Sunday, May 8, 2011

PC Gaming Journal - Resident Evil 5 (Part 1)

IMPORTANT NOTE: THIS IS NOT A REVIEW, IT IS A JOURNAL. THAT MEANS IT DOES CONTAIN SPOILERS! IF YOU HAVEN'T PLAYED THE GAME IN DISCUSSION AND WANT TO KNOW NOTHING ABOUT IT, DO NOT READ UNTIL YOU'VE PLAYED IT.

Each entry in this series will examine a game and its different aspects - such as design choices, looks and mechanics - and through them discuss the current trends and opinions in the gaming world and the directions it is (or could be) taking.

The first game I'll be going over in the series is Resident Evil 5.



At first it was just a random pick out of a few games I was playing at the time, but as I got through it I realized it was actually a very important game to cover. This game is a shining example of a design ethos which I believe is not good for gaming in general. Practically everything about it, from the interface to the controls to the story, is flawed. That's not to say that this specific game is all that bad - I even enjoyed it somewhat - but the way it seems to compile a lot of awful design decisions makes it ideal to explore in-depth.

Actually, there is one part of the game which is pretty fault-free, and that's the graphics. It's not breathtaking but it looks shiny and slick. But, for now, let's look at the game's story.

The game's protagonist is Chris Redfield, accompanied by Sheva Somethingorother as they attempt to chase down some terrorists who are using the zombifying virus to their own evil ends. 'Course, things go out of control fairly quickly and a far worse villain emerges from behind the curtains. The evil, black curtains.

The first fault? Yeah, it's the story. I think the air of childish silliness to the whole thing is typical of the series, and of many other games as well. I mean, just because it's violent and has some overly-sexual women doesn't make it adult. It's a cliche of several motifs put together all with the purpose of giving vague context to shooting things in their hot-spots. It's not interesting but it's also not so different from the majority of games out there.



You'd think that with Africa being the setting we'd get some subversive anti-imperialist comments or some issues with racism but nah... it's just black zombies. That's why I find it pretty funny that the game sparked such debate upon release. There are ingredients for something controversial but ultimately it's a very innocent and meaningless affair. And even if there is some underlying socially-relevant theme to it all, it's likely on the same intellectual level as an average Pokemon episode. My guess is that Africa was the chosen as the location for the game because of films such as Blood Diamond and the like which popularized the setting.

That's not a bad thing per se. Games don't need to have deeper meaning or themes and presently most of them indeed don't have any. I do wish, however, that games started utilizing the tools of their medium, even if it's just for escapism. The most important aspect of the story in survival horror is the atmosphere. Dead Space had a better plot than Resi 5, but the reason I truly remember it is for the fear it managed to emulate in me and the sense of barely surviving the horrors on the Ishimura. Resi 5's more childish approach to character removes a lot of the fear of the game, regardless of how gory it can get.

The problem is that the game tries to set atmosphere through its numerous cinematics rather than the actual gameplay. There's barely a 10-minute length of game that doesn't have a cut-scene interrupting it. Cut-scenes can be nice rewards for a hard level or something to set a mood - but here they're used to pretty much tell the story. That's exactly what I mean when I say they don't utilize the medium. The plot in a game doesn't have to be spelled out to the player. It can be part of the fabric of the world they play in; hints in the world itself. Done right (like in Portal 2, for example), and the story can be told from actually playing rather than watching a movie disguised as a game.

The atmosphere and story problems extend to the level design. That's not just how everything looks, but how the player can function in this world. In terms of random-creepy-things-lying-about, such as dead goats and human cadavers, the game has plenty. But there's something about the way the levels are formed which is just boring. This is hard to explain because Dead Space, for instance, isn't so different. Levels being constricted is necessary for survival horror. You can't have too much freedom to move. You need to feel suffocated. You need to want to get out of whatever place you're stuck in. So maybe the problem with Resi 5 is just the setting; maybe it's because it's sunlight most of the time and whenever something big with a chainsaw rushes towards me I can see where it's coming from. Maybe they just picked the wrong kind of backdrop.

But I'd like to delve deeper than that. I keep choosing Dead Space as an alternative because it's the most recent survival horror game I've played and I think it does the same things better. So, sure, both games have constricted level designs, but if you look at Dead Space, the game constantly puts you in front of something overwhelming. Just looking into space and the emptiness that threatens to overtake you, or a hint of something running in the corner of your eye. And in most cases you have to double back throughout a level... the place feels like a spaceship you need to navigate through. The story is told better through the level, and it is rich in atmosphere. Resident Evil 5 does have the required constricted level design, but where Dead Space comprises of a straight line which branches off into several interconnected straight lines, Resi 5 is just one line.



The game, probably because of engine limitations, doesn't let you see a lot, either. What you do see looks great, but your view is often blocked by crates, or trains, or buildings. When you get some breathing room, there's nothing to see... they don't use the space to make you fear or feel anything. The places are just places. So it's not just the setting that doesn't work for the genre. They could have worked fear into it. A zombie is just as frightening in the day as it is at night (just watch Walking Dead if you don't believe me). It seems that in terms of level design more focus was given to how shiny things looked and how smoothly it played than making the game evoke any actual emotions through its levels.


This journal entry will be continued in Part 2!

The opening 30 seconds of Dead Space 2

First goddamn minute of the game and there's...that's right! A QTE!
Brilliantly, the indicator that's supposed to indicate which key I'm supposed to press is helpfully off screen. So to pass this section I had to replay this part twice - and this is, again, in the first minute of playing - and manage to catch a glimpse of that indicator to know which key to press repeatedly to make Isaac not worthless. All this In the first. fucking. minute.

AAAARRRRGH!

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Replayability values

One of the reasons I started this blog was because I felt that no one was representing my view of things in the gaming world. I'd read all kinds of comments and opinions on gaming sites and forums , but I practically never felt that I agreed with any of them. This was even worse when it came to game reviews. I felt that game journalists often put too much focus on things which were not as important, and generally that people were missing the truly great things about PC gaming and gaming in general.
I felt that starting my own blog where I could be free to express my opinions and not be afraid of a flame war was the best choice.

Why am I mentioning this now? Because I've again stumbled across an avalanche of opinions which I find so misguided that it's impossible for me to ignore them.
What I'm referring to is people's complaints regarding Portal 2's lack of replayability options. You see, if a game doesn't have randomly generated levels or a competitive multiplayer mode it's not replayable enough, and therefore not as worth our money.

Now I know that games are a unique medium, but in this case I don't see why this is any different than a book or DVD. When you buy a DVD or a book, that's what you get - there is no re-read or re-watch value. You buy it to own it and be able to watch or read it as often as you like. Why are games different in this respect? Why does a game have to include things especially made to make us replay it? It's ridiculous.

The problem with this opinion of putting so much emphasis on replayability is that designers end up giving this more focus when they ought to be using their resources on improving the core game experience. Thus we get games such as the new Aliens vs. Predator, which had a mediocre plot in single player and even worse multiplayer. If they'd canned the multiplayer and put the extra time on crafting a worthy single player experience I'd probably give the game another go.

And that's my real point here - multiplayer games have never drawn me back as much as well-crafted single player games. I'm not saying that games don't need multiplayer - but not for the sake of this replayability nonsense. As a result of this hokum, Valve have recently stated that Portal 2 would probably be their last game which had an isolated single player experience. Hopefully, this doesn't mean they will never make single player games again, but that they'll always include some multiplayer element. In the worst case this could mean we'll start getting less than stellar games from Valve, as too much of their focus will be divided, or in the not-quite-as-bad case it will take them longer to release games. Either way, this stupid insistence on replayability in its most shallow form has brought us to this state.

I don't really believe that the masters of the medium, such as Valve, will be hurt by this. They know how to make good games and know what part of the community they should listen to. What worries me are the up and coming developers. People whose first game could be one great idea put together beautifully, or a bunch of good ideas strung together poorly just in fear of failing to please the ravenous crowds. A bad first game could also become their last.

It's a shame many people with short attention spans just don't get this. I have no problem replaying games because I appreciate them. I don't need crappy gimmicks such as a tack-on multiplayer or randomly generated (but virtually identical) levels. I've replayed The Longest Journey, Max Payne an the Monkey Island series, for example, more often than any game which offered "replayability value!" I've replayed Portal 2 about three times since its release. Why? Because these games are good. They're genuinely great experiences and that's their replayability value right there.

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Et 2, Portal?

Right. Let me make this clear.
Portal Two is the best video game ever made.

Obviously some won't agree with me. Some who like strategy better, or some who enjoy games which let them make their own adventure. Sure, they don't have to enjoy the game. But in terms of storytelling and style, this just doesn't get better. I'm officially convinced now that Valve are the masters of storytelling in games. They're the ones we'll look back at years from now when these virtual narratives are as valued as film and novels.

Valve aren't there yet. I think a lot can be done in terms of how stories are told through video games, but they have definitely gone further than anyone else. No one tells a story the same way they do. They embrace the strengths of the medium, and use them to tell the story rather than rely on methods used by film or texts. They understand this medium is different. Portal 2 is an absolutely brilliant piece of work.

I'll write more of my thoughts about this game later. I just wanted to put it out there. This is the best story ever told on our monitors.

Sunday, April 10, 2011

Video Killed the Blog Star

Well, it's finally happened. I've decided to stop making (or trying to make) video logs for this site. It was a hard decision for me to make because I really wanted to have a go at this - making interesting and fresh video journals of games. The idea still appeals to me.

But the reality is that I don't have the hardware or software to make videos in a quality I'm satisfied with. What happens is I spend a lot of time recording both myself and the games and by the time I get close to finishing I'm not satisfied with how it looks or sounds so I end up deleting the whole thing. That's what happened with my Bioshock review way back and this has happened now with the log about Resident Evil 5.

However, I've not given up on the idea of thinking about these games and gaming in a broader fashion. Instead of a video journal I will just upload larger articles on the blog from time to time discussing basically the same things I planned for the video, with some screen grabs to illustrate my points.

And, even though I'm giving up on video for the time being, I have something else in mind which will hopefully provide some variation to the site. I'm going to upload something like a podcast in which a friend and I will be discussing various issues connected to gaming. That way there is no burden of video editing and we still talk of intriguing gaming-related topics.

So despite having to give up on a good idea, there are still exciting things to come. Stay tuned!

Sunday, April 3, 2011

Crysis 2 DeCrysified

What do you say when you neutralize a crisis, anyway?

In any case, I've just finished Crysis 2 and I'm happy to say I really enjoyed it. I like it more than the first game, actually, despite the fact that this outing was not a PC exclusive.

I'll post more thoughts on the game later on, but just wanted to mention in a nutshell that it has a really intriguing story - rare nowadays for FPSs - and even though it is nowhere near problem-free it's an immensely enjoyable experience.
More on this later!

Thursday, March 31, 2011

Back Again (Again)

It seems that this happens a lot with this blog. I start writing with a bunch of ideas in mind, all excited, and then I just stop... and then I come back, saying that THIS time I will write without stopping. And then I stop. And then I come back.

Well, no more! Why? Because THIS time I will not stop!
... no, really.

Honestly, I don't know that I'll always be able to write - but I do know that I want to keep at it. As long as that's true, I'll continue to write here and do my best to provide you with my perspective on gaming.

Importantly, I've also finally finished my degree so I really do have more time to invest in this journal. The first thing I want to do is continue with the videos I started a while back and just gave up on for lack of time. I made one video review of Battlefield Bad Company 2 and decided that I want my videos to be less actual reviews and more just 'views' - that is, looking at gaming in general through the games. This is what I would like to get to now, started with Resident Evil 5. True, it's a pretty old game by now but I want to examine it for its design - I think it is a good example of a game that is geared towards 'console gaming'. I'll explain what I mean by this in the actual video post. But, yeah, I'm back again.