Review: The Conduit (Wii)

"Dear God, how many levels are left?"




...is what I kept asking myself after about the first level of the game. This will be a brief review. I didn't like the game. I will admit I had very high expectations for the game based on what I saw and heard up to its release. I thought it could be a great game, or at least a good one. It's neither. I wouldn't even say it's a mediocre game. It's a bad game. A very bad game. Not the worst, but bad.

Quick Facts:

Platform: Wii
Genre: First Person Shooter (FPS)
Developer: High Voltage Software
Publisher: Sega
Release Date: June 23, 2009 (US)
Rating: T


I will give a little credit to the developers for at least trying to bring a "real" FPS to the Wii. The idea is good. The execution is just terrible. The only quality that gives this game a little redemption is the fully customizable controls and HUD, and just the sheer number of game options. More games should take a lesson from the Conduit in that department. In every other department though, the Conduit fails.

As I mentioned above, the amount of customization you have for your gameplay is unlike anything I've ever seen on a console shooter before. From mapping the controls to however you like them, to changing how you move and the very feel of the game, to placing items like your health bar and ammo count anywhere on the screen you like them, there were some really cool features they introduced. I will give credit where it is due for these things.

The rest of the game does not inspire happy feelings though. The graphics are sub-par even for the Wii, and I believe we were promised somewhere that the Conduit would have "the best graphics ever on the Wii" or something like that. The sound is below average and repetitive (even with Hercules). The story is uninteresting and incredibly cliche. From what I've heard, the ending is just as bad and obviously leaves it open for a sequel (God forbid). There aren't really even cutscenes (there may have been one at the end, I dont know, I'll admit I did not have the heart to finish the game. I got about 75% of the way through and finally gave up). The characters are bland and completely unexplored in the least by the "plot" of the game (if you can call it that). While the customization for the controls was good, even with all the options I could not find a setting where I really felt comfortable with the gameplay. The motion controls for the melee and grenade throwing really screw you up if you try to do them while aiming precisely (I know you can change those to other buttons, but even if you do, something still has to be assigned to the motion controls). The "puzzles" the game had to offer were insultingly simple and consist of rotating three circles to all match each other. Every time. Seriously.

In my experience, the multiplayer was pretty bad as well. It lagged a lot, and even just getting into a FFA deathmatch takes a five minute period to gather players- there's actually a timer that counts down from five minutes! That, coupled with the time it takes to get onto the Nintendo Wi-Fi connection, is just too long. I like to be able to hop into an online game pretty quickly if I want to, I dont want to wait seven minutes to get into a game that may last three or four minutes. Maybe part of that is Nintendo's fault and not High Voltage's (the developers of the game), but either way the Conduit is not going to be gaining any points for it.

All in all, do not buy this game. Maybe if you see it for $10 someday in a bargain bin it might be worth it, but there are tons of great shooters on other consoles. Even if you only own a Wii (which, if you like FPS's is unlikely), still do not buy this game. Go with the Metroid Prime Trilogy. I've heard High Voltage say they'd like to make a sequel. All I can say is that if they do, there is no way I would even consider buying it until after it comes out and I have read a lot of reviews. And they would all have to be really, really good reviews.

In Summary:

Pros: control/gameplay customization options.

Cons: graphics, sound, some gameplay elements, story, characters, voice acting (sorry Kevin Sorbo, I love all your other stuff though!), multiplayer, singleplayer, puzzles, motion controls... just about everything else.


FINAL SCORE: 2 out of 5.





Note: All reviews on this site are solely the subjective opinion of the author. If you disagree with my review please feel free to post in a polite manner and state your opinion. I welcome respectful discussion on my blog and would love to get feedback on my review and also read yours. Thanks!

The Greatest Games of the Decade: The Year 2000

We start our countdown with the first year of this decade: 2000. Unfortunately, because this was so long ago (I was only 13 at the time) I dont have a great memory of which games came out this year. But upon thinking back (and checking older websites) there are a few games that stand out from this year. But first, let me award my Game of the Year for 2000:




Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn

Platform: PC
Genre: RPG
Developer: Bioware
Publisher: Black Isle Studios, Interplay

This game is actually my favorite game of all time, so it's not very surprising that it is also my favorite game that came out of the year 2000. The game is hard to explain to someone who's never played/heard of it (which is most of my friends), but it is the most expansive single player game I have ever played. It is also the best single player experience I have ever had. The way your decisions affect other characters and the world around you are way ahead of their time. Much newer games like Mass Effect and Fallout 3 (both of which I also love) are still introducing that to players (and BG2 was 9 years ago). The story is great, all the dialogue is excellent, and the characters that travel around with you (if you dont screw up your relationship with them) are hands down the best in any game I've ever played. They just have so much personality. The game world, while not technically an "open-world", is huge, well crafted, and a lot of fun to explore. There's so many things to do in this game in just one play-through, let alone the many play-throughs that it deserves. The graphics were good for its time, but you can imagine that 9 years later it's not that much to look at, but that was never the point of this game. If you like RPGs and are ever looking for something great to play on your computer, check this game out. Also, its expansion pack, The Throne of Bhaal, is an excellent addition and wraps the story up nicely. I think you can get both the game and the expansion for pretty cheap on Amazon now.


Honorable Mentions:

The Sims (PC)- This game was a lot of fun and started a whole chain of games that are still popular on the PC (The Sims 3 came out pretty recently and was met with great sales and good reviews). This game broke the chain of controlling a whole city and focused in on just one person or a few people, with lots of customization for both them and where they live.

Perfect Dark (N64)- While this game owes a lot to Goldeneye (N64) for its base, this game took everything Goldeneye did great and ran with it. The 4 player split-screen was great for its time, and this game featured both co-operative play and counter-operative play (something most games still dont offer). The weapons were crazy, the levels were good, and so was the story. Also, you could add bots to play against in this game, a nice feature which many games still lack. I put many hours into the killing of bots in deathmatch with my friends, and I didn't even own an N64. (Turtle sim was my favorite to kill.)


So that's all I have for the year 2000. If there are any glaring omissions (I'm sure there are many), or if you agree/disagree with my list, please feel free to comment. Like I said, it's hard for me to remember that far back, and I didn't play as many games then as I do now. Hope you enjoyed the first installment of the Greatest Games of the Decade, check back next week for the next installment: the year 2001!

The Greatest Games of the Decade

SInce the end of this decade is quickly approaching, I have decided that between now and December I am going to count down my personal "Greatest Games of the Decade". I'll start with the year 2000, and from there go every year from 2000-2009. I will give out my award for that year's greatest game (in my opinion of course), and I'll also give some runner-ups/honorable mentions. For some years, I might even post my "Most Disappointing Game of the Year". Here are a few disclaimers:

-All of this is my opinion and thus subjective. You will obviously not agree with me for many of these, and that is fine. I welcome comments and feedback on my blog. Dont agree with my game of the year? Let me know. Did I leave some great games from that year out? Let me know! Feel free to list your game of the year for that year too.

- Along with what I just said, because I have not played every game ever created in the last 10 years, there are some great games which will undoubtedly get left off my list. If I have not played a game extensively, I do not feel adequate to rate it, and thus it will not appear on this list, so please keep that in mind. There are some great games I haven't played that I still know are great/influential games, so some of those may get honorable mentions, but if I have not extensively played a game I honestly cannot say it was my favorite game of the year. Please keep this in mind.

Anyway, hopefully this will be fun and insightful, and please feel free to post comments once the list gets started. Thanks!

COMING SOON: the year 2000!

Dead Rising

I played Dead Rising for the first time in a very long time today, and I just have to say: this game may have been great when it first came out in 2006, but it hasn't aged very well.

Review: Shadow Complex (Xbox 360)

"Metroidvania"



Shadow Complex is a download-only game available for Xbox 360 users via the Xbox Live Arcade. The game is a 2D action/platforming game that somewhat resembles old school classics like the Metroid and Castlevania series (hence the nickname some people are using "Metroidvania"). Available for only $15 (1200 Microsoft Points), the game offers good play time and a lot to do over the course of the game. The left analog stick moves your character while the right one aims where you are shooting/looking, so unlike older platformers of the genre you can actually move and shoot in two different directions.

The game is fairly fun, the gameplay works well and you unlock better weapons and upgrades as the game goes on which helped to keep me interested while I was playing (more on that a little later). The whole game takes place in a large, secret underground complex, and as you get more powerful and get new gadgets you unlock new areas you can explore. The platforming part is fun, and there are secrets all over the map (much like Batman: AA) that you can take the time to try to find, which adds some extra challenge and playability to the game. While you are playing the game (not the cut-scenes), the graphics are good and the sound is alright.

This game has its fair share of problems too. The story is garbage. The intro level is a waste, it has only a very minor connection to the actual game. The way the main plot starts is lame. The ending scene and the plot twist are terrible and stupid (yes, not just one or the other, but both terrible and stupid). While the level design as far as platforming and secrets go is good, the levels/areas get very repetitive and everywhere just starts to look the same. Navigating the complex can be hard and frustrating, even with the help of the map. They make you retrace your steps a lot near the end of the game to find things you couldn't get to before, and that part is even more frustrating and boring.

There are some other gripes too, besides the awful story and level/world presentation. The cut-scene graphics didn't look very good to me. Something was just off about the people and the way they spoke. There are several boss fights in the game, and only one or two of them stand out as being challenging or interesting at all. Most boss fights just have you lobbing grenades at the boss until his health meter is gone. Even the final boss fight was incredibly easy (although the idea was interesting). Sometimes I'd kill all the enemies in a room, and come back to it two minutes later (usually back-tracking to try to figure out where the freak to go) and all the enemies would be respawned in their exact original locations, like nothing had happened. That really helps to take the realism out of a game. The enemy AI was also lacking; among other things enemies would often just keep shooting at you from the same place even if you were in cover and they obviously couldn't hit you, not thinking to move or try anything else.

This game got a lot of hype at E3 and other places, and while it's not a bad game, it definitely didn't live up to it for me.

In Summary:

Pros: gameplay, good value (only $15), decent platforming/action, cool items, lots of secrets to collect.

Cons: bad story/characters/cut-scenes, weak boss fights, bad enemy AI/respawn, repetitive/frustrating level design (at times).


FINAL SCORE: 3 out of 5.





Note: All reviews on this site are solely the subjective opinion of the author. While I try to look at media objectively, this is pretty much impossible (everyone has bias whether they admit it or not), so if you disagree with my review please feel free to post in a polite manner and state your opinion. I welcome respectful discussion on my blog and would love to get feedback on my review and also read yours. Thanks!

Review: Batman: Arkham Asylum (Xbox 360)

Be the Bat


"Wow." That was all I had to say as I played through this game. Everything about this game meshed together perfectly: the action, the graphics, the characters, the voice acting, the environment, the gameplay, cut scenes... everything. It's no secret, I loved this game. I was skeptical at first, but after seeing the great scores on Metacritic I decided to go ahead and buy it, and I am not sorry. This is easily the best game of 2009 to this point. To drive home this point, I'll quote Todd Howard, the executive producer at Bethesda (of games such as Oblivion and Fallout 3) who, when referring to the game on the official Bethesda Blog said "Batman: AA. Best game ever?" The man knows good games, so yes, it's that good.

Enough gushing though. The game is very good, and like I said before doesn't have any big weaknesses. And what makes this game so great is not that just all the individual parts (like graphics, story, environment, etc.) of it are so good, but that they all are placed together perfectly. What the game aims to do it does perfectly, and it doesn't try to do too much where it would strecth itself thin. The game isn't incredibly long, but that is a good thing, as I would rather have a medium length game that is an amazing experience than have a game that starts to drag on too long and gets boring near the end just so the developers could say their game is 20+ hours long. There are things to do after you beat story mode too- there are lots of challenges you can do to test and perfect your skills, and all over the map there are collectables that unlock things you may have missed during story mode. I almost never go back through a game just to collect everything, but this is one of the rare cases where I did. Even that part was thoroughly enjoyable.

The only slight weakness of this game that comes to mind is the melee combat system. The "Freeflow" combat system allows you four different options to do during any combat: attack, stun, counter, and dodge (the X, B, Y, and A buttons on a 360 controller respectively). The more hits you get on different enemies in a row the higher your combo counter goes (x2, x3, x4, etc.) and once you reach a certain number you can unleash some of Batman's special attacks. This in theory sounds great, but there were lots of times where I would reach a high enough multiplier, only to press the buttons for a special attack and have nothing happen. This was really the only part of the game that frustrated me, and it is a minor gripe.

As stated before, the graphics and sound were amazing. The graphics are honestly some of the best I've ever seen on a 360 (or of any HD game). Even my wife, who watches me play video games a lot and doesn't usually stop and notice anything about what I'm doing said at one point "Wow, those graphics are amazing." The sound was top notch too, especcially the voice acting. Most of the voice actors were the same ones from the old Batman Animated Series (which I used to watch a lot as a kid), so it immedietly felt natural hearing them do the characters. Heath Ledger might be the best actor to ever play Joker, but Mark Hamill will (at least for me) always be the voice of any cartoon/CG Joker.

In Summary:

Pros: graphics, sound, story, gameplay... pretty much everything.

Cons: melee combat system can be annoying at times, sometimes the camera can get in the way a little bit.


FINAL SCORE: 5 out of 5.




Note: All reviews on this site are solely the subjective opinion of the author. While I try to look at media objectively, this is pretty much impossible (everyone has bias whether they admit it or not), so if you disagree with my review please feel free to post in a polite manner and state your opinion. I welcome respectful discussion on my blog and would love to get feedback on my review and also read yours. Thanks!

Review: Call of Duty: World at War (Xbox 360)

I'll kick of my first review ever by reviewing a game I've been playing a lot lately- Call of Duty: World at War. You'll notice that my reviews usually will be pretty short; I'll basically just say what I feel about the game and then give it my score. WaW (World at War) is a good shooter with the usual solid and responsive controls and the strategic, realistic (for a game) feel that has become the trademark of the Call of Duty series. It doesn't propel the series to a whole new level and make huge strides in gameplay, but it takes the solid CoD gameplay and adds a few things, and does a nice job where it tries. The new Nazi Zombies mode is amazing, playing that online with friends is definitely the best experience that came out of the game to me. The online match-making is fine, it follows the same formula as previous CoD games, and adds a few new things like dogs and tanks. The dogs are a nice touch, but I absolutely hate the tanks online. I feel like they're overpowered, and if a team manages to get both tanks on a map, forget it. The ability to do the campaign co-op (something I wish Modern Warfare 2 was going to include) is also a great thing that was missing from most of the previous games. The campaign itself was good, the levels were well-designed and challenging. It got a little long and repetitive in some parts, but as a whole it was a decent experience.

So while the game overall is good (maybe even great if you think about Nazi Zombies), what keeps it from being excellent (5-stars) is the fact that whether it's fair to this game or not, it's always going to be compared to Call of Duty 4. Yes, this game adds some stuff, which is nice, but it doesn't do anything ground-breaking enough to earn it that fifth star. Nazi-Zombies is somewhat ground-breaking and I have had a ton of fun with that, but in the end it is basically a mini-game that you cant even unlock until you beat the story (or buy the map packs), and when the game shipped it only included one map for that mode (though now there are 2 more if you buy both map packs for an extra $20). In fact, even though I mentioned mostly good things above, there were some things that weren't as good as CoD 4. The story, while decent, didn't evoke the same feelings (in a good way) as CoD 4, and especially the ending (even though the two endings are fairly similar). The whole story itself and the characters all seemed kind of bland (yes, even the one Jack Bauer voiced). They were given no back-stories, and everything about them was largely forgettable. I cant even remember their names now, and I beat the game under a week ago. While a shooter with gameplay this solid would usually be forgiven for that, (like I said before) this game will always be compared to CoD4, whether or not it's fair to this game. Also, I already mentioned that I didn't like the tanks in multiplayer, and the guns in the game as a whole weren't as good as CoD4's. Maybe they're supposed to be that way since they are all WWII guns while CoD4 is modern (technology has grown a lot in the last 60 years), but even so I felt like most of the guns in the game were throw-aways while there were maybe 3 or 4 that I actually liked using and felt effective with.

As for the graphics and sound, they were both great. No complaints there.

In Summary:

Pros: NAZI ZOMBIES!!!, some new add-ons to matchmaking, gameplay/controls, graphics, audio.

Cons: weak story/characters, tanks in matchmaking, many of the guns in the game are worthless.


FINAL SCORE: 4 out of 5.




Note: All reviews on this site are solely the subjective opinion of the author. While I try to look at media objectively, this is pretty much impossible (everyone has bias whether they admit it or not), so if you disagree with my review please feel free to post in a polite manner and state your opinion. I welcome respectful discussion on my blog and would love to get feedback on my review and also read yours. Thanks!