Borderlands 2 Vita – First Impressions

**This was meant to be posted at the launch of Borderlands 2 on the Vita but then some stuff got in the way**

My Vita has been sitting on its own for quite some time now as my attention has been on my 3DS and Dark Souls II.  However, my 3DS may have to be put to the side for the time being, as I picked up Borderlands 2 for my Vita yesterday.  I’m not a huge Borderlands fan but I feel like it’s the perfect type of game to play on a handheld.  The reviews so far have not been great so I was on the fence about getting it, but I went for it.  I’m glad I did, because so far it’s been pretty solid.

Starting it up is the same and you still can’t skip the intro cut scene, which is annoying since I’ve watched it twice already, and a third time is just not necessary, but whatever, it drops you right into the game’s tutorial section, which is actually needed to get acquainted with the Vita controls.  They’re a little difficult to get used to but after playing for a bit it becomes a lot easier and now I’m not thinking about where things are.  Though, the front touch pad took some time to get used to since each side of the screen does something but it’s just kind of in a general area rather than a virtual button.  The back touch pad may be difficult for some people since you can’t rest your fingers on the back, but I didn’t find that to be an issue.  But overall the controls are solid and should not be a problem for anyone.

On to performance.  The first two hours I experienced no major issues.  There was a bit of slowdown when things got a bit crazy and sometimes when reloading a gun the game starts to get sluggish.  These aren’t frequent enough to be game breaking but don’t expect a seamless experience.  What is more noticeable is the frame rate

If nothing else, it’s quite the achievement bringing such a large game to the Vita, and for the most part it does rather well

drop in Sanctuary, it’s actually really bad but fortunately it doesn’t seem any fighting goes on there so it won’t have an impact on the core gameplay.  However, it is quite aggravating since it happens all the time.  That aside, there’s of course a graphical downgrade from the console versions and naturally the PC version, but this never stood out to me as an issue and the game looks pretty nice on the Vita.  Character models can be a bit stiff but that’s mainly for NPCs, as the enemies you fight seem to move just fine and have no problem getting in your face as they rush you with shotgun blasts.

Luckily, the gameplay is all there.  The whole shoot and loot system translates really well to the Vita and lends itself to both quick and long term sessions.  I’m assuming this version has all the guns in the other versions but with so many and with so little play time I honestly have no idea, but I can say so far I have come across a lot of weapons.  Enemies now explode to improve performance and I believe there are less enemies on screen at once.  Don’t worry, things still get pretty hectic.

I feel it’s important to note I have only played with the Day 1 patch, which from what I’ve read seems to have fixed a majority of major performance issues many people had to suffer through (it seems the Day 1 patch actually came out a week after the Vita bundle came out, on the day the retail version of Borderlands 2 for Vita was released on its own).  I have yet to play any of the DLC and I believe I may need to download it on my memory card, so some things need to be rearranged before I can comment on any of that.

So far, with just a few hours with the game it is difficult to give a full review, but my initial impressions are very positive.  There are some technical issues but not enough to detract from the fun or ruin the game (I’ve played some games with really awful technical issues and this is not one of them).  If you are looking for a fun game to play on the Vita then I would suggest this.  As it stands, Killzone: Mercenary is my top shooter on the Vita, but considering how much content is with Borderlands 2 it’s hard to say not to get it, especially since it’s rather fun.  I am looking forward to playing for many more hours and if I can convince anyone I know with a Vita to pick this game up I will give my thoughts on the co-op, which is limited to two rather than four players.

Now I must depart and go level up, shoot, and loot my way through Borderlands 2 on Vita.

Bioshock Infinite DLC Returns to Rapture!

The long awaited Bioshock: Infinite DLC, Bioshock: Infinite, Burial at Sea Episode 1 and Episode 2  is now announced and it is a shocker.  It will be a two-part DLC with Elizabeth and Booker not just returning but apparently living in Rapture.  For fans of the games this will instantly set off some “how are they going to manage this” flags.  Why?  Let’s explore, shall we?

MAJOR SPOILERS FOR BIOSHOCK: INFINITE AHEAD!

Starting off with the elephant in the room: if Comstock never existed, as the end of Infinite implies, then how did Elizabeth a) get taken through a tear in time by Comstock which in turn b) allowed her to create tears in time and c) be

Really liking the art style here, kind of like a retro movie poster

called Elizabeth rather than Anna?  Presumably, at the end of Infinite, the universes are at rest and each one has Booker with his daughter, Anna.  This implies that at some point in Infinite something happened, causing them go to Rapture and somehow forget about it, or at least Booker did, as Elizabeth wasn’t overly surprised when she brought them there in the game.

Did Elizabeth tell us about this already?  During the ending scenes of Infinite, Elizabeth explains how “There’s always a lighthouse.  There’s always a man.  There’s always a city.”  Are all these lighthouses echoes of the same people scattered through time?  Have their visions of utopia been slightly altered but still ultimately doomed to fail?  There’s no denying that Rapture and Columbia have been built on very different premises, but they booth breed the same sort of people.  Though, I wold have liked some Comstock back-story DLC, as we don’t really know his view of the city as much as his view of a single enemy, whereas Ryan had a lot more backstory and insight into the world along with his rivals.

The tricky part here is not interfering with existing history of Rapture while not being so distant that Elizabeth and Booker may as well not even be there.  Speaking of being there, I’m almost lead to believe this Booker was never at Columbia or didn’t make it very far at all.  In the trailer, he clicks his fingers and creates a little flame, but I can’t help feeling like it looks more like a plasmid than a vigor.  Are Booker and Elizabeth scattered through time?  We know Elizabeth and the Luteces have the ability to travel through dimensions and remember it, but when Booker does it he has to fill in the missing memories with ones to fit the world he’s in, even if he doesn’t really understand the world he’s in.  Maybe something massive happened, such as Elizabeth escaping to Rapture from her tower and the Luteces having to not only bring Booker through dimensions but through time as well.  This way, Elizabeth could be more grown up and living in Rapture, even before the fall, was not exactly a grand old time (well, the beginning was better but it kept getting worse) and she became hardened and more mature.  Hopefully this maturing doesn’t equal her being cold to the world, but I’m hoping they have better writing than just making her turn into an action hero of sorts.

Okay, I can go on forever with possibilities, but I quite like my last theory.  But I doubt whatever I come up with will be what Ken Levine has come up with, so now the wait begins for the return to Rapture (also note, Rapture looks awesome running on their new engine).

So Many Video Games, and People Are Way Too Sensitive Anymore

I have not posted in a while, but one must understand I just finished spring break, and no I did not go wild and crazy.  Instead, I played through the new Tomb Raider and Spec Ops: The Line.  Both of these games will be reviewed throughout the week, with Tomb Raider coming first.  Along with that I’d like to give a quick happy birthday to the Vita, which came out roughly a year ago (I’m a bit late, but oh well).  I have a Vita and think it’s pretty awesome, and I’ll probably get into that later in the week.  Playstation Plus has also been great this month with Vita game sales and some pretty cool free games.  Of course, Bioshock: Infinite is next week, but I’ll be waiting a few days after that until I get it since I had to order the Premium Edition, as Best Buy was out of preorders (don’t even get me started on that nonsense) and Gamestop was closed at the time, so I was fed up and ordered it.  God of War: Ascension came out last week, I have yet to play it but I want to talk about it, so let’s go.

Right then, there is or was a trophy in the latest God of War called “Bros Before Hos.”  I say was because apparently the title is offensive.  A few things to point out here, is that I’d be impressed if someone has not heard that saying before (just watch pretty much any college party type movie from a few years ago, you’ll likely hear it) and two, God of War has a far more offensive part to it that is in all the games, can anyone guess it?  That’s right, the sex minigame in every episode and the countless amounts of unexplainable topless women throughout the series.  I think it is a lot easier to construct an argument that Kratos (the main character for those who don’t know) is able to go to areas in the game where women are laying down as nothing more than sex objects waiting for the player to hit something along the lines of triangle, triangle, circle, square, rotate right joystick to the left now the right, and finish it off with a strike of the X button.

Then again, I suppose it is easier to release a little patch to change the title of the trophy to “Bros Before Foes” than actually do something about the actual depiction of women in the games (heck, Kratos at one time had a wife and child, I guess now that they’re gone he has no problem getting it on with every woman he comes by).  For those who are wondering, the trophy is acquired when the player kills a female enemy called Fury, but don’t worry, you still kill her in the game, why take the actual offensive part out (yes, she’s probably a monster of some sort, but for this to raise as an issue she likely somewhat resembles a human female)?

So it begs the question, who was offended by the trophy before the game even came out?  Probably not many people, but it is some easy PR to show the developers care and all that jazz.

Ah well, here’s a cool little video of Bioshock: Infinite, there’s a humming bird around the 1:30 mark, blew my mind, the detail in this game is stunning:

On a different note, right on SimCity, because singleplayer games are always better when plagued by connection problems, EA rocks!

Should Video Games Promote Social Change?

I have been playing video games for as long as I can remember, and there’s a good chance you too play video games of some sort.  Take a quick look at any video game forum and you’ll likely notice something: gamers are not segregated.  Sure, we may make fun of others if they claim Call of Duty to be the best game ever, but it’s really all in good fun.  So if there are no boundaries between gamers when it comes to ethnicity or gender, why then are so many games pushing the same old characters on us?

You all know the ones I’m talking about: steroid man, emotionless man, annoying guy who just wants to blow stuff up, generic hero white guy, obligatory tough leader black guy, female who does nothing but is stuck in there for the sake of saying they put a female in,  and need I say more?

See, I don’t understand how gamers expect anyone to take video games seriously with so many of the mainstream games made up of these characters.  I know there are deeper characters in gaming, but for the major players in the industry, the characters are very far behind.  More often I keep hearing developers say they can never have a female protagonist because it wouldn’t work, and instead they’ll throw in a random female character for no reason other than to say they listened to the complaints and put one in.  This is why I like how Ubisoft has an African American female protagonist in Assassin’s Creed III: Liberation.  There’s so much rich history that has the possibility of being explored by creating a diverse character.

Likewise, if a modern era game had a diverse character that was a real person instead of a shoot-anything-that-moves character then maybe we would be able to play as a character that could show us a new way of thinking.  After all, I don’t think many people are full world travelers, so living in the US, I’d be interested in playing as a character from modern China or Middle-East.  While there are those who don’t want to admit or accept it, video games are a dominant form of media, and it seems logical to allow games to depict people in a real way.  This brings me to another main point: how mature are video games?

Yes, video games have a specific “mature” rating, but that does not mean they are mature in subject matter, at least not when it comes to characters.  Really, it mainly means the game will be violent, but how far does that go towards a mature story?  Not much at all.  Now, I don’t want to get rid of the rating, as I don’t ever want to see a little kid playing Grand Theft Auto or any other ultra-violent game, but obviously the ratings are not doing a great job of stopping that (i.e. just go online with Call of Duty and your ear will bleed with the shrieks of pre-teens cursing you out and saying they have done things to your mom even though they have only just been born a few years ago).  What I would like to see is two mature ratings: one for the ultra-violence and one for story.

This may not seem like a big deal, but I believe it will give gaming a new image.  Yes, a mature story can be told in a teen rated game, but for the sake of this I will focus on mature rated games.  If we look at the upcoming game, The Last of Us, it is obvious the game is violent.  However, there are glimpses of character interaction that look to touch on an emotional level.  The same can be said for Bioshock: Infinite.  I cannot really blame the public for looking down on these games for promoting violence, after all, the previews shown have all included a ton of killing.  Even the boxart of Bioshock: Infinite has the main character holding a gun (I believe The Last of Us has a similar cover).  Why not put a picture of the main character with the main side character?  The story revolves around the side character, but yet she might as well not exist in the majority of recent previews.  I appreciate she will be the focus, but so far they’re trying hard not to focus on her (which is odd since in the beginning they showed her off like there was no tomorrow, and now nothing).

Could this be due to an immature market?  I don’t think so.  Sure there will be those who want to play violent games all the time, and I have to problem with that.  They’re often easily accessible, and to be honest, dominating in Call of Duty or Halo online can be great fun.  But why try to trick these players into buying a game that is not something they would be interested in?  Or even worse, change the direction of a series to appeal to a wider audience, and in turn alienate the original audience.  Resident Evil has done this to no end, Silent Hill is kind of doing this, and Dead Space is making it painfully obvious.  There’s a reason these games made it to where they are, and that is the original fanbase.  Enough people must have originally bought the game for the series to take off, so why ignore them down the line?

See, gamers can come together from all around the world and play games.  The internet has made this substantially easier, but game companies are making it more difficult.  Developers are far too often scared to make a character that isn’t a white macho man.  Well, as a white male, I have grown painfully tired of that character.  Perhaps that is why Mass Effect was so well liked.  The characters were diverse and all served a point.  When a character died I cared about it, and that has a lot to do with how they developed and their back story.  If a fictional character can create a connection with the player, why can’t a fictional character based on modern people from around the world be depicted in a realistic way?

I don’t think video games can be taken seriously until they deliver mature stories with realistic and diverse characters.  This obviously cannot be done in a war game, as we have seen nothing but stereotypes in every modern war game.  Perhaps a survival game with people from around the world having to come together after coming to terms with prior prejudices and ultimately discovering how, when spending time together, we are all just people.  That is the game I want to play.  I think that is the game to change how people look at video games as an entertainment medium as well as a social commentary tool.  One day I hope this game exists, but with the current trend of brainless macho men, I sadly do not see this coming for a long time.

Does EA Hate Their Fans?

Yes, yes they do.  Why do I say this?  Battlefield 3, that’s why!  I don’t know if DICE had a hand in this nonsense I’m about to tell, but if they did then I suppose they too don’t care about fans.  See, it was recently announced that Battlefield 3 Premium Edition will be coming out for $70 in September.  Essentially, it is a bundle including the original game and more importantly, all of the current and future DLC.

What does this mean?  It means anyone who bought the game at launch has to essentially buy the game twice to get the full content (original game was $60 while the access to all DLC with the Battlefield Premium access costing $50).  So while I and many others would have to pay $110, this new bundle cuts $40 from the price tag.  That may not seem like much, but from EA’s perspective they will already be making a ton of money from people who are basically forced to pay the $50 if they want all the DLC compared to new players.  What do they care, after all, Medal of Honor is coming soon and right around the corner is Battlefield 4.

While I do enjoy Battlefield 3, I cannot justify spending $50, especially when new players only have to spend an extra $10 compared to what I and many others originally paid.  It’s really a shame what EA has come to, and I can only hope the rest of the gaming world doesn’t follow down the same path (well, Activision isn’t doing much better and I quite like how Sleeping Dogs currently has an average of 83/100 on Metacritic).

It wouldn’t be as bad if this were the only thing wrong with Battlefield 3, but with EA allowing people to cheat and pay to get all weapons for online play and DICE essentially abandoning the servers by having nearly every single server be rented I just don’t know what they are trying to do with Battlefield 3 other than try their hardest to ruin it.

Also, if you’re wondering where I am getting the facts from here is a link.  The opinions on the other hand, they’re mine.

Why Is Classic Rock Classic, TV Considered Bad, and Video Games Evil?

Think about it, I’m sure you know people who are anti-TV and anti-video games, with the latter being more common.  They’ll argue these things ruin your mind either by having you zone out and ignore the world around you or turn you into some sort of loser or evil person.  What’s the alternative then?  Well, usually they like to refer to the good old days.  I’m assuming this means reading a book.  Reading a book offers nowhere near the amount of creativity needed when playing a video game.  There is no trial and error, which means no learning.  Yes, you can learn through video games (team work, communication skills, and with games like Portal 2 you have to critically think to solve puzzles), and you know what, they also must be doing something right, just look at their popularity.  I’m not saying books are gone, as I like a good read, I’m simply saying there’s no reason to say video games are evil.

As for TV, well I’ll just say it doesn’t destroy your mind as critics like to say.  Granted, I don’t think watching the Kardashians or plastic housewives of whatever will be beneficial, but there is more to TV than that nonsense.  I recently watched all of Battlestar Galactica (I know, I’m late to the party) and the ending was horrible.  However, this allowed me to realize how connected the show had me to the characters that made me appalled by the ending.  Likewise, Doctor Who has story arcs spanning over multiple seasons, allowing viewers to analyze the episodes and communicate through online forums.  See the pattern here?

These new forms of media are connecting people in ways never before possible.  Sure, the new generations may not care about Shakespeare (who I think is overrated) and Great Expectations, but does that matter?  Honestly, I couldn’t care less about Pip and Miss Havisham, there was no connection there.  I don’t care if they’re deemed classics by scholars, that’s all yesterday’s news.  This leads me to my next point, why are some things considered not as good as others because they’re not classics?

Classic Rock, what in the world makes it classic?  What, it’s old, is that it?  Seriously, listening to Robert Plant wail into a microphone and Jimmy Page sloppily play guitar is not my idea of classic.  How many times can they play the same songs over and over on the radio?  Lynyrd Skynyrd are nothing special, but they don’t go away.  The same goes for newer bands such as Metallica.  I’m sorry, but when I walk into a music store I don’t want to hear the same old nonsense over and over.  Somehow I don’t think in the 70s people were listening to music from the 30s and saying it was the best thing ever (though, I’d argue that there’s a good amount of music from the 30s and 40s that’s better than what’s considered Classic Rock).  Don’t say it’s because there isn’t any good new music, because there is.  Just look at Paloma Faith, Imelda May, Sonata Arctica, Within Temptation, Arjen Lucassen, and so many more.  The problem is, the current generation doesn’t listen to the radio, so they pretty much have to fill it with Classic Rock, and as a result older generations don’t think anything has happened since then.  And I will seriously argue that Lady Gaga is a better musician, singer, and songwriter than the majority of the Classic Rock artists, she’s simply doing shock-rock, just as has been done for many years from Alice Cooper to David Bowie and many more.

Since we’re discussing music, why is metal so bad?  I listen to metal a lot, and I have to say, when listening to a song such as A Sailorman’s Hymn by Kamelot, Say My Name by Within Temptation, Swanheart by Nightwish, and Under Your Tree by Sonata Arctica (possibly the most emotional song about the death of a pet dog in all of music) I don’t see how anyone can say metal is just a bunch of people making loud music and screaming into a microphone.  Sure, there is metal like that, but the reason I hate saying I’m a metal fan is because people think that’s all metal is.  Sure, I may have put down Classic Rock, but I also acknowledge the good bands such as Styx, Queen, and Pink Floyd amongst others.  I’m just tired of people saying all new music is horrible and that Classic Rock is the best.  The same kind of applies for metal, as many don’t know symphonic metal and power metal exist.  I just found a new band last year, Amaranthe, and I can almost guarantee if they had more exposure people would become fans.  It’s a shame that metal is still looked at as either the music of evil or still associated with the 80s.

Essentially, what I’m saying is we need to expand our entertainment minds.  Sure, none of these things are pressing issues, but they’re definitely the easiest of issues that people can be open to.  I’m not asking for massive social change, just a bit of open-mindedness to basic forms of new and old entertainment.

 

Mass Effect 3 Ending Isn’t Bad

People become attached to things they invest time into.  People want it to be worth it.  If something goes on for too long people begin to have doubts that the ending may not be worth it.  But what happens when something works out perfectly and people are still disappointed with how it ends?

SPOILER ALERT

Well, just read a discussion board about the ending of Mass Effect 3.  I cannot believe how many people are still complaining about it.  After playing the game, I really don’t see what all the fuss is about.  Sure, the choices made in past games didn’t directly alter the ending of the game, but the had an impact on other events prior to the ending.  As for the ending itself, why was it so bad?  Really, it’s not that complicated, so I don’t see why people are trying to think of alternate theories on why it ended how it did.  Simply put, Shepard runs towards a teleportation beam, then ends up getting shot and nearly dies, then wakes up sees everyone around him dead, still walks towards the beam, and then is teleported.  After being teleported, Shepard walks about until finding and killing The Illusive Man.  No big deal.  So you then go to the top of the ship you’re on and after talking to the synthetic mind (sorry, it’s been a while I forget what it was actually called) you are faced with a choice of which ending you want.  Then the ending is played out in a cutscene and that’s it.

I’m sorry, but where in the world is there any issue with how it ended?  It’s not like the games ever had deep stories, they’re all pretty much standard space-opera affair.  Now, that’ s not a bad thing, but I’m just confused as to what type of ending people would have preferred?

It seems like people are looking way too into a space-opera, where the main focus is on the characters and their relations, which this game (for the most part) does very well.  If anything, I was most annoyed with the addition of online play being tied in with single-player, as I was never able to actually get into any type of match due to nobody ever saying they were ready to start the game, so I’d always just sit in lobbies and wait.

Basically, this is a space-opera, and even if it wasn’t, the ending is still not bad by any means.  Sure, there could have been more cutscene showing a memorial service for Shepard or having a kind of Earth rebuilding scene, but that wouldn’t have really added that much.  Maybe “true” Mass Effect fans will say I’m not a fan so I don’t get it because every “true” fan gets it, but to each their own I suppose.

Dragon’s Dogma: 18 Hour Report

After a few days of playing I have 18 hours in Dragon’s Dogma.  I’ve gone from being an ordinary Strider to Magic Archer.  This means I no longer use arrows, but rather have magic arrows shooting from my bow.  At first it just seems like a gimmick, but then new skills are unlocked that make it worthwhile.  Right now my favorite skill is being able to target multiple enemies at once, or use that same ability to target multiple parts of a large enemy and watch arrows rain down on them.  I believe I can also use a staff and have legitimate magic, but I have yet to try this.  My main pawn is now a Sorcerer, and is becoming a lot better at knowing when to help and when to attack.  I’m thinking I may eventually try to turn my main character into a Mystic Knight, which seems may be like a Magic Archer, just with swords and shields rather than daggers and bows (and staffs).

I continue to find myself in areas that are harder than I can handle.  This is nice but also a little annoying.  Currently, I think I’m in the midst of what may be a main story quest and can’t progress because the area I have to go to is above my level (I’m at level 28).  Sure, higher level pawns can be summoned, but if I’m stuck with nothing to do it is difficult to actually progress.  Still, this has given me the opportunity to do some exploring, and I like how coming upon large enemies results in a side mission to take them down, which then leads to some good XP boosting and sometimes I think it gives a money reward.

Traveling at night is very exhilarating, especially when going against the game’s tip to not travel through new areas at night.  It even makes commonly traveled areas feel new.  Though, I was traveling through a new area during the day, taking down some enemies, feeling pretty good, and out of nowhere a dragon swoops in, spots me, and burns me to crisp.  Needless to say, I don’t go there anymore, but one day will return (I’m thinking about when I’m at level 40).

Really, this is turning into one of the most fun games I’ve played this gen.  Sure, it has issues (I wish the pawn control/command options were more precise) but the map is so vast and surprisingly filled with stuff (but oddly not a lot of weapons and armor to loot) there is often a reason to come back.  I also like how weather such as wind makes it more difficult to walk into a strong gust or pushes you forward if it’s to your back.  Things like this show a different type of attention to detail than in games like Skyrim.  I like these small touches, they make it feel unique.  The Japanese flair also adds to this, as I’ve noted in my first impressions post.  I like all this, it’s different, and reminds me of why I like Demon’s Souls and Dark Souls so much, as none of these games feel like cheap clones of other games (even both Souls games have their own feel to them, and while I prefer Demon’s Souls, Dark Souls is growing on me and I appreciate it for it for being different).

So I still encourage people to play Dragon’s Dogma, because after the lackluster introduction sequence that overstays it welcome, the game opens up and does not disappoint.

Dragon’s Dogma: First Impressions Impress

It’s finally here, Dragon’s Dogma!  I’ve been waiting for this game ever since it was announced, and the preview clips kept peaking my interest.  Now that it’s here, I can honestly say it’s not what I expected, but then, what did I expect?  Honestly, I don’t know.  All I knew was there would be a good character creation menu, a focus on combat, and a pawn system.  Well, now that I have the game I’m glad to say all that is there and there’s a bit more to it.

I went straight to this game from Skyrim, which I have 93 hours on.  I was used to the level scaling and never really having a sense of fear.  What I should have done was put Dark Souls back in my PS3 the week before getting Dragon’s Dogma.  True, it isn’t nearly as hard as the Souls games, but it’s no push over.  Actually, I rather like the difficulty.  It encourages careful exploration, and makes it more fulfilling as you have to gradually explore the map rather than have free reign from the beginning (which you do, but it isn’t wise to go into harder areas, as you probably will die, or just end up running through it).

So far I’ve traveled through mines, forests, castle ruins (where a band of female bandits ruled by a man hating leader decided to have at it and take me down [only after a few tries and a bit of planning was I able to take down {with the help of my pawns} the bandits and their leader]), caves, and the main city of the game.  Yes, it all sounds dreadfully generic, but something about it has a charm of something familiar yet foreign at the same time.  I’ve only traveled at night once during a mission, but it was interesting to see different enemy types come out (and often with higher difficulty levels).

Now, the pawn system is interesting.  There are two ways to summon pawns, which seems to be ignored in many reviews.  The first is the most covered way, and that is to go to certain stones (I forget what they’re called, so I’ll refer to them as summoning stones) and touch it.  Once you do that your character is transported to a realm where you hire other player’s pawns.  These pawns don’t level up, so you’ll change pawns often throughout the course of the game.  Another way to hire pawns is simply by walking around the world and talking to them as you cross their path.  I was surprised to see pawns walking around the game world, but it does make it easy to pick them on the go (though, the summon stone worlds allow more freedom for what type of pawns you want and have a section for the highest ranked pawns).

Two pawns can be summoned, as one of the pawns will always be with you (and you get to create him/her).  My main pawn is a female mage, and somehow I need to figure out how to make her stop getting killed so much.

Creating the main character and pawn can be extensive, but I didn’t go too far into it.  My main character is a strider (bows and daggers, much like Legolas in The Lord of the Rings), and due to my current obsession with Battlestar Galactica, he is named Gaius Baltar.  Similarly, my pawn mage is a blonde female called Caprica.

Really, the worst part of the game was the introduction sequence.  It really went on longer than I would have liked, and it took about an hour or two to actually be able to go into the full world.  However, once that happened, the game really opened up, and without the game recording how long I’ve been playing (I hope I might just not have found it yet, as I like to know how long I play RPGs) I’d say I’m around seven or eight hours in.  I’m not sure if I’ve done more than one main story quest yet, but I think I’ve done around eight or ten side quests (the rest has been exploring and doing my own nonsense).

Is this game for you?

If you like exploration, having to think out if you can go somewhere or not, looting (which I’ve yet to really find a lot of in terms of weapons and armor), and action (which this game does well, and is a nice change from the more methodical approach in the Souls games) then there’s a good chance you’ll enjoy this game.  Sure, the graphics and character models can be lacking at times, there is pop in, and zooming in on objects can bring up some sub par textures, Dragon’s Dogma provides something that is often forgotten in adventure and RPGs, a fun challenge (the key word being fun, which it truly is).

Lost Planet 3, Resident Evil 6, Capcom oh Capcom

Well then, if anyone has been following Capcom’s announcements this week you probably know the big things going on.  Lost Planet is getting another go and Resident Evil 6 is getting a crazy, $1000 plus special edition.  I also think there was a Dragon’s Dogma hands on demo, but I’m not sure about it and know it is not available for download on the PSN or Xbox Live Marketplace.

Now, Lost Planet 3 seems interesting.  I’m a fan of the 2nd game, as it reminds me of Monster Hunter, but with big guns.  Sure, the friendly AI was horrible, but they did distract enemies enough that they at least served that purpose.  Yes, the story was horrible, but really, who played that game for the story?  It was made for the crazy action, awesome graphics, and fun online and offline co-op (I like to ignore the competitive multiplayer modes).  Not to mention, there was a lot to unlock and customize your character with.  Apparently, Lost Planet 3 is being handled by Spark Unlimited, who are fondly remembered for that nonsense game, Turning Point: Fall of Liberty.  Still, that was a few years ago and who knows how much of the development team is still there.  They also are able to work with Capcom or at least with the basis of 2 games already in the series, so there’s more help this time around.  I’m giving them a chance here, as I’m a big fan of crazy games like this.  It’ll be interesting to see how it is with more of a focus on story and single player, but I’m thinking they’ll be able to make it work.  The game’s supposed to come out next year, so there’s still a lot of time to speculate, and we have not even seem gameplay footage, so I’m not getting overly excited at this point.  Now, there’s one thing I’m not excited for, which is also brought to us by Capcom.

Resident Evil 6 is coming out later this year, and I’m sure by now you either know if you like the way the series is going of you don’t like it at all.  I fall into the second category, but will probably end up playing it at some point.  However, there is one thing that is just crazy, and not in a good way.  They are releasing a premium edition of the game, which will cost$1302, yes, that is how much it will cost.  Why so much?  Well, I don’t know.  It comes with a replica of Leon’s leather jacket, four tablet covers, and of course the game.  Now, tablet covers don’t cost $100 each, and the game is $60.  I doubt the jacket actually costs $500 or more, especially since it’ll be massed produced.  I can’t really blame Capcom, as people will buy it.  It’s just outrageous, but will be interesting to see how many people buy it (after all, I was amazed how many people were buying the Skyrim special edition with the dragon).

There’s also Dragon’s Dogma, coming out May 22 in the US, and is looking to be the best alternative to Monster Hunter on PS3 and 360.  Though, I’ll be discussing this more when/if a demo comes out, and as the release date gets closer (of course when the game comes as well, as this is looking to be a day one purchase).

If nothing else, I applaud Capcom for trying new things.  Sure, the Resident Evil 6 Special Edition is expensive, but it’ll serve well to stir up talk about the game and create a lot of buzz amongst gamers and non-gamers.  Lost Planet 3 shows that there are still companies that are willing to stick with a franchise when it falters.  Dragon’s Dogma is simply awesome looking, and seems to be great fun.  So there it is, the craziness that is Capcom (there’s also the new Devil May Cry, but I have not been following that).