Temporary Hiatus

I am dying.

Too... much... work to do.

Am still playing some games for breaks, just no time to sit my butt down to write stuff. Be right back after this.

OBJECTION!

I just got to play (and finish!) Ace Attorney: Phoenix Wright - Dual Destinies, thanks to a generous friend and his 3DS. Whooooooooooo~

For the clueless, you play as a lawyer in the Ace Attorney series, and you are to defend your clients in court. No, you don't have to memorise laws and statutes and treaties and nonsense and... *shudder*

No, the game's pretty much a puzzle game, played in the styles of a visual novel. You go around asking people questions and gathering evidences, all in order to unravel the mysteries behind each case. It's a really fun process too, especially when you know what's going to happen before the game guides you there. I feel like a professional investigator or detective everytime that happens. Heh.

Like its predecessors, Dual Destinies has a main storyline and accompanying cases which reveal bits and pieces of the story, until you reach the final case that gives you closure.

New mechanics and animated cutscenes are introduced. Crime scenes are now in a three-dimensional layout, so camera rotations are involved when investigating the scene. Characters' animations are now more... animated. These are not the things that make the Ace Attorney series great.

If you are seated down on a lazy Saturday afternoon with naught to do, and you feel like reading a book, play this game. The stories you find in this series are all fairly simple, with twists or turns you might, or might not expect in tales. Yet, the pacing of the game paired with the dialogues between the characters create this somewhat immersive story, which, frankly speaking, is a rare sight in the gaming scene nowadays. Not even AAA RPG titles deliver on that anymore! (Final Fantasy, I'm looking at you).

Down-to-earth and simple, without even attempting to be pretentious. Well, whacky maybe.

As you progress through the game, the missing links between events are filled in with evidences and it is up to you to point them out. It really is a puzzle game. Think jigsaw puzzle.

You start off the case with your client being accused, and as you defend him/her, the whole story behind how the victim was murdered, the motive behind the murder and the relationships between characters get clearer with each passing moment. You are basically reading a book, or better, you are an active participant in the book.

*sigh* I really love the series and it's silly to go on talking so highly of it. Go and buy it. I think it is a game which most people, if not everyone, will enjoy.

Now, on a personal note, where is my Turnabout Theme?! I love the sound of the new theme but I miss the old one too! GAH!

P.S: I find it tedious to write in a manner as though I am doing an official review of the game, which passed off as pretentious and unnecessary to me. I will just write what I feel like writing from now on. Hue.

GTA = Dog

The highlight of GTA V is the dog, Chop. That's it. Game over. Thanks for visiting the site.

Okay. *cough* I finally finished GTA V - only the storyline, too much other stuff to do. Does it live up to the hype? Before I begin, you need to know that I have not played GTA IV yet. I am making the jump from San Andreas, so, yep.

So, what's GTA V about? According to Rockstar:

"Los Santos: a sprawling sun-soaked metropolis full of self-help gurus, starlets and fading celebrities, once the envy of the Western world, now struggling to stay afloat in an era of economic uncertainty and cheap reality TV.

Amidst the turmoil, three very different criminals plot their own chances of survival and success: Franklin, a street hustler looking for real opportunities and serious money; Michael, a professional ex-con whose retirement is a lot less rosy than he hoped it would be; and Trevor, a violent maniac driven by the chance of a cheap high and the next big score. Running out of options, the crew risks everything in a series of daring and dangerous heists that could set them up for life."

Game plays similarly to earlier GTA games. You control your character in an open-world, armed with weapons to kill whatever that's in your path. You can hijack cars to get around or call for a cab. Do whatever, y'know?

What's so great about GTA V? Details.

You're driving down the street, Dre's playing on the radio and all's good. *BAM* A robbery takes place in your vicinity. What do you do? My personal preference is to run that sucker over with my car. You got the item that was stolen. What do you do? Return it, or keep it to yourself? I like to be the nice guy so, I return things usually. 10% of what was stolen as a reward? Ehh, makes you feel like keeping the stash, right? *BAM* Someone I once helped was actually filthy rich and gives me $100,000 worth of shares to his company.

YOU THINK YOU PLAYING THE GAME, BUT THE GAME'S PLAYING YOU. MWUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

To a certain extent, GTA V feels like the world is somewhat alive. Hey Microsoft, Rockstar's doing it without the "power of the cloud". Take down some notes, maybe?

Well, after a few more robberies, that experience starts to feel dull. What next? Sports. Activities for you to do. You want yoga? You got yoga. Parachute down a construction crane? You got it. Race around on speedboats? Checked. Pimp your ride then race round the city? We got you covered. TRIATHLONS EVEN? No problem.

San Andreas is filled with so much to do, that if you are beginning to feel bored, there's always something there to divert your attention to. "But all these things take up my time and money, I want something I can do on the side..." *BAM* Stock market. Yeah, no joke. Stock market. There are missions in the game which allows you to manipulate the market, insider trading shit going on. Have some free time? Buy properties and maintain them for regular cash inflow! 

The physics of the game is still nowhere close to being real, but it's pretty good. Cars no longer feel like cheap plastic toys, for starters. Environment exploits are harder to do because your characters ragdoll easily, for example - spamming jump before you are even close to what you want to jump over. In a way, it keeps people on their toes and you can't mash buttons for lulz.

Combat? Oddly enough, there's an auto-aim function for the game. A lot of elitists will claim that this is dumb and for noobs, but given the amount of enemies you have to fight off from time to time, the stupefyingly small aiming reticle you are given and how easy it is to be killed, I do feel it's slightly justified. To prevent easy deaths, you're supposed to take cover and shoot when the time is right. So, no more Rambo bullshit.

Right, as I mentioned earlier, there are three main characters. You are allowed to swap between them, when the game allows you to. Each character is unique, with some having strengths and weaknesses in their parameters/stat, but those can be remedied by grinding in the game (running for stamina, sports for strength and etc.). So, what's the big deal? Specials. 

What's a special? It's like a skill that is unique to that character, which really helps in giving that "this guy's special for this role" when the game has you pulling off heists. Franklin has Speedbreaker from NFS: Most Wanted - he can enter a state where time slows down while he's driving, to improve his control of the car. Michael is also able to slow down time, but only when he's on-foot, which is useful for combat (rocket to your face). Trevor? SInce he's a maniac, let's make him somewhat-invincible when he activates his special. So, if you're running away from the cops, Franklin makes things easier. Shooting tyres from afar? Michael is good for that. Head-on assault against mobs? Trevor, brah.

So, "what's so great about the game, when everything seems the same?", as some would argue. Well, play it, and discover it for yourself.

Personal thoughts - I really enjoyed the story and the character switching mechanics does make it feel like I'm playing a movie, sort of, although I do feel like Rockstar had some problems ending it (rather sloppy?). The parodies mocking American culture were really hilarious, so, A++ to that. I loved the graphics. Some textures looked really beautiful, and the skybox was awesome, though, the ground (grass, dirt, etc) still suffers from ugliness. Maybe that's why they have beautiful horizons? Heh.

It does feel like you can sort of "live a life" in-game. You got a dog, and you can take it for walks. It pounces anyone you aim at, and kills them (YES!). You can modify your car and then take it out for a long ride through the countryside for some R&R. I definitely enjoyed getting to higher altitudes with a plane, only to jump out and crash it as I parachuted down like a madman. 

Was the game fun? Yes. Was there a lot of details? Yes. Was it immersive for me? Yes.

I don't see why anyone would say the game is the same even, when you do have new stuff like a dog and specials. Are you expecting some sort of overhaul, when that would take forever because they'd have to reprogram everything they have? Or, are you expecting it to just take on a new genre, which is really stupid. Imagine Devil May Cry transformed into an FPS. Shit would be different, and it'd disappoint people who look forward to the game's contribution to the genre.

Geez. Anyway, I wouldn't say it deserves a 10/10 (IGN pls). Complaints about horrible frame drops (not on my PS3, suck it Xbox users) and disappearing cars from garages were abound. The app to train Chop wasn't available for Android phone users. You can see that Rockstar didn't really cover all grounds by release. I couldn't even switch sides when shooting. The ending was a little weird for me too, so, yeah.

Personal rating? Maybe, what, 9/10? It is really good afterall, just some silly things which annoyed me. So, go get it. Now.

My Game of the Year is The Last of Us. kbai.

A Fancy Term For Gravedigging

Who is that girl I see? Staring straight, back at me. When will my reflection show who I am inside?

Answer: Lara Croft, and it will show near the end of the game.

Yes, I played me some Tomb Raider recently. Finished it even. Hickididooda. I have no idea what I just uttered but it's super late and I'm watching League of Legends World Series and I'm on a caffeine high and it's cold so bear with me. 

Square-Enix (SE) pushed out an all new Tomb Raider earlier this year, which gives players a glimpse of what is perhaps Lara's first adventure. Lara sets out to find the ancient kingdom of Yamatai, which was ruled by the Sun Queen, Himiko. Legend has it that Himiko possessed supernatural powers, powers which gave her control over the weather. Whether or not it is a myth, Lara will have to find out as she explores the kingdom of Yamatai while fighting a cult worshipping the Sun Queen.

I have to say, the game is actually fun to play. Although the story itself can be pretty short and can be finished within a day, the side activities available for players to do just add to the hours. There are plenty of relics, artifacts and documents for you to find, and they are all spaced out nicely so you are in fact exploring the environment as you find them. What smoothed out the process of hunting down these items is the Survival Instinct ability, where the screen grays out and interactive elements become highlighted. This means that the thrill of finding collectibles is always there. I found myself constantly roaming and activating Survival Instinct to locate the next collectible, and the time I spend on this feels worthwhile every time I find something new.

As you explore the island, you will inevitably gain experience and get salvaged parts, or loot, from crates or enemies. Getting enough experience levels you up and grants you a point to upgrade a skill, and salvaged parts will help in upgrading weapons. I guess it would make sense that the more experience you have, the more skills you will have, BUT how is it possible that I upgrade my gun's CLIP SIZE near a campfire? What, the campfire is actually burning with hell's flames and the temperature is hot enough for me to temper my equipment? I'm dumbstruck here.

The game's combat system is fairly basic. The game is a 3rd-person action game, and it plays almost like Uncharted. What is different is that in Tomb Raider, the aiming feels less smooth transitioning from X axis to Y axis, the recoil from firing your weapon is stronger and melee strikes are less spammable, since it opens you up to enemy fire and strikes if you time and position yourself badly. Maybe the repercussions are less significant in easier difficulties, but it sure messed me up horribly when I played badly. Also, there's a huge emphasis on one of the game's key theme for surviving in combat - "keep moving". If you stay too long in one spot, even if you are behind cover, enemies will either flank you or smoke you out with molotovs. I like how they implicitly emphasise this in combat. Very... sneaky. *heh*

Now, the game attempts to utilise Quick Time Events for certain scenes. An example I'd like to use here is combat because boy oh boy, did the first combat QTE make me mad. It seems that the majorly used QTE button for combat is, on the PS3, the Triangle button. That button also functions as your melee attack. Is this Square-Enix trying to be consistent or lazy? I don't know. What I do know is, the timing for the combat QTE felt impossible for me the first time I encountered it, then I found out it was always Triangle. After that, it just became a routine. So, maybe this game doesn't really have QTEs, instead they have timed prompts. 

Much like the other games Square-Enix develops, Tomb Raider offers stunning visuals. Check them out.

If anything, I think Square-Enix made a very nice skybox for the game. Liking the sun lots. Kudos to them.

The game itself is fun to play, however, be prepared for frame drops. Heck, there were times late in the game where I had frame losses. I'm not even sure if that's a thing, but what happened was the game would skip a little. I died a few times because of this. Here's to hoping next-gen doesn't have this happening.

Now, overall, Tomb Raider holds up pretty well. Visuals? Checked. Combat? Not too bad. Theming? Exploration, ruins and relics are ready. So, why didn't it sell well?

I don't know.

To be honest, I've not really been a fan of Tomb Raider, as in I've never really played the earlier games. I remember my brother playing it, but I never did touch it. So, to look into this whole deal, I did some Googling.

Hmm, it seems that most reviewers are saying it's bad because of its storyline. The characters never got much exposition? Lara is too whiney? Everything seems to be vague?

Ladies and gentlemen, this is why I hate "official reviews". They don't actually PLAY, play the game. They dabble in it, taste it, and decide what to write from there as they put on airs in their written work. 

Let's assume you are completely clueless as to what Tomb Raider is actually about, like what these snobbish reviewers are saying. The game is called Tomb Raider. Tomb. Raider. Hm, I guess this game has something to do with tombs, and raiding them... I mean, I don't know. I'm a stupid incompetent person who can't infer things from available facts.

Moving on, the story slowly exposes that Grim and Roth used to work with Lara's father. Hm, I wonder what's his job about. Ruins? He studies weird things, like ancient, crazy ritualistic stuff? Lara's doing archaeology? Gee, I wonder what is this Lara girl doing. Hm. 

What's this? This is Lara's first expedition? She has never been exposed to crazy shit like this before? You don't say? Gosh, how can a girl who has never faced life-threatening situations be so whiney when shit goes down?

Honest. I swear. These people who write these reviews in famous sites feel like pencil pushers who were swallowed by the sudden rise in authority when  forced to write something at the eleventh hour.

Okay. Back to business. I do feel that the game itself is actually something that's worth anyone's time, however, the whole feeling of exploration and adventure gets hindered whenever the frames drop, which really breaks the immersion. While the story may be rather short, the side activities which you can do can be really engaging, especially the hunt for documents, as they give some fillers on the history of Yamatai and the Sun Queen, not to mention EXP. I really enjoyed those bits of the game.

Some of the bits which are enjoyable on a personal level? Bow and arrow. B- no shush... Bow and arrow. Not enough? Flaming arrows. Not convinced? Explosive arrows. ... Yeaahh.... So good. What's even better than that? Gunning down samurais. What? Yes. Samurais wielding katanas running directly at you while you aim your shotgun at them. Delectable.

Heh. Anyway, I give this game an 8/10. The fact that it stutters so much and has a rather 'sticky' aiming when it shooting is such an integral part of the game are bad factors. I did enjoy the game however, and would suggest you to pick it up if you can get it at a discounted price.

Eyyyyyyyyyyyyy have fun

Not Sharing This.

I just finished inFamous 2, and damn, Sucker Punch's good. Here's to hoping Second Son is awesome as well.

inFamous 1 and 2 tell the story of Cole MacGrath, a bike messenger who turned into a superhuman, AKA a Conduit. Your ability? Electrokinesis. You can absorb the energy from lightning strikes. Shit. You can strike people with lightning. How cool is this shit?

The series is pretty great. I enjoyed the fact that I can shoot small lightning bolts out of my hands and grind across charged cables like I'm surfing. MacGrath is an urban explorer, so you get to parkour around your environment like a baws. Jumping off a high building? Shit, charge up your fists and slam the floor for a shockwave. People shooting at you? Set up an electric shield. Absorb electricity out of light poles and charge them up again for more power to absorb. Destroy the city with your lightning grenades. Do whatever you like, just don't fall into the water like a punk and get shorted out (you are electricity itself!).

What made this game more than a simple "super-powered-character-destroys-shit", for me, are the choices found in the game. You either let loose and wreck everything thus becoming infamous, or you make the morally right choices and control your powers to become a hero. What's also nice is that depending on your alignment to good or evil, your powers grow differently and your character will look different too.

To be honest though, I felt that the choices in the first inFamous were harder to choose from. Save your girlfriend or let six doctors die, especially during a plague? Shit. Doing things for the greater good never made me more ambivalent.

In fact, the character design in inFamous 2 feels terrible. I liked Cole's jacket from the first game, what happened to it? Also, the voice actor for Cole for the second game is ASS. That bit pained me for almost throughout the playthrough. Do you know how terrible that feels?

Why am I writing about a game that's so old, people should not even care about whatever's being written about it now because there are tons of shit out there written about it? Because of complaints I've seen.

There are plotholes? Frankly, no, and I will fight you over this (not physically of course, I'll lose).

Inconsistency with characters in inFamous 2? I want you to imagine this. You almost died after suffering immense pain for a prolonged period. You survived, but you became what you think is an abomination. Dealing with that, you finally found the will to live and to help people with the powers you get from being a monster, even though people were afraid of you and hated you. At the end of the road, you discover that to make the right choice, you have to give up everything and to die, despite your struggles and your newfound will to live. TELL ME HOW ARE YOU NOT AFRAID TO DIE AND THAT WOULD FILL YOU WITH HESITATION. Some people. Too detached. Srs.

Sucker Punch really did a good job with this, and my advice to you as a gamer is - if you have a Playstation 3 and you have not played this, go get it. It is something that is worth your time. It was certainly worth my time. I'm willing to give it an 8.5 out of 10, shit, it's that fun to play.

Rant - Some people just want to act like a White Knight

I was derping around and read this article by John Teti.

Holy shit, seriously, what's up with this guy? 

Keiji Inafune, the guy who poured out his all for Megaman, who had problems getting another game out due to Capcom's internal shenanigans, finally decides to go out and say "okay my baby's getting another run, I'm Phoenix Down-ing this shit".

No. According to John, Keiji's disrespecting Megaman and Beck. From what I understand, John claims that Keiji is utilising Megaman so much that Beck is not Beck at all, it's pretty much Megaman and that's disrespectful.

What is wrong with you? Imagine this scenario. Keiji had a baby idea, he named it Megaman. Capcom made it impossible for him to show off his idea, so now he has to find some way to "get in touch" with his baby. What does he do? He creates a "sibling" from the idea and calls it Beck.

Beck's the younger brother here, and there will always be things he does which is reminiscent to Megaman. Does this mean Keiji is going to disrespect Beck and let Megaman be that brother who overshadows the younger sibling? Look at Megaman X. We all loved Megaman, but we loved X as well. X and Megaman are both special, individually. We all get that they share the same "blood" from Keiji's idea, and though they are different, we love them both the same.

What about Beck? The design concepts for Beck already shows that he's different than his predecessors. He's getting his own deal, his own shine. "Oh but at every turn and corner Keiji's marketing Megaman, not Beck." They are under the "Inafune Family", sure as hell they'll share similarities. Those bits where Keiji's like promoting Megaman? I saw those as him saying "guys, look at all these toys I made for my baby boy, and he can't have them. Y u do dis to me Capcom? I'll let his sibling have it then."

John. Pls. Stahp. You REALLY think Keiji's gonna make this all about Megaman? When X carried on Megaman's legacy, was it really all about Megaman? Now Beck's gonna "indirectly" carry on that legacy, you REALLY think Beck's not going to shine?

I honestly think you owe Keiji Inafune an apology just from posting that shit. Not only are you doubting him as a game designer and his love for all that he makes, you essentially put yourself in a high horse and virtually "spat" at him thinking you know better. Let the maestro do his work. He knows how to work magic with his babies.

Who's the Killer??

Got around to playing Killer Is Dead recently, even though I'm being bogged down with assignments. Goes to show that when I want to play a game, even the most tedious of assignments can't stop me. Whoo...?

Right. Killer Is Dead is... different. It's your typical 3rd-person action hack n' slash game. You get your character with your sword, and a sub-weapon... THAT TRANSFORMS INTO GUNS AND A DRILL! Man, that drill's so hype. Aiming's a little clunky though.

In Killer Is Dead, you control Mondo Zappa, a guy who works for a government-run hitman organisation. Your job's to kill killers. So, hit-hitman. You hit them. With your sword. Eh.

Anyway, Mondo has lost his memories, and as the game progresses, yeap, you... get more confused about his past. They wrapped everything up AT THE END of the game. Throughout the rest of the game? The 80% of content you got? Nah son, we dropping tips and hints but no real clue! You can speculate though! (I got quite close to what was going on)

There is not much to be said of the storyline aside from it being a little confusing and... disappointing? I'm the kind of person who wants to know every single detail of what's what, and this game didn't give me the pleasure of knowing the details. Instead, the whole story's shrouded in mystery. You gotta speculate. You gotta make do with what little they give you.

And I like it. I love this mysterious vibe. It's cool!

Back to the story later on. Let's talk about combat. Hmmm... If Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance is that game where slicing your opponents feels like you were in control of everything you did, I feel like Killer Is Dead is that game where your every calculated step rewards you with overwhelming power with less control.

Every time you do a well-executed dodge, the game rewards you with this insane "hey-man-mash-that-button-and-go-crazy-slashing-that-dude" sequence. It FEELS super good. Imagine you're in battle and you have complete awareness of what's going on, and you dodge EVERYTHING super well. BOOM! Slice n' dice! The game sort of freezes in time and a small choir sings as you execute that move, and each slash gives you stunning audio and visual feedback. Simply amazing.

Surrounded by enemies? No problem. With enough BLOOD (this game's Mana), you can instant kill an enemy! This grants you more bonuses as well. Problem is, BLOOD is earned by slashing enemies continuously or by picking up orbs. Feel that it's a hassle to keep slashing at them? Dude. DUDE. Building up your combo grants Mondo new movesets, resulting in him slashing even faster and flashier. It starts to feel like Sora or Ventus after your combo reaches a certain level. It's that fast.

It's so hype! You get rewarded for EVERYTHING you do right in battle!

The game also presents the usual SUDA51-styled visuals. I'm not an expert in visual arts, and according to people, this art style is known as cel shading. It doesn't look like Battlefield or Call of Duty's attempts to imitate real life visuals. It doesn't look like some other Japanese games with bright colours. You know what though? I really like this dark, mysterious-vibe giving cel shaded art style. It fits the atmosphere of the game, and has its own flavour. Why not?

Right, the music for the game. Y'know what, I didn't even notice what's playing in the background. That's just how well it's melded into the storytelling. In my experience with games and studies in sound engineering, this is beyond remarkable. It's not like Revengeance's or Anarchy Reign's songs where you feel like you wanna sing along, but it's become the ambience itself. THAT'S something.

Ah, this game FEELS Japanese, so much so that I loved everything about it. The humour, the artistic direction, the dialogue... Everything.

Now, I want to take some time to talk about the West's reaction to something you find in this game - the Gigolo Missions. Some call this "a stamp on sexist culture" and some say this is disappointing. My take on it is that you guys are idiots. Japan is known for making fun of weird things, and you go all serious on it? 

Let's take some Western games overly serious and see what happens:

1. Sleeping Dogs - wow racists showing violent Asians I swear this is bullshit omfgwtf
2. Mortal Kombat - wtfisthisshit so much blood gore and intestine so violent banbanban
3. Battlefield - guns and wars on Middle-East you people promoting the Syrian War arentcha
4. Call of Duty - omfgrlyeveryonewannakillAmericayouselfcentredbastards
5. GTA - are you serious you promoting violence and hookers and drugs and shit
6. Saints Row - wow rly you making gangs cool and into pop culture icon omggtfo

What I want to say is, guys, seriously... The way these missions are made to be so over-the-top leaves no room to even THINK that this is Suda's opinion on how women are. No way will women just somehow be objectified right after such an overly flagrant cutscene, for me and a lot of other people, at least. *sigh* just, whatever.

Back to the kick-ass game. If I'm not mistaken, there are only 12 or 13 main missions for you to do, with plenty of side missions in it too. If you only go for the main missions, this game will be relatively short, and so may not be worth the money you put into it.

Thing with this game is, it has a very good learning curve. Some bits are steep, some are not. Playing through the side missions unlock items and costumes for you, and helps you train with the game mechanics too. I played this on Hard and it's really difficult to beat without taking advantage of the mechanics. So, if you buy this game and want every cent's worth from it, do everything. I promise you, it is really satisfying.

Right, as for the game's plot, you kind of get the gist of what's going on. My take on the ending is that, Mondo has the blood which allows for evil to overtake him as well, which might mean a sequel...? YES!

SO! 

Main missions only? Definitely wait until it's cheaper.

You want to have a good action game? Worth the buy, unless you're in a tight spot.

This game gets an 8/10 from me. 

I feel that certain bits of the combat can be fixed, especially the camera's auto-panning. When fighting tons of enemies, the camera can make your sick combo streak go down the drain - not something I want to experience. Also, the loading screens are used way too often. Not sure if it's possible to clamp it down a little, but the fact that they're there breaks the immersion sometimes.

Alright, on to the next one.

Where Dubstep Kills

Frame drops? It's fine. Game freezes? No sweat. Game bugs out? Like I care.

IT. IS. SAINTS. ROW. IV. PEOPLE.

Wow. Just, a great time playing the game, and... WHOO!

*cough*

Alright, back to business. In Saints Row IV, you play as the leader of the Saints, who just got "promoted" from being an international pop culture icon to the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. But wait! Just when you thought you were gonna have a good time being possibly the most powerful man on the Earth, an advanced alien race led by Zinyak comes and ruins everything. It's all up to you to lead the Saints in a battle against Zinyak and the Zin Empire.

Right, so like its predecessor, Saints Row IV has tons of parodies, pop culture references and over-the-top shenanigans. Seriously. A dubstep gun? Giant soda can monster on a rampage? "What Is Love" playing during an action sequence? And, *gasp*, Metal Gear Solid and Splinter Cell references? 

C'mon! What is not to love about all these?

The Boss (your character) mainly operates in a virtual reality, or a simulation. In there, you get to use superpowers. You can freeze your enemies with an ice blast, then super-stomp and watch them crumble; or, you can leap across buildings and run past traffic like you're the Flash. Heck, by collecting Clusters, you can power up to find yourself running on water. So much power, yet so little responsibility. 

The game operates the same as Saints Row: The Third - complete side missions to gain control over territories, gain money and upgrade your abilities or weapons, and mess around in the world while deciding if you are finally willing to move on with the story (I took my time messing around, so...)

So, as you power yourself up, you get more and more prepared to face Zinyak. However, if you are to face Zinyak in the real world, what about your powers?? Your weapons?? Aren't they all in the simulation? *gasp*

Psshh, when I got to the end, I was mindblown. Long story short - I sort of became Isaac Clarke.

ALRIGHT MOVING ON!!

This game is amazing. Let me lay the cards down right now. Yes, the game crashes at times and bugs can pop up from time to time, having you restart the machine (although it could be my console that's buggy, but other games work fine, so...). Also, yes, frames dropped during my playthrough. I stated all of that in the beginning of this post. Guess what? None of that matters. Saints Row IV was about entertainment, and I was entertained.

Let me say that playing this cleared my palate after Assassin's Creed 3. I actually enjoyed myself. Yes, power-ups do come from side missions and challenges, but the side missions involve integral characters to the game, and doing them was less... clunky, so to speak. In AC3, travelling to my objectives was a hassle. In SR4, travelling was fun. Jumping across buildings and running at the speed of a bullet? It felt really great, especially when I ran into cars... Huehuehuehue...

Right! Aside from fun times with powers, I really enjoyed the arsenal of guns introduced in this installment. Take for example, the Dubstep Gun. DUBSTEP. GUN. You wub your enemies to death. Seriously, I'm not joking. You aim it at your opponents, charge the gun and when the bass drops, your enemies start dancing and the guy you aim at, dies. Check out the video.

As if that wasn't enough, Saints Row IV also throws at you plenty of ridiculous enemies. Not convinced? In a mission to rescue your friend, you have to fight a kaijuu soda can. Yes. A huge, towering soda can monster with angry, glowing-red eyes ready to smash you into oblivion. By the way, his name is Paul, so don't be rude now.

Side missions involve having you running a race with your super speed, completing platforming mini-games, causing mayhem with your superpowers... OR WITH A MECH SUIT!!! 

Ahhh... But really though, there are loads of goodies to be discovered in the game. A Double Dragon parody mini-game... Flying an aircraft while "What Is Love" is playing... Having a Mass Effect-esque headquarters... Deciding between curing cancer or solving world hunger... Loads of fun.

I did not play co-op, since I enjoy playing alone. If I am not mistaken, you can get 100% achievement without ever touching co-op, which is nice. If you do have a friend and you choose to play together, I'm sure chaos will ensue. So, go ahead and do it.

Take note however, that this game reuses a lot of assets from the previous Saints Row game. Some people have been complaining about how they feel cheated over being charged so much for a game which might as well have been released as a DLC. Well, for started, I'm not sure if THQ's finances had anything to do with them having to reuse so much stuff, but it could've been a factor. Also, this game plays nothing like Saints Row: The Third, and there are lots of new stuff in it, so don't sulk that much.

Alright. This game is fun. It is over the top. It is meant to be a game where you get to relax and go wild in. If you are looking for something serious and picked up this game, don't be disappointed over it. Well, you have been warned. You probably want a Grand Theft Auto game, not this one.

My mind's all over the place. Need some sleep.

SO!

Should you get this game? Absolutely. Should you get it immediately? Depends. If you are tired of serious games and need a change of pace, you should try it out. If you are interested and you are willing to wait, I would suggest waiting for a price drop/GOTY release/discount. 

Because the game entertained me so, I award it an 8.5/10. Although I really enjoyed myself, I felt that had the developers been more thorough with the development (bugs, frame drops, crashes), I would have had an even better experience (which would net it a 9). 

Alright, onwards!

Guy In Hood The Third, essentially

Played me some Assassin's Creed 3 recently. *sigh*... Where do I begin?

So, I have never played any of the other AC games before, and coming into this, I thought to myself "wow, after two installments and other extras, this series must be quite polished. I'm so lucky!" And then I slapped myself multiple times as I went through the game.

Right, so the series is about the Assassin Brotherhood, who advocates complete freedom, going against the Knights Templar, who upholds peace through control. This is a really interesting concept, I have to admit that. It is pretty much philosophical, and on a personal note, I am a bit of a Templar myself. Once you have reached a certain age, you just grow bitter. ANYWAY!

The game revolves around Desmond Miles' effort to stop the end of the world, who does so by accessing his Assassin ancestors' memories through The Animus, in hopes to find the key which will unlock an artifact left behind by the First Civilization. Lots of jargons, lots of confusion when I jumped right in. It is pretty simple though, after the first hour.

So in AC3, Desmond has to go through the memories of his ancestors back from Colonial America. That's a time when people lined up in a row with muskets for a firing line, only to be cut down by the enemy's fire should they be quicker. Should a platoon fall, another comes to replace it. *sigh* Why were they so stupid? Damn.

Right, so the Assassin you play as in AC3 is a half Native American, half British dude, whose name is Connor. He has a Native name, but I sure can't spell that, or pronounce it even. So, I got to control Connor and uncover the Templars' plots to get control of America. He assists the Colonies, in hopes that his people's freedom is preserved along with the Colonies' victory.

Throughout the game, you get to do stuff like climb stuff, free run atop of trees, hunt animals, collect collectibles, expand your homestead (like a village?) and craft stuff. Heck, the BEST activity, in my opinion, is sailing. You get to have naval warfares and navigate through rocks and cliffs and stuff. Things were pretty hype, no wonder Ubisoft's next AC game is about pirates. *yarrr!*

In between Connor's memories, Desmond wakes up to the present and you have to play as him. Your job is to get the power sources/batteries for the ruins Desmond needs to unlock (save the world, get the artifact?). The gameplay gets a little tougher here for people who rely on visual cues when countering enemies, so yeah... Pretty much no problem for me. *heh*

Game's pretty fun to play, in an overall sense. Chaining your kills after deflecting a blow, running around town to dodge guards and formulating strategies to achieve maximum efficiency in killing/running... Fun times!

I was quite into the game for the first few bits, until the game started to reveal its ugliness. It is afterall, a Ubisoft game, so don't be surprised! Things started going wrong during the prologue (not good).

Like Splinter Cell: Blacklist, the game's frame rate goes nuts after a while. Loading times are insanely inappropriate, as they can be found in between dramatic sequences. Textures can FAIL to load at times. Heck, cutscenes are inappropriately ended sometimes as well (guys, fade outs are used for reasons). Just a lot of questionable directions, y'know?

Some bits of the gameplay can be iffy. Running around can be a hassle because the run button enables you to climb as well, so your character jumps up walls sometimes because you didn't control well enough. Some bits of the terrain which look climb-able, are not quite so (ship's rudder, anyone?) The SIDEQUESTS grant you bonuses which can help your gameplay. No, main missions do little to nothing for your gears, only the sidequests grant proper boons. WHY? It's like they are forcing players to do all these extra bits. Not cool man.

In all honesty, I enjoyed the game's storyline and its intended questions about morality. I can see where the writers wanted to go with this, although there are bits which are badly presented. So, even though I kind of enjoyed it, the bad elements of the game made my experience horrible. It's like watching a movie you love, and the cinema's projector flickers, its sound system is clipping, the screen did not open fully and the audience is talking. Imma be like "movie/game, I love you, but not like this. Not like this."

So, should anyone get this game? If you are willing to abuse yourself a little, yes. Get it while it's discounted, please.

I want to give this game an 8/10, but damn the poor integrations and presentations... make it a 6.5/10. I mean, it's supposed to be a AAA game, dammit!

Splinter Cell: Blacklist

Look at him. LOOK. Look at Sam Fisher. He's friggin' awesome, seriously. I was so hyped when Blacklist's release date dawned closer. First thing I did when I got it was to just stare at Sam on the cover with his new karambit blade.

Sam's cool. Either you love him or you love him lots.

In Splinter Cell: Blacklist, terrorists are launching a series of attacks on the US, and it is up to Sam and his team, Fourth Echelon, to stop them. As the story progresses, you discover that the terrorists' intentions are far more complex than their original demands, and your failure in stopping them can mean the end of US as a nation. Pretty heavy stuff.

Anyway, I played the game and Ubisoft's doing things slightly different this time around. When you first boot the game, you are thrown directly into the game - there is no title screen. This means that it is going to suck horribly if multiple people want to play it on your console.

Instead of having you go through missions one after the other, you are now able to decide when to take on primary missions. In between them, you will be roaming your headquarters, the Paladin, talking to the key people on your ship for side missions. That's right, side missions.

Aside from that, you get to make calls to Sarah, Sam's daughter, for some additional useless conversations. Roaming around the plane after main missions might net you access to some artwork (they're really easy to find, just be patient).

So, side missions huh? We'll get back to that later.

As usual, Ubisoft Toronto delivered. The whole game plays remarkably well and your playstyle can be classified as Ghost (stealth without killing), Panther (stealth kills), or Assault (go Rambo on your enemies). Playing stealthily rewards you with more points, which gives you more money for upgrades.

The whole HUD looks a lot neater compared to Conviction, and the overall mechanics have been improved. Ubisoft also polished up the Mark and Execute (Kill in Motion) mechanic in this game, where you have to charge a meter by dealing with enemies either by knocking them out or killing them, and not by meleeing an enemy like in Conviction. Despite the numerous outcries over how this mechanic "makes the game easier", I have only used it once in the whole game, so perhaps the problem lies with people wanting to take the easy way out? Heh.

Blacklist supports co-op and multiplayer, meaning you can have your friend teaming up with you or fighting against you. Some side missions require you to play in co-op, meaning you can never truly obtain 100% completion without playing with others, which frustrates me because I dislike this sort of gimmick.

Right, upgrades. Completing missions nets you points, which equals money. You can then choose to upgrade your headquarters or your equipment. What I really want to talk about is your equipment. All this while, Splinter Cell has been played as a stealth game. In this game, your upgrades can shift you towards a much more gung-ho approach to the game. You can choose to abandon stealth by buying armoured suits. You can customise your guns for more power or better control. Heck, you can even customise your suits' camouflages for cosmetic reasons.

So... How is the game?

Like I mentioned, the gameplay's interesting, BUT... Yes. But.

*sigh*

I feel so disappointed and empty after the whole game.

The game is really fun to play during missions. I enjoyed planning my engagements and lurking around in the dark to catch some poor sucker who wandered too far from his comrades. I enjoyed running around from cover to cover, immersing myself in the stealth experience which Splinter Cell provides. Yes, I do. I enjoy all those bits. But... The game is laden with a lot of flaws as well.

When you die, you turn into a ragdoll, and there are times when a part of your body clips through objects. Guess what happens then? Enemy soldiers continue shooting you and you never truly enter a "You Died" screen. Like, what? Once the ragdoll is shot in such a way that it no longer clips through objects, then and only then will you get to continue the game from your checkpoint. This was a huge problem for me when I played, since I was playing in Realistic mode, which means I could die in a few shots. This problem occured way too many times for me to enjoy the game.

The game lagged like mad after I played it for a long time. Sometimes, the AI's programming goes haywire and the game will not progress. Sometimes, my HUD went blank for no obvious reason. Also, loading times can take up to a couple of minutes. Certain "decisions" I made in the game felt like it didn't matter at all what I had chosen. The list goes on, but I'm stopping here.

Homing in on storytelling, it baffles me how this qualifies as a Splinter Cell installment. I can sort of see the direction in which the story is trying to go to, but the way it is presented makes it horrible. Side missions did not help at all, and I believe they only made matters worse, since it distracts players from the "main dish". Heck, want to know how badly it is presented? Check out the ending to the game here (no major spoilers). After that scene, it transitions back to me being in Paladin without any fades. HOW TERRIBLE IS THAT?

This is really horrible because I really, really enjoy the series. Sam Fisher's growth as an agent can be seen as the series continue, and everything just fits in nicely as a storybook. Then for no reason, this episode just decides to imitate everything that has been done thus far and be super sloppy about things. Do you know how that feels? That feels bad. Real bad.

*sigh*

Overall, the game itself is fun to play. However, the failure to hit the storytelling home and extensively test out the game before shipping it makes me feel disgusted at the way Ubisoft is treating Splinter Cell. Should you get this game? Yes. Should you wait until it's cheaper? Yes, you owe it to yourself.

With all that said and done, I have not actually played multiplayer. The footages I've seen on the Internet suggest that it's great. Multiplayer revolves around Spies, who have great agility and nifty gadgets to take down enemies, fighting against Mercenaries, who are armour-clad and equipped with heavy firearms. Spies are played in 3rd person, whereas Mercenaries are played in 1st person. There are 1st person segments in the main storyline as well, which I feel doesn't play well compared to other games out there.

Wrapping things up... Splinter Cell: Blacklist?

Great gameplay, horrible implementation. I give it a 7 out of 10.

Slightly Confused

Xbox Wire released some news on the Gold benefits subscribers can get and share. Well, "share". You can read about it over here. As the title suggests, I am a little confused. In short, Microsoft is trying to say they are behind the idea of sharing. To help illustrate things better, I will try to make up scenarios. 

According to the Sharing Digital Games segment, if I were to buy a digital game, say... Watch Dogs, the game is attached to my Xbox Live account. My friends can come over to my house and play it even if I'm not logged in on my Xbox One. I can also play it when my console is not connected to the Internet, or when it's not finished downloading yet.

I then go to my friend's house, whose name is Jim, and log in to my Live account on his Xbox One. I can then play my digital game, Watch Dogs, on his console. If I decide to buy another game while I'm at Jim's, the game is technically still mine and the aforementioned "rules" will apply to it (e.g., anyone can play it at my house).

Then, Xbox Live Gold Benefits states that if I were to have a Live Gold subscription for my account, the benefits I receive will be shared with everyone at my home. These benefits include "multiplayer gaming, Game DVR, SmartMatch and access to entertainment apps and experiences, including The NFL on Xbox, Skype, Internet Explorer". Xbox is calling this overall benefit the Home Gold.

This means that, if Jim doesn't have a Live Gold subscription, he will get to play multiplayer online if he comes to my house and play here, because I am subscribed to it and my account is linked to my Xbox One, allowing the sharing of its benefits. If I were then to go to Jim's house to play, I can play multiplayer online because of my subscription, and Jim's only able to do the same as long as my account is still logged in.

OKAY. That is about it. Time for me to just talk shit.

I feel that Microsoft is once again overselling these things for no particular reason. To call them "benefits" is a little too much. The whole Sharing Digital Games segment is essentially what I can ALREADY do on my PS3, aside from the "play while you download" bit. I think the same applies for current Xbox 360 owners, but I am not too sure about that. I appreciate the fact that Microsoft is trying to reaffirm their users on what they can or cannot do on the new Xbox One, yet the whole affirmation ends with them saying "it's a great feature on Xbox One". It's not a bad feature, but neither is it great. I mean, come onnn.....

What I am seeing as a benefit is the Home Gold feature. A Live Gold subscription can now essentially be shared with a few serious gamers in your own home - you don't have to each pay the subscription fee to play multiplayer online. But, I think that's it. Currently, that's ONE benefit I see with this deal. 

"Oh, but don't forget about the families and the kids and parents don't have to subscribe to multiple Live subscriptions bla bla bla..."

Look, it sounds nice but I don't think people are giving it much thought. If you are a denizen of the web, you'd understand that there are toxic communities all over the place. This is true with gaming communities as well. 

To my knowledge, you cannot share the PS+ subscription with anyone else. With next-gen, users need to subscribe to PS+ in order to play multiplayer online. This could mean multiple subscriptions within a family. Well, personally, I think this is healthier. So, a parent figure will subscribe to PS+,  and his or her children will be allowed to play multiplayer online ONLY WHEN he/she is around. In a sense, this leads to actual parental supervision (although it can get a little tedious signing in and out of your account).

With Xbox Live Gold, anyone from the family will have access to playing multiplayer online on the Home Console, which is linked to the Gold account. Kids will be able to play multiplayer online, all the while exposing them to possibly toxic communities, or in some cases the kids contribute in making the community toxic. 

Thus, the way I see it, PS+ offers more control on the whole playing online bit, while Gold essentially offers uninhibited 'freedom'. Of course, some might argue that children could still pay for the subscription fee themselves, but that pay-wall serves as a discouragement nonetheless. At the end of the day, it's more about the parents' stance on parenting, which I think will reveal a lot about the family. Heh.

As for "serious gamers", to be honest, I don't think serious gamers who are dedicated to playing online would share one console together, all the while being under one roof. Why would you TAKE TURNS as you wait to play online? Won't you want to play online TOGETHER? I don't know. That's just me. It's like saying, "hey, let's play this game online separately even though we can team up, because haha". *sigh* If you are fine with that, then this might be a good incentive for you to look into getting an Xbox One.

To me, this whole "news" was just Microsoft's... well, the picture below speaks for itself.

Burn EVERYTHING

So, I played and finished Little Inferno recently. Boy, was it a FUN piece of art. This gem's intended to be a mini-game, and it does a really good job at that.

You start up the game, and after you select a profile for a playthrough, it throws you straight into the game. Then the screen shows you this fireplace, and some other HUD icons. That's it. The majority of Little Inferno is played there.

Here's the gameplay: you BUY stuff from a catalog, BURN them, get MONEY for that, and repeat. Told you it's simple. There are "combos" which you can attempt to complete, where you are to burn two or more specific items together.

Each item has a specific burning, uh, 'aftermath'. If you ignite a valkyrie doll, it starts singing opera and the whole screen is filled with rose petals falling from the sky/chimney. How cool is that? You could also toss the items around, which smashes them, or let the items interact with each other, i.e. dry ice cubes will freeze other items. Nice little details.

So yes, I spent 3-4 hours (could've been shorter had I not derped around the web while playing the game...) buying items, dragging them to the fireplace and burning them. "BUT ZE PLOT? WHERE IS ZE STORY?" Ohhh man, the game's pretty deep when it comes to that.

You are stuck facing a fireplace in the game, for the most part. At the end of the game, the fireplace explodes, and you are presented with a humanoid for you to control. You will have conversations with people and they will touch on things like capitalism, existentialism, ambitions and all those stuff. It's absolutely immense and heavy, for a game which I thought to be 'simple'.

Overall, it is a simple and fun game to play when you are loafing around and have some time to kill. They have good burning animations, burning sound effects and, well, it's just a really well-produced game, I'd say.

 I bought the game during Steam Summer Sales for cheaps, which was about £2 I believe. I would pay £5 for it, but hey. You could also get it on iOS, allowing you to scare your friends or fellow neighbours with your pyromaniacal personality.

For a mini-game? I'll give it a 9/10. The game's fun, the whole thing's well-produced and not as shallow as it appears to be. Go, go get it.

Another Serving of DRM, Please!

I was just sitting, chilling and minding my own business, until I found an article about people trying to bring back the old Xbone via petitioning. After giving it some thought, the most appropriate response would be this, I figured:

After all the trouble that people had to go through, and now we have a bunch of self-important, insa-... Wait, let's get through this.

So, there are a bunch of people who are DEMANDING the return of previous Xbone DRM policies, i.e. the 24-hour online check-ins and all sort of other bullshit. This bunch deem the original Xbone to be the future of consoles, and the way forward for the industry.

Let me say this right now - you people are insane.

The Internet was at one point filled with people raging around in analysing the immense failure that is the old Xbone, and you somehow managed to forego all that. Really. Your eyes are only set on the family sharing nonsense, WHICH WE KNOW would be taken down eventually. You keep talking nonsense about cloud computing, Gaikai's forte... which Sony owns. Why haven't they pushed it? Oh well, maybe because... They know it's not a whole lot of hoopla? Ask any tech geek. Ask them about the potential of this whole "cloud computing" bullshit that Microsoft is trying to sell. 

*sigh*

Look. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, fair game, but can you really say objectively that the pros far outweigh the cons, in the case of the old Xbone? I agree to a certain extent that the ideology that is the old Xbone, in some form of shape or manner, is the future of console gaming. Thing is though, the market isn't ready. Consumers aren't ready for it. Look at the bunch of pirates. Look at them. No, not yet.

I am not going to get an Xbone, even after they went back on their original policies. Do you think others are going to get the Xbone if this petition is passed? Hell no. Microsoft will receive a shitload of pre-order cancellations. You think they'll do it?

By the way, stop accusing PS/PC users of this heinous crime. We really couldn't care less, Microsoft dug their own grave far too deep for us to meddle anyway. Also, if you are a self-important tech geek who is overtaken by the urge to "push tech", and thus are pushing for this petition, please hide yourself. You don't want angry people to be coming after you, do ya?

*SIGH*

I don't know man... I am tired. Spacing out a little. This piece of news is really... wow. Just, wow.

WELP! The customer is always right, even if that means they are stripping others' rights as consumers!

A Look Into Ryse: Son of Rome

Let me poke you.

I was reading an article written about Ryse: Son of Rome, an exclusive title for the Xbone. You can find  the article here. I'll put up a direct link to the video as well.

I took a look into things, and I got to thinking, is this game going to be any good?

In the article, Kotaku mentioned that Crytek spoke to GameReactor about their intention behind the game. The concept of "mashing to mastery" can be demeaning to gamers who take games seriously, but honestly, I think this is a very nice concept. It can be daunting for new gamers to experience this fun we have, especially when everything looks difficult. This game, while looking graphically remarkable and offering intense action, can be played by complete beginners.

Really, it isn't that hard. I analysed the video, and found that I don't even need to look at the prompts to know what I'm doing. Keep in mind however, this is probably the "intro" level, which in games means the easiest level. Since the gameplay is trying to showcase their combat system, let's talk about combat.

You get dropped off shore and the demo starts there (by the way, a huge thing smacking in like that might cause someone to loop in and out of consciousness instead of the whole pinging sound (WAY too overused). The protagonist encounters barbarians. Here's what I saw:

1. Protagonist slashes once or twice.
2. Prompt appears.
3. Player goes into QTE (Quick Time Event), and needs to input correct buttons to slay the enemy.
4. Protagonist continues his conquest.

Really, really simple, right? The combat is EXTREMELY shallow. Now, I am going to break it down, without judging, so just hear me out.

Granted that this is probably the intro "level", you are not going to enter into some difficult fights, which might explain the ease of weakening enemies enough to enter QTE. One or two slashes put enemies into a weak state. Blocking with your shield staggers your enemy.

All enemies who are weak enough will have ONE button prompt appear above their heads, "B". Look through the whole thing, "B" is the sole button used for entering into QTE. People might have referenced the God of War series after seeing this.

Then, the player enters into QTE, right? I'll break you in on a secret - you don't need to look at the button prompt. Just look at your character. *SHOCK* 

No, really. 

If the protagonist is poised to strike with his shield, press "Y".

If the protagonist is poised to strike with his sword, press "X".

There, I've done it. I unravelled the mystery of the game. Thank you everybody. Goodbye.

No, come back. See, the "A" button is, I believe, used exclusively for interacting with things. "LB" is for issuing commands to your troops and to look around, whereas "RB" is for actions during events.

That's what I have gathered so far from the demo.

To those who are drawing comparisons with God of War, you have every right to do so, but mind you that this game is painstakingly dumbed down to accommodate a larger range of players, if they wish to play it. If you belittle God of War, I believe you must have played it in a casual manner, in which case I prompt you to take on the more challenging difficulties. Ryse is a lot easier than God of War. I just broke down its QTE into simple bits, and I think I can pretty much take on the game without any challenges.

Anyway, back to talking.

The combat is really, really SHALLOW. I cannot stress that enough. The grace period you have to block an enemy's attack is really long. The QTE is awfully simplistic, more so than God of War's. You do not seem to get punished enough for being bad at the game, such as allowing an enemy to circle around your back or timing your javelin tosses badly. No, really. The enemy ONLY hits you once if he gets behind you, with no conceivable damage whatsoever. Doing badly when you are in the phalanx formation punishes your soldiers, instead of failing you (game over). Really, just, yeah.

Crytek is appealing to a larger consumer base, make no mistake about that. They want to appeal to casual gamers and non-gamers alike, by combining other studios' recipe for success. What do I mean by this?

• Naughty Dog's cinematic experience for gamers (Uncharted, The Last of Us)
• Activision's heart-pumping action (Call of Duty)
• Santa Monica Studio's shot at epic games (God of War - QTE's included too!)

In return, we get an extremely simplistic game. No challenge whatsoever. Don't expect to be filled with ecstasy after defeating an opponent. You won't. 

As a dedicated gamer, I am rather disappointed at this. Of course, Crytek delivers great visuals, yet again, but at what cost? The gameplay? Was it worth it? I will wait for players' response when they have actually played the game. Truth be told, I'm not expecting much, and neither should you.