wonder.  As I explored my immediate surroundings, I gathered up the secrets found within several ancient ruins, while being sure to defend my territory from the marauding barbarian hordes.  I wasn't immediately able to find any wonders, but it wasn't long before I happened upon my soon-to-be good friend Montezuma.  I'm not sure how well you know your history, but the Aztecs were not exactly opposed to war.  I attempted some diplomacy with the angry Aztec lord, but talking didn't appear to be his strong suit.  This is when I learned my second Civ 5 life lesson:  Montezuma hates everyone.  The game had been going for only a few dozen turns before I was being attacked by Monty's noble Jaguar Warriors.  Thankfully, I had a few military units at my disposal and was able to repel the attack rather easily.  Monty had already made it clear that his civilization would be the first on my list of things to erase from the collective memory of the world.

Like this, but less literal and more destructive.

Meanwhile, in the sandy wasteland known as America, Pachbel was still dealing with his friendly neighborhood barbarians.  The fun-loving trolls had already kidnapped several of Pachbel's settlers and workers.  When they weren't kidnapping everything that had a pulse, they were happy to run around and set fire to everything beautiful in the world.  Pach held his ground though, and through sheer tenacity he managed to stem the tide of barbarians long enough to expand his borders with several new cities.  During the expansion process, Pachbel happened upon some French scouts.  Knowing the Frenchman's tendencies from last game, the leader of the free world decided to keep a close eye on the outlying American cities - in fear of the inevitable French hostilities.  We were well aware of Napoleon's thirst for treachery.  Things calmed down for a little while on the American front while Pachbel started to claw his way back up the ladder of dominance - upon which I was firmly planted at the top (mostly due to my starting resources).

On my side of the world, things were fairly peaceful, outside of the occasional Aztec uprisings - which were immediately quelled by my superior Chinese army.  The might of the Chu-Ko-Nu crossbowmen were too much for Monty to bear, but that didn't stop him from trying again, and again, and again.  The Aztec emperor suffered from a bad case of bloodthirst, and it wasn't winning him any points with the other civilizations.  Due to his apparent allergy to peace, Monty had successfully alienated himself from the entirety of the world, with the exception of Gandhi (his ally).  The warmongering got so bad that even Gandhi was starting to question his loyalty to the Aztec warlord.  Luckily, Gandhi was much more diplomatic, which allowed me to keep the peace for short periods of time.  Like any addict, Montezuma would still declare war every chance he got, but having Gandhi around meant that I could simply look toward the Indian leader for momentary peace if I didn't feel like stomping Monty's army into the ground for the 23rd time.  There was also still the question of the remaining civilization that we had not yet met, the Songhai Empire.  Pachbel and I had no idea what to expect from Askia, Songhai's mysterious leader.  All that we knew at that point was that Askia was ranked 2nd behind myself as "Strongest Civilization." Since Napoleon and Gandhi were both situated on the same continent as America, it was a foregone conclusion that the Songhai leader was on my continent.  It appeared as though a "clash of the titans" was inevitable.

I will be playing the role of Perseus,
except I'm decidedly more awesome. 

It was around this point in time that barbarians were no longer an issue for America.  Instead, Pachbel found himself on the business end of several musketeer battalions, courtesy of (you guessed it) the French.  You see, Mr. Pachbel doesn't always play it safe in Civ 5, he tends to just let things fly and see what happens.  This was one of those instances where his philosophy of throwing caution to the wind came back to bite him in his American ass.  Pach had successfully managed to found cities near every valuable resource within his relatively short reach.  The problem was that each resource was nowhere near his capital, leaving his cities scattered and difficult to reinforce.  Napoleon, ever the opportunist, was probably salivating over the prospect of claiming himself some sweet American soil - and Pachbel's southernmost city made for some tempting Napoleon bait.  The city itself was newly founded, so it had a small population and meager defenses.  The threat of Napoleon's advancing army forced Pach to fortify the city with everything he had.  While it would normally be a problem to start a war with the sole ally of the Chinese juggernaut, Pach and I were so far apart that there was no feasible way I could send a contingent of troops that would reach him in time to be of benefit.  I was forced to sit and watch the war unfold from the outside.  

Far away in the northwest, I was more than content to just sit back and let the technology flow.  Since Montezuma's paltry forces were now nothing more than a swarm of feeble gnats compared to my massive, sprawling empire, I could easily afford to funnel resources and money into the American war effort.  While I generally don't spend money on anyone but myself (because I'm one of the greediest Civ 5 players of all time), I decided to help out, and this was good for Pachbel - because he was up to his ears in musketeers at the moment.  The musket-wielding french infantry were also backed by cannons and other siege weapons, so we knew they meant business.  Unfortunately for the French, business is one thing that Americans definitely understand, so Pach was able to show the French a little bit of American business.  Due to my considerable scientific progress, we were able to research a few technologies that allowed us to jump ahead of Napoleon in the midst of the war.  This became the primary reason that Pachbel would stay alive, and yet another reason why you should never piss off the Chinese.  Suddenly the American minutemen were replaced by riflemen, and the poor French musketeers were annihilated just as quickly as they appeared. With the stench of failure in his nostrils, Napoleon vacated the American borders heavy-hearted.  The Frenchman knew he had been beaten, and that it was unlikely he would ever reach our level of technological prowess.  Despite Napoleon's less-than-glorious retreat, Pachbel was not finished with the French just yet.  During the war, the French had founded a city right next to one of Pach's American cities, in an attempt to steal a valuable silver mine.  Now that Pachbel could actually do something about it, he set upon the small French city with the kind of fury thought to be attainable only by spree killers.  By attacking America early on, Napoleon had once again opened Pandora's box, and he would come to regret it tenfold.

I'm not sure you understand the point of this list, Napoleon...

With The Purge in the east, my continent was fairly boring in comparison.  Askia of Songhai continued to expand closer to my borders, gobbling up every single resource he could find.  I was nearing my breaking point when it came to the trifling Songhai empire and the annoying pest that was Montezuma, but I did not attack either one of them just yet.  Instead, I waited patiently.  I knew that my scientific progress was ahead of theirs by leaps and bounds, so I decided to fortify my lead even further.  I churned out as many military units as I could muster, setting up defensive barricades around any city that I deemed to be even the least bit vulnerable.  Once I was satisfied with my defensive posture, I reverted back into science mode - to increase my lead even further.  Due to the war in the east, Napoleon was also reaching out to any city states that were willing to lend him a sympathetic ear.  He managed to create an alliance with two city-states, Rio de Janeiro and Florence, both of which were just north of my capital city.  While I was aware of the city-states' existence, I did not figure them to be a threat, until Florence decided to capture one of my workers.  Unknown to Florence, that would be the last mistake they ever made.  While Florence's technology was nearly comparable to mine, they didn't stand a chance.  I quickly glanced over at Florence's forces, to get an idea of what I would have to go up against.  After seeing it was mostly ground-based, I took my Attack Helicopters and proceeded to burn Florence to the ground.  Rio de Janeiro decided to muster up a counter-attack to defend the memory of Florence, but infantry do not fare very well against flying, bullet-spraying machines - generally speaking.  Having successfully cut off Napoleon's proverbial arm in the west, I quietly went back to researching. 

The city-eating snake known as America had already conquered its fourth French city by this point.  Napoleon was getting caught in a fairly shameful pattern of attempting to defend a city with his entire army, then retreating when the city fell.  While retreating, the French units would get cut off and subsequently obliterated by the Americans.  Because of this, the Frenchman's army was being slowly, but purposefully whittled down to nothing.  Sure, the Blue Coats would reinforce their numbers periodically (before being instantaneously eradicated), but it would only serve to temporarily sate Pachbel's bloodlust.  After the fifth French city was placed under American rule, the Chinese-American alliance began the Manhattan Project (this, for those of you who are not familiar with the name).  This meant two things:  (1) we were about to have a nearly endless supply of glass on our hands, and (2) Napoleon was not long for this world.  As soon as we were able, we began to stockpile an unhealthy amount of atomic bombs.  When I say "we," I'm actually only referring to myself, because Pachbel could only hold onto his nukes for 15 seconds before they began to burn a hole in his pocket (figuratively, and possibly literally).  Unfortunately for Napoleon, France became Pach's nuclear testing ground.  France's primary exports were no longer champagne, wine, and cheese.  As it turns out, it's quite difficult to make any of those three products when 95% of your country is covered in ash and/or nuclear fallout.  Instead, France could only manufacture anguish and suffering. 

It didn't take long for France to simply cease existing, although Napoleon did give it the old college try.  As a last ditch effort to preserve his civilization, he sent out a dozen settlers to found as many cities as he could before Paris evaporated.  Sadly, this did not go unnoticed by the Americans.  Any living settlers were immediately kidnapped by the American military.  Those that had managed to start cities were immediately blasted with a barrage of concentrated artillery fire.  France was nothing more than a radioactive pile of ash, a memorial to Napoleon's shattered dreams and bad decisions.  Gandhi watched the slaughter transpire, but never rose a complaint or even a whisper against it.  Gandhi knew that he had to keep his mouth shut, or face potential retribution.  The rest of the game followed in short order, just as you would expect.  I systematically dismantled the entire Aztec army, taking their lands for my own.  Askia knew the outcome if he retaliated after Napoleon's destruction, so he remained quiet.  Our technology continued to advance at its nearly warp-speed pace.  Shortly after I took over Montezuma's last city, Pachbel and I launched our space program and put a man on the moon.  The science victory was ours!  It wasn't quite the same cathartic victory that we experienced in our previous game, but it was still a victory all the same.  Through the powers of technology, we had surpassed every other civilization and achieved a relatively easy victory.

Stay tuned for the next installment of My Adventures in Civ 5, where Pachbel and I increase the AI difficulty levels - with frightening results.

Pach's Real Talk: Catherine

Greetings gamers! It's time to get a little bit weird up in here. It's time to talk about your sex life. What is that, you ask? Well, when other human beings go outside the realm of video game blogs and hentai, sometimes they discover something... something horrifying. It's called a "girl". These "girls" are complex creatures that take on many different roles and forms, sort of like a shape shifter. "Girls" can have a plethora of effects on a gamer's life, they can make you feel big, make you feel small, and sometimes they can make you feel big and then small if it's really good (AMIRITE?!... totally getting banned for bigotry...). But all that aside, no game in existence lets you know what it's like to betray a girl quite like Catherine.

Real talk.

If you folks read my previous entry about Amnesia: The Dark Descent, then you know that the "feeling" of a game is quite important to me. Our ability to empathize with and put ourselves in the shoes of a protagonist is absolutely paramount to a game having a lasting effect on our lives. Atlus has done some super cool stuff in the past (Demon Souls anyone?), and with Catherine they have really outdone themselves.

Lets just jump right in, shall we?

I want you to use your imagination for a minute and put yourself in a situation you've probably never experienced before: You've got an attractive girlfriend. Picture it... think hard... no you can't have Jessica Alba... B-List please. Ok. Ok good. Now, I want you to imagine another scenario that probably isn't so far out there: You're a terrible person with stupid friends. Combine those two together and you've got our protagonist - Vincent!

But Pach! You just contradicted yourself! You said it was important to be able to put ourselves in the character's shoes and then threw a curve ball my way! Well, listen closely: I definitely mentioned the importance of being able to empathize with a character and then immediately afterwards put you in a scenario that you've probably never been in before... HOWEVER, what's important with connecting to a video game is not the specific detailing of the protagonist's daily life (you aren't a dude with a 10 foot long sword either but I bet you cried like a little girl when Aerith died). What's important are the emotions being expressed by the character - frustration, sadness, joy, triumph, betrayal, and the circumstances that surround them. These are the things that, if portrayed properly and realistically, ANY player can connect with on a personal level. It's a rule that applies regardless of a character's specific situation (i.e. what he had for breakfast, whether he's famous or a loser, hobbit or orc, etc.). It makes you "remember that time when..." and really puts you in a position of vulnerability to the game's story devices.

So here we go - You begin as Vincent, a mild mannered game programmer with a pretty hot girlfriend. She's got a job, life goals, and is successful. But after 5ish years, she finally wants Vincent to tie the knot with her. Unenthusiastic about getting married, Vincent consults with his retarded friends: a bro, a depressed chain smoker, and a college kid. They all give him terrible life advice about women, and then leave him alone at a bar. Sound familiar yet? Thought so. Vincent then proceeds to get completely blasted out of his damned mind. He begins talking to himself... mulling over the various horrors of marriage and so forth... when BAM BOOM BAZAOW!!!! A smoking hot blonde walks into the bar. Since Vincent is the only one there, she sits next to him. You both chat it up for a little bit, talking about relationships and the universe as a whole, and Vincent leaves pretty much empty handed. Simple.

Then, the next morning HOLY TAP DANCING JESUS she's in the bed with you... and yes, you guys totally banged. Oh, did I mention that Vincent doesn't live with his girlfriend after 5 years? Yeah, pretty sweet deal. So anyway, there he is with this crazy hot woman in his bed, and the story begins.

Now, without getting into any of the crazy plotline stuff or spoilers, lets talk gameplay elements. You as Vincent constantly cycle between two phases of the game - the bar phase, and the nightmare phase. Every day, some crazy stuff happens with Katherine (your girlfriend) and Catherine (the hot blonde) that puts strain on your relationships in various ways. Every night you go to the bar, do what you want, then go home and go to sleep. So the progression is bar, sleep, consequences, repeat.

Bar phase first - While in the bar you're in simple "I'm in a town in an rpg" mode. You can walk around, talk to your buddies, and chat up recent events with other patrons at the bar. Oh, and you can drink. You can drink a LOT. This phase is all about making decisions that affect both a.) the nightmare phase directly afterwards as well as b.) the story stuff later. The more you drink, the better you're able to handle the nightmare phase (your movement speed is increased and so forth), but the more you drink the more unstable your decisions are for the story stuff. That's part 1 of the bar. Part 2 is texting. You are constantly getting texts and/or phone calls from your girlfriend as well as from Catherine. The game has a pretty dynamic system that allows you to choose from various, situation specific phrases and then actively compose responses (line by line) to these text messages. The texts you receive can vary anywhere from your girlfriend nagging you to Catherine wanting to send you nudes (F*** YEAH!). Each text you receive and respond to can change the way your following morning is going to go. Also, as an added bonus: every time you drink a full glass of a certain type of booze, the game provides you with a fun fact about that type of liquor! These are actually pretty cool, and are different every night for every type of booze (there are 4).

Annnnnd the nightmare phase - This is where things start to get a little weird. To make a long story short, if you die in the nightmare phase you die in real life... so it's important to not die. The nightmare phase is where the actual "game" takes place. The nightmare places you in large, creepy rooms of a giant cathedral... and you are constantly climbing various towers of blocks. Wait, what the huh? This is a block puzzle game? What? Where am I? Who am I? I thought this was.....ngFUUUUU- (bear with me). The block puzzles involve you climbing this tower with speed and mental dexterity so that you can escape a dark force that is constantly pursuing you. You are able to shift the blocks around to make your passage more efficient, as well as collect power ups that allow you to avoid the many traps and special blocks that obstruct your path.

The dark force takes on many forms and for the boss fights it actually takes on physical entities that put a fun-house mirror to what's happening in the story (have you ever been attacked by a monster that is an embodiment of kama sutra sex positions? Man, you just haven't lived yet...). There are usually 3 block towers to climb per room, per night, culminating in a boss battle. In between each puzzle you find yourself on a central hub area that remains frequent throughout the storyline. Oh, and you're surrounded by sheep-people dressed in human clothing... WHAT THE- (bearrrrrrrrr with me).

The sheep people are also trying to escape the block towers, and give you various hints on how to not die. You can chat them up, find out their hopes and dreams, and sometimes see them climbing their own towers in the background of the various levels. Often times you may even find yourself sharing a tower with other desperate sheep... who will totally push you off if you give them the chance because sheep are dick bags. Many of the sheep on the hub are actually reoccurring characters that you can talk to each time you reach a new level. Then, to transition from the hub to the next block tower... you go to sit down in a church confession booth and talk to a mysterious voice... OK SERIOUSLY YOU'RE NOT EVEN FORMING REAL WORDS WITH YOUR MOUTH ANYMO- (bear with me bear with me you're almost there!).

Finally, once you're sitting in the confession booth, the mysterious voice asks you a very personal "door 1 or door 2"-esque question about your own personal relationships. Anything from your thoughts on marriage, to whether your significant other dressing like a baby and sitting on your lap would turn you on or not. This is followed by a graph showing you what others answered on the same question (via online survey), and a transition to the next block tower. Ok... ok whew. You made it.

So the next question you should be thinking is "WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD EVER, AND WHY DO YOU LIKE THIS GAME!?!?" The answer, my dear gamers, is metaphor.

While it may be difficult to explain all the strange, ridiculous, sheep loving, often subtle details of the game, this is allllll one big metaphor for relationships and how we deal with them. The developers at Atlus wanted you to feel like you're constantly doing what we all do when placed in awkward, uncomfortable situations: run... run and try to avoid the problem. Let's be honest, this is an impulse that we ALL deal with to a certain extent when faced with confrontations of deep, emotional vulnerability... and Catherine forces you to face those confrontations head on. You run, climb, jump, and try to escape the problems that are chasing you (via the block towers and dark force in various forms) only to find out that you CAN'T run from these things and are forced to make a decision (via the confession booth). Then you watch that decision played out in real time the next day, blending everything together from texts to block towers to decisions to sheep. Why sheep, you ask? Well, the idea is that the more you face your problems, and don't run from your own emotions, the more you take control of your life and break free from the "herd" as it were. The more you learn about yourself, the more you're able to stand out from the crowd and become less of a victim. I know, it sounds like a long-shot but you had to be there...

So why does Pach love this game? Well, to further drive the point home, lets take a look at what this game actually does to you.

1.) You're forced to deal with meaningful temptation that requires personal reflection.

At our very core, we all want something more. We all want a hotter girlfriend/boyfriend, better careers, more money, better anything. Associated with these things are various forms of temptation that usually involve cheating or betraying our fellow human beings to get there quicker. It could be anything from leaving your wife for a more attractive friend of hers, to stealing a co-worker's big report and claiming it as your own. We all wonder what life would be like if things were a little bit different... a little bit "better". Being satisfied is something we all certainly dream of, but in actuality it's extraordinarily difficult to be completely "content". Proper use of temptation is a wonderful thing in video games... mainly because it is something so hard wired into our sense of self-worth that we can't help but to fall prey to it.

With Vincent, we see it everywhere - Vincent tempted into being a more outgoing person through alcohol, Vincent tempted into a better sex life with women, Vincent tempted into being the envy of his friends, and so forth. While this isn't necessarily the all encompassing list of what most of us have ever been tempted with, these are things that most people have desired at SOME point during their adult lives... and the game has some very clever tools that keep you constantly deciding which impulses to give in to. Let's briefly break each one down:

Temptation #1: You know that liquor is bad for your character's self-control, but it helps you deal with the nightmares more easily and teaches you fascinating things about the world (through the fun facts). The game provides you with enough of an incentive to at least TRY walking on the wild side, despite the dangers, and after each stressful event you are forced to re-evaluate how you would like to treat this part of your life.

Temptation #2: You've got a girlfriend... but DAMNIT Catherine is hot. She's fun loving, speaks your language, and she comes with zero serious commitments. Through the texting mechanic, you are forced to decide how much you want to deal with each of your separate responsibilities to both your girlfriend and Catherine, and the game does it in a very intelligent way. Rather than forcing you to make BIG decisions like "Marry girlfriend", "Sleep with Catherine tonight", or "Tell girlfriend the truth", the game forces you to make extremely frequent LITTLE decisions. When your girlfriend says "I love you" in a text, and you're out with Catherine, do you say "I love you" back? When Catherine tosses you a text about wanting to send you nudes, do you respond to it after your girlfriend just cleaned your house? All of these little things eventually add up to form the big picture of Vincent's life as you see it.

Temptation #3: Your friends are ridiculous, but hey... they're all you've got. After finding out what you've done, your friends (and the other patrons at the bar) react in various ways to your fidelity issues. Some think it's awesome, some wish they were in your shoes, others think you're making a mistake but will support you, and so forth. Their reactions change based on how you deal with Katherine and Catherine... so while they don't directly affect the gameplay, they affect you by making you choose whether you want to live by their standards or not.

2.) You're able to project pieces of yourself onto Vincent throughout the story.

While it is very important to be able to hop into the shoes of the protagonist, it's an element that is often difficult for developers to "plan" for in games that involve large amounts of dialogue. It's quite simple in a game like Zelda because your protagonist doesn't speak... so it's much easier for HIS voice to be YOUR voice. But in a game like Catherine, with a fully flushed out character like Vincent, it's a bit more complicated to mold that kind of experience. So what does the game do to mold Vincent appropriately? Well... they ask you!

Each and every time you complete a puzzle (there are about 25-30 in all), you are forced to answer a question that profiles how you think relationships should be. By question 10 or 11, the game can have a pretty fair understanding of how you think things should go down in the protagonist's life (assuming it asks the right questions, which it does)... and the game adjusts accordingly. This is a very unique mechanic that is reminiscent of "Silent Hill: Shattered Memories", where again the game finds out how you would like the story to progress by straight up asking you (and totally judging you based on your answers).

3.) The game forces you to make realistic choices

In a wide variety of games that allow story line decisions, alignment choice plays a big factor. Are you good or evil? Do you murder the guy or let him live? Do you steal the item you need or earn it through hard work? And... to be perfectly honest with you... I loathe these types of games from a narrative perspective. That is because what these games do (more often than not) is put the world in black and white, then reward you for choosing a side and playing it to the fullest. While yes, this does allow an amount of replay value and creates somewhat of a unique experience... have you ever thought about what these mechanics are actually for?

The ability to choose your own adventure goes allllll the way back to the wonderful world of D&D, and to tell you the truth - they built a system that did it right. How did they do it right? Because while there were always "good" and "bad" decisions to be made in every campaign, that wasn't the point. The point was that it was YOUR adventure. The point was that from beginning to end you were deciding how you wanted the world to work, and the game reacted to you on a moment to moment basis.

Now to be fair... each game of D&D does have a human mind controlling the progression of the story to a certain extent (meaning there are added opportunities for improvisation and various options), but the basic idea of creating your OWN story remains the same. Video games with branching storyline progression were built to mimic this pen and paper masterpiece... and more often than not, they fell short. Why? Well, we can claim it's because it's impossible to predict everything a player can come up with, but predicting player behavior isn't the point. Games aren't meant to account for EVERYTHING that a human mind can come up with, because they still must have a ruleset and patterns that you as a player are forced to operate within... just like anything else. However, what branching stories are meant to do is provide a player with interesting choices within the rules of the game (even if it only allows for a few), have those choices be truly meaningful to the game's progression, and then execute whatever path the player chooses with relevant consequences.

The point is this: just because you can be GOOD Luke Skywalker or EVIL Luke Skywalker doesn't change the fact that you're still playing a linear adventure with Luke ****ing Skywalker... even though game devs would like for you to think otherwise. It's very rare for decisions you make in a game to mean something relevant to the progression of the game, and often times you are manipulated into playing "purely" good or "purely" evil because the game rewards it more than playing the middle ground. What you end up with are simply 2 separate games to choose from rather than 1 unique game.. 1 truly unique adventure that is catered to your tastes. The truth is, life is not black and white. We flip flop every moment of every day on our decisions, because human beings are complicated creatures... and any game that advertises unique storyline progression should cater to that. Often times what games will do is either a.) make your decisions matter moment to moment (but not in the big picture), or b.) make your decisions matter in the big picture (but not moment to moment). An example of poor usage of each would be a.) it doesn't matter whether you choose a red car or a blue car to get to your destination, because you're still getting there regardless... or b.) it DOES matter which car you choose, but you end up not caring in the end because the destination is unrewarding, boring, similar to other destinations, and/or watered down to save time and developer resources. Each of these things causes you to stray more and more from the original intention of having your own, unique adventure where anything is possible.

Catherine, however, does this successfully by making your decisions matter on BOTH levels and by rewarding you for playing yourself (imagine that!). You are free to react honestly to situations because you are rewarded moment to moment based on how you deal with your texts, drinking, and friends... but you are also rewarded in the grand scheme of things because each of those moment to moment choices adds up to a unique big picture decision (i.e. how you want Catherine and Katherine to perceive you). The game doesn't punish you for playing the middle ground. In fact, it allows itself to be more interesting than black or white because you normally do play the middle ground in your everyday life.

Not only that, but the game does a very good job of making both Katherine and Catherine endearing parts of Vincent's life. More often than not, we feel like we have to make a hardcore decision in terms of how our game experience is going to go. Devs cater to this by making characters appealing in two polar opposite ways, mirroring your storyline choices with simple cookie cutter character choices (Brooding badass companion, anyone? Naive-but-means-well heroine companion, anyone?). But... what if BOTH characters had EQUAL value in terms of progressing the story? Whaaaaaaaat?! Normally characters are made to cater to either a "good" or "evil" side of you, and while at first K and C might seem like that's what they're doing, they are actually both catering to equally valid sides of the same coin. It's not as simple as one being what you're "supposed" to do and one being what you're "not supposed" to do, it's a matter of choosing how your life should be lived decision by decision. Risk vs. Safety, Unpredictable vs. Planned, Freedom vs. Order... and while you may think you want one more than the other, on a moment to moment basis things change and the game doesn't allow you to make sweeping statements about your alignment. You could want to have a cheeseburger today but still want to go on a diet tomorrow because THAT'S HOW HUMAN PSYCHOLOGY WORKS.

4.) The game indirectly exposes parts of your subconscious through gameplay.

Ok, we've gone all over the board with this write-up, so before we wrap things up I would like to point out one final important thing: you're a terrible person. No, seriously, you are... and this game will show you. It's one thing to say that you're a good person, or that you "wouldn't" do one thing or another, but if you put ANYONE in a controlled environment with no real life consequences for their actions... you're gonna see some hooker killing. That's what makes these open ended games so fascinating - you see sides of yourself that you didn't know were there. The developers at Atlus really made it clear that they wanted to see exactly what would happen if you played the game honestly... and they weren't afraid you were going to break their linear adventure if you strayed from the norm.

Ordinarily, would you have the balls to have an elaborate affair on your girlfriend/boyfriend? For most people the answer is probably not, and if you did you'd only do it with limitations for your own personal well being. But what if you could honestly go out and make a dramatic change in your life with zero meaningful repercussions for your actions? Like I said... a lot of dead hookers. Now, this isn't to say that in a game like Catherine your actions don't affect that world in a meaningful way... but it does allow for you to honestly, truly "act on impulse" in a lot of different situations, and the results can (and should) be startling. This is probably the most meaningful consequence of any good work of art - it reveals something about the audience that they never knew was there. Let me say that again - it reveals something about you, the player, that you never knew before playing the game. How cool is that? In a safe and controlled environment, you can actually learn more about what makes you tic as a human being... and have a pretty compelling story told to you at the same god damned time. That's what it's all about people.

So, in conclusion, this game is definitely on the weird side of things. It definitely runs the gambit of being too metaphorical and has some complicated stuff flowing through its plot... but at its very core the game is extremely well put together. It boasts an experience that most other games can only claim to hold a candle to, and it makes every adventure real and personal to you as a player. Who cares if you're not going to play through a game twice? The one time you played it, it changed the way you perceived the world. Will Catherine do that? Maybe not in so many words, but it will definitely make you think about yourself in a much more dynamic way and will definitely challenge you on many different psychological levels. Not a lot of games do that nowadays, and it's something that should be given more attention in all aspects of gaming and game design.

Catherine is rated M for Mature.

Trends in Game Creation: "Keep It Simple"

This article represents the beginning of yet another ongoing series.  The goal here is to look at game design/production trends with an excessively critical eye, in order to slowly peel off the layers of the game industry onion.  Once we've established what a given trend is, we can begin to analyze it and deconstruct the general ideas at play.  Through these articles, I hope to show you some facets of game development that you might have never considered before, and not always in a flattering light.  I decided to start this series with something that I find to be increasingly relevant in modern game creation: the "Keep It Simple" Principle (KISP for those who love acronyms).

"Hey Boston, what exactly is this trend?"

First, I should let you in on a little secret:  game companies exist to make the most money possible.  For some companies, the amount of money to be made is much higher than others.  However, for the purposes of this article, you need only know that developers and publishers are all in it for the profit.  I'm sure some of you are thinking: "But Boston, independent developers only care about making their fans happy, they don't care about money!" If that is indeed what you're thinking, then you couldn't be more incorrect.  The ONLY exceptions to the golden rule of profit are: if the developer has a substantial nest egg (generated from previous games, some other business venture, a trust fund, etc.) and has no need for the potential income from game titles, if the developer thinks that there is no potential loss of income from releasing the title for free (implying that they don't care if people buy it or not), or some variation of those two scenarios.  In any other case, the intent to make money is always there.  Think about all the big indy games over the past few years:  Super Meat Boy, Minecraft, Terraria, etc.  What do they have in common?  They became popular and sold like hot cakes.  They all used the revenue generated from their success to continually make their games better, while still making money hand over fist.  So these developers definitely care about their fans, right?  Of course they do, but so does every other developer in existence (to some extent).  The fans are the ones who purchase their games, and if they are unable to cater to the very people who play their game, then their game is probably not worth anyone's time.  You can argue with me and say that the money is just a bonus and that they're all truly in it to bring joy to the public, but then you'd be getting a little ridiculous.  For the sake of my sanity, all you need to know up to this point is that games are made with the intention of making money.  Plain and simple.

Need I say more?

The reason I brought this up is because the concept is of paramount significance when discussing most trends in the industry (especially this one).  So then, knowing what we know, I want you to pretend that you're a major developer.  You've made dozens of hit titles, and you have become your publisher's leading cash cow.  Your publisher tells you that you have to come up with a new IP, with the intent of making it into a hit franchise.  How do you go about making sure that your game will be successful?  You pick a wide-ranging demographic and appeal to as many people as possible.  Does your game need to be good as well?  Well yes, but only to start with.  At the very least, it needs to be somewhat innovative, but not to the point where it alienates your core audience.  If the first title is good enough to gather a substantial following, you know that you only have to iterate on your first successful title in order to continue the cash flow.  Case in point: Modern Warfare.  Once a franchise is established as a hit, a developer has almost free reign with whatever comes next, as long as they continue to iterate and appeal to their demographic.  This is where the KISP comes in.  

To this day, games are still seen as being undesirable and impenetrable to some.  The higher you go in generations, the more likely it becomes that you'll encounter this sentiment.  As time passes, the older generations are passing as well.  The current generation of developers most likely grew up on games, but not in the same way that the younger generations have.  They grew up in the age of Pong, Pac-man, and Space Invaders.  In other words, they grew up in a time where games were simple.  Whether this has stuck with them as their mantra throughout their careers, whether they derive nostalgia from simplicity, or however else they attempt to justify it - they will sometimes favor their version of simplicity over other alternatives.  Because of this false understanding of the need for simple games, certain figures in the industry have been trending towards dumbing down their franchises.  While this aggravates the younger generations of gamers, it also guarantees that the titles appeal to the broadest demographic possible.  When these games do well, the success is attributed to the game's simplicity, instead of the game's appeal to the lowest common denominator (or fans who were tricked because they enjoyed previous games in a franchise).  Because of this, the franchise will continue to get dumbed down, to the point where it's barely even a game any more.  This, my friends, is problematic.

Case in point (more on this later).

"But Boston, why should we care about this?" 

This trend has the potential to result in some less desirable games.  To illustrate this point, I'm going to reference a few franchises:  Fable, Mass Effect, Ninja Gaiden, and Demons Souls.  On one side, we have Demons Souls and Ninja Gaiden.  Both of these franchises have substantial followings, and both are known for the absurd level of difficulty featured in their games.  Let's look at these two games individually.  Ninja Gaiden has a difficulty curve resembling a vertical line.  However, is the game particularly complicated?  Not really.  When you get to the heart of it, it's just a combat-oriented platformer/adventure title.  None of the abilities or movesets are overly difficult to execute, and the world is not massive enough to constantly get lost in - the game is just simply hard, and all of the titles have sold quite well.  Why am I bringing this up?  People often confuse difficulty with complexity.  Just because something is difficult doesn't mean that it's overly complex, whereas an overly complicated game isn't necessarily difficult to conquer if you can understand the game's systems.  Part of the problem with the KISP trend is that complexity is being associated with difficulty, because older generations of gamers are finding both complex and difficult games to be equally impenetrable - causing them to dump both types of games into the same general category.  Demons Souls is another franchise along similar lines.  At its core, it's a hack-and-slash dungeon crawler with some Japanese influence.  Is it a difficult game?  It certainly is.  It's also more complex than Ninja Gaiden, simply because of the RPG elements featured in the game.  Even so, this series was an international success.  Is overwhelming simplicity a necessary evil that must be tolerated for the sake of success?  The series proves otherwise.  While not overly complicated, Demons Souls offers varying levels of complexity based on how deeply you want to explore the game.  In doing so, it appears to hit the sweet spot with relative simplicity accompanied by a heavy dose of optional complexity.

Even though a good amount of complexity is necessary, anyone who claims
to enjoy the complexity of Steel Battalion is either a liar, a masochist, or both.

On the other side, we have Fable.  This franchise is the primary inspiration for this article.  While never an overly complex franchise, Fable has succeeded in actually dumbing the game down to the point where it almost plays itself for you.  The games have never been particularly difficult, and they have also had some interesting systems.  As the franchise progressed to its second installment, it maintained the charm of the first title, but added some fun (and optional) complexity while still keeping things relatively simple.  Then Fable 3 came along.  I had fun with this game at first, but after the first few hours, I had no desire to keep playing.  I managed to trudge through the storyline and experience the end-game of becoming a king, only to come to the conclusion that nothing in the game really mattered at all -  no matter how much I wanted it to.  If I wanted to press 'A' to win, I would have played an Atari game.  The bosses in Fable 3 were uninteresting, and the world gave me no reason to explore unless I wanted items that didn't actually matter.  Sure, the writing is clever, but even incredible writing can't save a game that's drowning in simplicity.  I might come off as a Fable hater, but I really did try to enjoy my play experience.  I do not detest the franchise as a whole, I only dislike what it represents - extremely basic gameplay.  This series is the very reason that the trend frightens me.  As we have seen, even so-called "complex" games are really not all that confusing, and yet they still remain engaging, compelling, and most importantly, fun.  It's when people grievously misuse the KISP that I begin to get worried, and Fable 3 is the perfect example of a franchise moving in the wrong direction. 

Mass Effect is taking a slightly different road to Simple Town.  In their attempt to appeal to a broader audience (not that they needed to, with the game's success), they also dumbed the game down to some extent.  Bioware turned Mass Effect 2 into more of a shooter and less of an RPG (compared to the original title), while still keeping enough of the RPG elements to prevent the alienation of their fans.  While I am still not a fan of game simplification (especially with RPGs, but that's another story), I feel that Bioware did a solid job of preserving the bits of complexity that were essential to the game's success, while simplifying aspects of the game that they felt were in need of a "trim." This is the proper way to iterate through a franchise, generally speaking.  A developer needs enough pieces of a complex system to give their game the depth necessary to make it compelling.  It's really just a balancing act.

For those who like literal imagery.

What can we conclude from all this?

It is important to keep things simple enough to remain accessible, but not so simple that the game becomes forgettably effortless.  To be clear: I am not saying that simplicity is always a horrible thing.  I can think of plenty of simple games that are still incredibly entertaining, just as I can think of games that have fallen to the wayside by being too convoluted.   The key is to be aware of the portions of the game that need simplification, and those that are fine the way they are.  Games that essentially play themselves are just as awful as games that require a doctorate to understand.  For the most part, developers know where that fine line is.  As the gaming industry continues to evolve, so does the KISP.  Younger generations of game developers will have their own methods of creating intriguing systems.  However, it will always be important to keep the balance of simplicity and complexity in the back of their minds.

Saints Row: The Third

I have never played a game that punched me in the mouth and then told me to like it but that’s the only way to explain what I felt the first time I played this game. The game starts off running as you take part in a bank heist gone wrong that ends with a plane crash after being pursued by no less than 100 armed swat members. That’s the first section of the game before you do a single side quest or even take your first naked run. Action isn’t a strong enough word to describe this game and stunning doesn’t do the visuals justice. Watch and see what I mean, but keep reading (well, watch first then read).

Yeah, something like that.

So the controls are the same as the last two which means they’re laid out pretty much like your standard FPS (first person shooter) and that’s a very good thing. That means the controls are tight and responsive like a Ferrari fresh off the line, only with this ride no brakes are needed - or wanted! That doesn’t mean that there’s nothing else going on here though. They add fluidity to the controls that the two previous versions lacked and those few changes make all the difference. So take a simple move like jacking a car something we’ve all done before in GTA, for example.  Now blow it up till you no longer recognize it! Run up to a car and press the jack button to dive feet first through a window (Bo-Dukin’ It) and ride off in smooth fashion. So much faster than any other carjacking in any other game (and it’s a good thing), but most of all: its fun! Oh yeah, after you jack the car and squeal the tires to get away it only takes one button to power slide around the corner, past the pigs.

Much faster in Saint's Row.

After you rob the bank, jack a car, and burn the cops, you’ll want to do the next logical step: blow **** up! Lucky thing this game makes that so easy to do and with so many options. A regular gun will let you take out almost any vehicle in the game provided you don’t die (and you’ve got enough ammo), but who wants to waste their time with a plain gun?  Instead, choose from: rocket launchers, grenade launchers, exploding remote control cars, chain guns, flame throws, or a guided missile!  Those aren’t even all the weapons, those are just the ones I can say in one breath - and to get through them all it might take at least a few more breaths. To spice it up if the regular weapons aren’t enough, each one has about 5 levels to upgrade that change the strength and sometimes properties of the item, like a gun that shoots explosive rounds. Now I know these aren’t new items to the gaming world and maybe they don’t even sound that great, but in the world of Saints Row you live by the gun, and enemies die by the gun - so yours needs to be the bigger gun.

Should I take this one, or maybe that one?  Ah, decisions.

Okay, so now you’re armed, loaded with cash, nice wheels, and a bad attitude. Sounds like a good time to start thinking about taking things over, right? The first two games all took place in Stillwater. By the end of the second game the Saints owned the town and the rivals were dead or dying Saints run Stillwater uncontested. The Third takes place in a new town called Steelport, where the only difference in the town is really the name (and that the Saints are small potatoes again), but it still feels like Stillwater. That’s a good thing for the players that have been there before because without much effort you can get around the place without even really using the map. Again, you have several options on how to take over the place, activities that earn you part of the city, rival gangs that gather and need to be ummm, "dealt with," harshly.  The activities are so fun that even when you don’t finish in time, or you die during a level, it’s still fun to play it again without causing too much stress. It feels so right in every aspect that even though I wanted to rush the experience, it was nice to take the time to mix it up.

                

Another key component that makes this game stand out over its predecessors is the leveling system. In most games of this type you level like building a cake, first you do this to get this powerup and then you do this task and you get that gun or save that person to get that money. Saints let’s you make the cake icing first and then eat it inside out. You get respect points for doing certain tasks or missions, and then those points get used to level up your character - but you can tailor it to suit you. Overall, you’ll get everything at some point but to start you might want to build up your gang, instead of improving your driving, or making your character stronger. Those are just a few options, and as you level up more will become available that can be silly/deadly - but all are functional in making sure you rule the city.

I own this town!

                 

Ok so there are a few fails with this game - and I mean just a few - but I can’t overlook them because they are so apparent. One: the multiplayer is just a series of enemy waves. Don’t get me wrong, because like everything else in this game it’s fun and oddly addictive, but it’s the only multiplayer mode available. I can see why they limited the multiplayer this time and changed it up for The Third, seeing that the last two kind of sucked in the multiplayer department. The two previous installments just had too much to offer that was never really fleshed out, and in several ways the old versions took a lot to adjust to - but it was fun and missed from this game. The other issue is the frame clipping that does occasionally happen due to the sheer speed that this game plays at, it doesn’t happen all the time but it’s noticeable. Those few things said, the game rocks! It has made me hope that instead of the originally planned trilogy they will make a 4^th followed by a 5^th. In closing, go get it! It’s that simple: go get it and thank me later.