There and Back Again - The issue with AI

Is it just me or are games stupid? Picture the scene. You're in a tranquil setting, an underground cavern say. You're chatting with a mate about some random rubbish, perhaps going over the day's events laughing at how that last beggar just wouldn't die despite being on fire and smashed about the head with maces. When THUNK...an arrow is suddenly protruding out of your mates head. He's dead, no two ways about it. Arrows in the head tend to have that effect. You're naturally taken aback, but this is no time to get upset, action must be taken, fiends must be brought to justice.


So you mount a single man search party and begin to look around for where the arrow could have come from, you search high and low...for 10 seconds...in one direction. And after performing this 'exhaustive' search you return to our original position and stare at the wall...well your mate has just been killed, who are you going to talk to? Then THUNK...another arrow, except this one has found it's way into you. You get lucky though; you still have the ability to walk. So you go in search of where this new arrow could have come from - and you search high and low...for 10 seconds...in one direction...and then you give up and return to your original wall staring position. THUNK. Another arrow has joined its' friend. 'Right' you think 'The bugger must still be around, lets mount another search'. But this time you're going to outsmart him, you're going to cover the exact same path as before and for the same amount of time, he won't be expecting that. And thus your search turns up...nothing. 'I must've imagined it' you say, which would be true if we were to ignore the two huge metal tipped splinters sticking out of you. Oh well, back to your favourite standing spot. THUNK!


This above example actually happened...not in the real world obviously, I'm a gamer, I don't know about such a place. No it happened in Skyrim, Bethesda's answer to the question 'What would Fallout look like if no one had invented the toaster?'. However it's not the only place I've encountered NPCs displaying a distinct lack of common sense.



Hitman Absolution featured guards who forgot that 4 previous guys had gone to investigate a mysterious noise only to never return, but no worry, the 5th guy will solve the enigma...THUNK. Half Life 2 (hid in 1 cupboard and killed 40 enemies), Metal Gear Solid (killed enemies are forgotten about after 20 seconds of vigorous perpendicular searching) are further examples of dumb characters. Don't worry, if you miss there's probably a rock you can hide behind, 'Ah you say', but in Skyrim sometimes the shot enemy shouts for backup. Yes he does, and to get around said backup all I have to do is either retreat 20 yards and hide behind a rock (or at one point the chair they were sat in) or exit through the door, wait 5 seconds and re-enter the room where the bandits have all buggered off thinking they've successfully scared me away.

Is it really too much to ask that game characters show a little common sense, or is this some bizarre form of equal rights and games are being populated with Alzheimer sufferers. Now I'm sure the programmers amongst you are shouting about how hard it is to write code that accurately conveys real behaviour...to give characters actual logic...fair enough, if NPCs actually did what we'd expect they'd all be rolling around on the floor clutching their legs crying about the arrow wounds. However this is an example as to why games really haven't moved forward in the last 20 years.

Those of you who still remember a time when games came on cassettes may recall a game called 'Manic Miner' in which a character called Miner Willy (stop sniggering at the back) had to traverse single screen rooms, dodging enemies and collecting shiny things. Now these aforementioned enemies would travel along a set path, stop, turn around and return to where they started from before doing the journey all over again. Sound familiar? Too young for that game, no problem, just imagine Super Mario Bros where the enemies would travel along a set path, stop, turn around and return. Deja vu. Or for our even younger readers how about Splinter Cell where the enemies would travel along a set path, stop...I think you get the idea. 

But it does sort of prove my point, aside from being shinier, how exactly have games moved forward?. Developers are still giving us games that are little more than a fairground shooting gallery. Did this set an early benchmark as yet unsurpassed? A few games have tried to combat this problem, Gears of War Judgement being a recent example with it's 'adaptive' gameplay, the idea being that the game would check your style of play and adapt to give you more of a challenge. Didn't work, because what it actually meant was each time you play you just got different enemies, all of whom doing the GoW attack of charge forward and absorb enough bullets to allow the guy behind to get slightly closer. Teach them the pincer movement for God's sake. 

With the next-gen consoles almost upon us a lot of the publicity propaganda has been aimed at telling us how powerful they are and how shinier the graphics are going to be. How about this for an idea. Cut back on some of the colours, don't fill the games memory with photo-realistic sparrows and tulips and use that spare data to give me an enemy that when shot runs away to warn his mates and then forms a defensive position forcing me to rethink my approach. Or even better, give some of that spare memory to the characters so they at least remember why that arrow is in their leg and not in my quiver.

The Death of Survival horror

Survival Horror used to be the big gaming genre. Back when first person shooters were in their infancy Horror games drew huge sales and often scared us to death. If you ask people about their top 10 games of their gaming lives I would say a Survival Horror game would be amongst them. Look back at the charts for the last few years and I would bet a Horror title has not made it into the top 5.

So what happened to the once mighty genre?

Back in 1996 the biggest and probably best remembered of the Survival Horror genre hit our shelves. Resident Evil was born and with it came tension, atmosphere and fear. It was such a good game that when Nintendo re-released it with better graphics on the GameCube it went straight to number 1 in the charts (this is taking into account the fact that the GameCube was not a hugely owned console as well).

Resident Evil as a franchise is still with us today and it spawned a large number of other franchises off its success. I think it can be held accountable for Silent Hill, Alone in the Dark, Dead Space, Alan Wake, Condemned, F.E.A.R and Project Zero.

Even though some of the list above are great games, take away Silent Hill as it was released around the time when Resident Evil was in its prime, the games listed have never done amazingly well in the charts (Dead Space 2 did well but the original only succeeded due to word of mouth).

Looking at the way the gaming market has gone since the 90s it is easy to blame the genres decline on the changing market. But I think this is a scapegoat for what has been poor design.

Dead Space made a game very similar to the original Resident Evil with tight spaces, eerie sound, great atmosphere and fear of what would be around the next corner. It is one of my favourite games from the past few years. But you then look at Resident Evil. After the critical acclaim that went towards Resident Evil 4 the subsequent games have been awful. To me they went from Survival Horror to Action Horror. It is far to easy now to think that dark rooms and close confined areas equal scary and then throw in a load of weapons to add the survival. But it has no depth. You really do not feel in danger and you certainly do not care about the characters at all. Everytime a Resi game comes out the journalists always ask 'Is this a return to form?' and then after release we know that it isn't. You then hear how the industry has moved on and creating a Horror game will never appeal like it once did. Now to me I can see this is rubbish.

First lets take the Free-to-play game Slender on the PC. The basic concept is that your in the woods at night (Scary) and you have to collect notes from areas spread around. As a whole it does not sound that scary but then you throw in Slender Man. Slender man is not always in sight. To be fair the game lets you move a fair amount before he first appears. but what makes it scary is when you catch him out the corner of your eye. Slender man is there to stop you completing your task. You have no weapons and all you can do is run. But as he is not always in sight you do not know where he is. Sometimes you will turn a corner and he will be far in the distance, then suddenly he will be feet away. It is terrifying and exhilarating. It is also beautifully simple.

Things are looking up for the genre as 'The Last Of Us' has been a sensation on the PS3 and was at number 1 for weeks. This game is brutal, well written, has deep characters and suspense. There is also 'The Evil Within' which has been designed by the guy who did Resident Evil and then Resident Evil 4 and he is well thought of for the games he has created in this genre so hopefully this will stand up well. But for me the game that look strongest of the future releases for reinvigorating the genre is a game called 'Outlast'. this is set for a PC and PS4 release and looks fantastic. Again it has a pretty simple premise.

Your character breaks into what looks like a mental asylum after all contact goes down. You are not some military operative but a journo with nothing more than a camcorder. No weapons or survival skills. You end up captured and trying to escape. It is confined, you spot things out the corner of your eyes and if you get in trouble all you can do is run....

What this shows is that trying to appeal to the Call of Duty audience is the wrong way to go. There is a market out there for these games and its about story and atmosphere that really make a game (It is what every game should focus on) and unless Resident Evil takes notice of the success of these games and maybe scraps all they have done before to create a new series they will eventually disappear. Silent Hill has almost run out of ideas and it would be a shame for these once great franchises to die.

So take note. You can go back to what once made you great. You can create great surrounding, tension and fear... but first drop the guns and run.

Ghost Recon Breakpoint - In Review

How do you review a game that keeps evolving? This happens more and more with games that on Day 1 get mixed reviews and underachieve but come in 6 months later and the landscape is completely different. Breakpoint probably falls into this catagory.
I enjoyed Ghost Recon Wildlands which proceeded this game, so I went in with some high (above middling lets say) expectations. Playing a short period of this game and I was lost. The feeling of the game while familiar was also different to Wildlands. This is not to say it is better or worse, just different. Look at Far Cry 3 and Far Cry 5. Both good games but there are differences that are for good and worse.
Firstly the story. Wildlands I honestly have NO idea what the story was. didn't care, something to do with drug cartels i think. It did not matter to me, the island, combat and tactics made the game so much fun. In Breakpoint I will admit the story held me a little more. The villian of the game is set very early on which, for me, allowed a better core understanding of the reasoning behind what you were doing and why. This was lacking in Wildlands Drug Cartel story.
While Wildlands had the Unidad, a local military that would swarm you leading to me pretty much fleeing, Breakpoint has moved into the 21st century. Mechanical enemies are now the hardest enemies that you will discover on the island. Often you can be going about nothing, just walking from A to B when a Drone will fly overhead. Get spotted and before you know it mini drone tanks, flying drones and Wolves (highest tier military) will be all around pinning you down. It always keeps you on edge.

One thing that may negatively impact fans of Wildlands is the weapon levels. This has now been patched a little but for me it doesn't work as well with it turned off. In Wildlands you start with base loadout. to get weapons and upgrades you storm bases and find pieces across the world. Decide you want to be a sniper you need to search for the best rifles and scopes, tripods etc. to make you ultimate weapon. Breakpoint you pick up weapons through the game but these may be the same as what you had but a higher level. This is common in many games and is fine when you play. the issue is they don't appear to be any more powerful, they just say they have a higher level. As I said this has now been patched in an update that allows you to turn weapon level off. The problem is that you cannot carry multiple weapons. You find a new one in the game, prefer what you have and so leave it. But this leads to the issue when in comes to buying add ons. The main way to get currency is selling weapons. if you do not pick them up you cannot sell them. It kind of spoils the game. Not sure this was thought out during development. It worked better in Wildlands (my advice is to stick with gear level as I find it best of both worlds and I could always find a weapon I liked and move up levels).
Overall the two games are similar yet different enough to make them both worth playing. Both have detailed and well populated worlds. However I have read Wildlands fans not liking Breakpoint. I love both games and have sunk loads of hours into both. I will say that I much prefer Breakpoint on my own as the story is a bit more engaging.
A discount purchase recommendation from me.

Beneath the Radar - Great games that not everyone has played

I am returning to my blog a long time after my last post. With the current global lock-down over Covid 19 why not get my creative juices flowing. When I say my creative juices, I of course mean something that I heard on PS I Love You XOXO on Kindafunny PodCasts.
They decided to discuss games that they thought were great games that not everyone will have played. This was a topic that immediately sparked something in my mind and I started thinking of a number of games that I loved, but they may have only got middling scores from reviewers. Like I have said in the past, reviewing is subjective and one person may see something others do not.

So here is a list of games that i really enjoyed that may not have been Massive Blockbusters:

Army of Two: Look at a game like Saints Row compared to GTA. Army of Two is the Saints Row to the GTA of cover shooters (such as Gears of War). It is over the top, silly and brilliant. It did not take itself at all seriously but in doing so, made itself unique. Everything in the game was solid enough but not genre defining. I loved it so much that I bought the two sequels ('the Devils Cartel' killed the franchise so avoid). If you have a buddy round and want to play a light version of Gears of War for enxt to nothing, grab Army of Two. I recommend it wholeheartedly.


Outlast: This is a throwback to proper survival horror. While Resident Evil had gone all guns blazing and you tended to blast your way through games, Outlast made you want to hide in a locker... literally. The story of the game is possibly a little strange and far fetched and toward the end a bit naff, but the gameplay is great.
Investigative Journalist breaks into a mental asylum that is overrun by crazy people who get more bonkers as you go on. You have no weapon, cannot fight and so you have to run. The enemies can kill you in one attack so you have to sneak, hide and think you way through areas. I played with a friend who literally refused to play the game and hid behind a pillow (looking at you Josh). You can find videos of people playing the game and I promise you the screams are real. The sequel did not touch the same nerve but still worth a play.


Condemned Criminal Origins: Scares aplenty and decent combat held together by a solid story. Another good horror game on my list (are most of these underrated?). This was a little bit faster paced than Outlast but had a different feel. I will admit that this games maybe doesn't stick with me as much as Outlast but I feel it deserved more recognition.


Deadly Premonition: Or Twin Peaks the Game as it may as well ahve been called. Even the developer has said it was inspired by the TV series and it is very obvious once you get into it. One issue I had was the opening 30 minutes to an hour. You are out in the wildness with demons but no real explanation. Once you arrive in 'Twin Peaks' mark 2 you will see why this game is a homage to the TV show. You play an FBI detective (Tick) in town to solve a strange death (Tick), things get weird with bizarre locals (Tick) with many a sub plot happening all around you (Tick). Combat is a bit meh but overall the games pacing is on point. Gaming journalist and Internet personality Alanah Pearce @charalanahzard says this is one of her favourite all-time games (apologies if I have miss quoted but pretty sure this is accurate)


Spec Ops - The Line: The reason I think this game is not thought of in higher esteem is that it had a plot. A plot that actually is hard to digest (in a good way from my point of view). I was not expecting a game like this but was amazed by the credits. The shooting is maybe a little loose compared to other shooters in the same time frame but good enough to pull you through the story. The age rating on the game was deserved but if you like your films a bit more Christopher Nolan than Michael Bay this is for you.

I will update this if more come into my head. If you have any games you think belong on this list let me know. I admit some like Mirror's Edge would be on my list but I never played it (sorry people). On this basis I cannot really comment.

Watchdogs - Review

I was late to the party here. Nearly a year has passed since Ubisoft launched their latest IP. I brought and played this game at launch and i think the fact that 9 months later i have only just finished it says a lot. The game takes place in sort of current time Chicago. You play Aiden Pearce who is a hacker. He gets drawn in to this vengeance story after his wife and child get killed. The issues begins here. I never really felt like i cared. It was not that the characters were not thought out or that there was anything wrong as such but its just that Aiden sits in a moral nomansland. He preaches about peoples actions being bad and then gets caught doing the same. The game looks... Well ok. Its polished but it does not scream look at me like some games do. I will commend the controls as they are pretty tight. What is frustrating though is that the game has so much promise. Its basically Assassins Creed in modern day with gadgets. Sounds brilliant but the tricks grow tiresome quickly. You end up just hacking everything all the time and not really caring (and what is up with the makers? So many of the little side videos and hacks are sex related. I ended up making a filthy video from it all!). The game just felt like the makers lost direction part way through and just made what they could. I am hopefully that the next game will really kick start the series similarly to what AC2 did for that series. I was left fairly disappointed with it all. I am not saying dont play but i wouldnt rush. 
Story - 6 
Graphics - 8 
Controls - 8 
Sound - 8 
Game Presentation - 7 
Multiplayer - 7 
Overall - 7.3

The Death of Survival Horror

Survival Horror used to be the big gaming genre. Back when first person shooters were in their infancy Horror games drew huge sales and often scared us to death. If you ask people about their top 10 games of their gaming lives I would say a Survival Horror game would be amongst them. Look back at the charts for the last few years and I would bet a Horror title has not made it into the top 5.

So what happened to the once mighty genre?

Back in 1996 the biggest and probably best remembered of the Survival Horror genre hit our shelves. Resident Evil was born and with it came tension, atmosphere and fear. It was such a good game that when Nintendo re-released it with better graphics on the GameCube it went straight to number 1 in the charts (this is taking into account the fact that the GameCube was not a hugely owned console as well).
Resident Evil as a franchise is still with us today and it spawned a large number of other franchises off its success. I think it can be held accountable for Silent Hill, Alone in the Dark, Dead Space, Alan Wake, Condemned, F.E.A.R and Project Zero.

Even though some of the list above are great games, take away Silent Hill as it was released around the time when Resident Evil was in its prime, the games listed have never done amazingly well in the charts (Dead Space 2 did well but the original only succeeded due to word of mouth).
Looking at the way the gaming market has gone since the 90s it is easy to blame the genres decline on the changing market. But I think this is a scapegoat for what has been poor design.
Dead Space made a game very similar to the original Resident Evil with tight spaces, eerie sound, great atmosphere and fear of what would be around the next corner. It is one of my favourite games from the past few years. But you then look at Resident Evil. After the critical acclaim that went towards Resident Evil 4 the subsequent games have been awful. To me they went from Survival Horror to Action Horror. It is far to easy now to think that dark rooms and close confined areas equal scary and then throw in a load of weapons to add the survival. But it has no depth. You really do not feel in danger and you certainly do not care about the characters at all. Everytime a Resi game comes out the journalists always ask 'Is this a return to form?' and then after release we know that it isn't. You then hear how the industry has moved on and creating a Horror game will never appeal like it once did. Now to me I can see this is rubbish.

First lets take the Free-to-play game Slender on the PC. The basic concept is that your in the woods at night (Scary) and you have to collect notes from areas spread around. As a whole it does not sound that scary but then you throw in Slender Man. Slender man is not always in sight. To be fair the game lets you move a fair amount before he first appears. but what makes it scary is when you catch him out the corner of your eye. Slender man is there to stop you completing your task. You have no weapons and all you can do is run. But as he is not always in sight you do not know where he is. Sometimes you will turn a corner and he will be far in the distance, then suddenly he will be feet away. It is terrifying and exhilarating. It is also beautifully simple.

Things are looking up for the genre as 'The Last Of Us' has been a sensation on the PS3 and was at number 1 for weeks. This game is brutal, well written, has deep characters and suspense. There is also 'The Evil Within' which has been designed by the guy who did Resident Evil and then Resident Evil 4 and he is well thought of for the games he has created in this genre so hopefully this will stand up well. But for me the game that look strongest of the future releases for reinvigorating the genre is a game called 'Outlast'. this is set for a PC and PS4 release and looks fantastic. Again it has a pretty simple premise.
Your character breaks into what looks like a mental asylum after all contact goes down. You are not some military operative but a journo with nothing more than a camcorder. No weapons or survival skills. You end up captured and trying to escape. It is confined, you spot things out the corner of your eyes and if you get in trouble all you can do is run....

What this shows is that trying to appeal to the Call of Duty audience is the wrong way to go. There is a market out there for these games and its about story and atmosphere that really make a game (It is what every game should focus on) and unless Resident Evil takes notice of the success of these games and maybe scraps all they have done before to create a new series they will eventually disappear. Silent Hill has almost run out of ideas and it would be a shame for these once great franchises to die.
So take note. You can go back to what once made you great. You can create great surrounding, tension and fear... but first drop the guns and run.

MR

Gears Of War: Judgment Review

Gears of War Judgment is the fourth game in the Saga but goes back to where it all began. The story is a setup story for the main trilogy's backup characters Baird and Cole. It is a nice idea to go back and set up these characters because they are ever present in the main story arc but you do not really feel they are fleshed out as much as Marcus and Dom were when playing through Gears 1-3. The story starts at the end, with our duo and company in a tribunal. The game is basically broken down into testimony's of the events that unfolded which lead to them being put before the jury.
It works well with the game allowing to flow through the section and then a cut scene setting up the next. You feel the characters emotions well and truly understand the decisions made. The secondary characters in the game are also strong with a distinct personality and overall the story was strong. The campaign runs for around 6-8 hours which is fairly standard but at no point did I find it a struggle to keep playing. There is also Aftermath which is a short add-on to the disc which sees you play Baird and Cole through a section of Gears of War 3 where the two groups are separated. It's nice to see how they got to where they did when not with the main group but it did not really add anything to the game for me.

Level design and graphics are fairly standard compared to the rest of the series with waist high cover in abundance. The graphics are solid and the colours or lack of feel right within the world. There are a few more enemy types thrown in to the game which actually made me wish they had made it into the main games as they added a new threat to proceedings. Also I really enjoyed the 'Declassified' missions. Through the main campaign you find tags on the wall which if you choose to activate, start the next section under a restriction. For example you may be working you way through a building and normally it would be illuminated. But selecting the Declassified mission this would turn off the lights meaning only light through windows can be seen and enemies are harder to spot. This adds a bigger challenge and can add to re playability. Playing through a section knowing that there are going to be harder enemies, or having to use just a pistol etc really became fun as you challenge yourself that little more. The reward is additional XP and also an achievement or two. For some reason this was taken out of the Aftermath section of the game which was a noticeable absence. I was disappointed by it and also really feel that a DLC should be available for the other games so they can be played through with Declassified missions.

All in all Gears of War Judgment did not really make any new ground and was more of an expansion of the series rather than a re-invention. There were some good additions and it felt like it was created with care rather than thrown together purely to make a few bucks. Comparing this to something like Halo 3:ODST really shows Bungie up as this does generally stand up well as a stand alone title but I think releasing at £40 was a bit high. A £30 would have been about right in my eyes but it was good all the same. Multiplayer is very much what you come to expect and again tread on familiar ground.

Graphics - 8
Sound - 7
Controls - 8
Story - 8
Overall - 7.7
Multiplayer - 7

MR