Square-Enix have finally revealed that the long awaited next gen entry to the Final Fantasy series will be releasing on the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 in North America on March 9th, 2010.

I’m definitely looking forward to it, although I have to say that March 2010 is beginning to look a little crowded with all the games being slated for that spot.

An Editorial  Rant by Figboy

As usual, I find myself on my soap box ranting about the gaming media. I can’t help it, with each and every bit of media being released by the gaming press this generation, the more fuel they add to the fire in regards to their complete lack of objectivity, consistency, and above all else, journalistic standards.

I’m not a journalists, nor do I consider myself to be one. I’m simply a guy that loves his video games, and loves talking video games with like minded gamers.

Last night, I got a chance to spend a good 3 hours with Modern Warfare 2, the latest FPS title from developer Infinity Ward, and publisher Activision. I don’t fall for hype, but it has to be noted that, considering that Call of Duty 4, Modern Warfare was one of the biggest games of 2007, it’s sequel has garnered a fare bit of attention from the gaming media.

Many an outlet couldn’t contain the hyperbole in declaring MW2 the best shooter of 2009, 6-12 months BEFORE it’s actual release.

It also must be noted that 2009 saw the release of another rather huge FPS title; Killzone 2, an exclusive title for the Playstation 3. Killzone 2’s history is not as rosy as Modern Warfare 2’s and while I won’t go into too much detail, Killzone 2 was shown in CGI Target Render form that was too good to be true at an E3 many years ago. The gaming media and the gaming community alike did not believe the actual Killzone 2 game would look as good as the CG. In short, it DID, and a lot of people’s feelings were hurt. They tried to attack the gameplay, nitpicking things like controls, the war torn color palette, and the “meatheads with guns” protagonists. Despite all that, Killzone 2 is quite possibly the best FPS to release this generation. The multi-player component was also top notch, expanding upon elements introduced in FPS titles like Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, and Team Fortress 2, and adding it’s own unique spin to it (like being able to cross-class your soldier, a Valor Points system, and more).

Other FPS titles, like Operation Flashpoint 2, were talked up before their release, but quickly pushed under the rug when their game play failed to surpass Killzone 2 and the upcoming Modern Warfare 2.

Well, now, Modern Warfare 2 is on the store shelves, the reviews are flooding in, and they are more than positive. They are glowing. The praise for the title is unending, despite some poor PR from Activision and Infinity Ward, as well as some questionable design decisions that have soured the mood a bit (ie, pairing down MP from 32 players to 18, and removing dedicated servers from the PC version of the game).

The reviewers are quick to praise Modern Warfare 2 for it’s gritty presentation, robust multi-player,  tense game play, and amazing graphics that rival the recently released Uncharted 2.

After last night’s session with the game, I can’t help but think I’m playing a totally different game.

I’ll leave Uncharted 2 out of this, and stick with addressing FPS vs FPS, but I have to say I walked away from Modern Warfare 2 very underwhelmed.

The first thing you notice about the game is the rather poor voice-acting. I’ve played many a game with terrible voice acting, and Modern Warfare 2 certainly isn’t the worst, but I found the narrator’s attempts at a tough-sounding, gravelly voiced hardened soldier more comical than intense. The chatter from squad mates is pretty much relegated to mission only (which I assume keeps it realistic). The dialogue isn’t very inspired either, and lacks any and all characterization. It’s pretty much dialogue that sets up  your next mission, or, in game, points you to your next objective.

But I’m not one to get hung up on dialogue and voice acting, so I easily shrugged it off, given that the game is about war, where keeping to the task at hand is more important than witty banter. After the initial cutscenes (which were just flashy images of a satellite view of the Earth and the names and logos of characters and battalions), I was really eager to get into the game and see the visuals that I had been assured were “amazing,” and “rivaled” games like Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2.

First, the good. The guns in the game look fantastic, with a great attention to detail, and are overall the high point of the visuals. I’m playing the game on a 40″ 720p Samsung, and while the graphics are sharp and clear and crisp, it only serves to highlight one of the game’s most glaring visual issues: poor quality textures.

Character models look good when observed from far away, but when you get up close and scrutinize them, they lack any real attention to detail. The faces are flat, with little to no real detail in their expressions. Their uniform details are flat as well, with all of the clothing looking like molded plastic with a little bump mapping thrown in to try and make it look like it has depth.

This lack of real detail is also evident in the environments. Like the character models, when viewed from a distance, the environments look rather good. When up close they are just as bland and flat as everything else. There is also very little real ambient details present that sell an environment as a believable place. There is some debris here and there that floats across the map, or snow flurries, or dust blowing across your vision, but because they opted to make the image super sharp and clear, it looks…fake. Which is a rather silly thing to say when talking about an environment in a video game, but it’s the truth. The environments just don’t feel like real locations. They feel like multi-player maps tied to a very flimsy story (there isn’t really anything in the way of story cutscenes, just briefings for the next mission, then off you go).

There are certainly uglier games out there, and don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that Modern Warfare 2 is an ugly game, far from it, it looks rather good in HD, and visual effects like how the screen splatters with your blood when you are taking damage are solid, but when the gaming media is comparing it to, hands down, the two best looking console titles on the market in Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, well, you can’t blame anyone for having rather high expectations. Modern Warfare 2, in it’s own right, is a visually good game. It just simply doesn’t compare to Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2.

Beyond the visuals, which, again, I can brush off (it’s not like it looks like Legendary: The Box, or Conflict: Denied Ops; not even; Modern Warfare 2 DESTROYS those games hands down), I was then eager to play the game and get a feel for what has been talked up as the best FPS experience out there.

The first thing I noticed were the controls. They feel like Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, and most other FPS titles out there that try to emulate the smooth, “twitchy” controls of a keyboard and mouse. So, while Modern Warfare 2 certainly has smooth, responsive controls, it still feels like you are controlling a floating gun, instead of an actual human being moving about and grounded to his environment. I really liked the iron sight lock on, trick, which has players bringing up iron sights with the L1 button, and having it immediately “lock on” to the nearest enemy.

Which brings me to the actual game play of Modern Warfare 2. I can overlook a lack of interesting characters, or a deep, complex plot. I can even overlook visuals that are by no means ugly, but not the top of the industry as many have stated. But what surprised and disappointed me the most about Modern Warfare 2 was how completely uninteresting and uninspired the game play was.

It was almost as if the single player campaign was created using the Big Book of FPS Design Cliches. Even the open streets of Afghanistan amounted to nothing more than a corridor shooting gallery. I was willing to accept the more realistic take on warfare that MW2 was selling, until I had to flee enemies on a snowmobile in something that seemed ripped out of a James Bond flick, and very out of place for a game that, initially, was attempting to be a very grounded, realistic shooter. The moment that I managed to jump a 200 foot gap on my snowmobile is the moment my suspension of disbelief snapped.

The weapons in the game are standard FPS fare, so no complaints there. I mean, there are only so many weapons you can have in an FPS before it starts to feel samey (although the PS3 exclusive Resistance franchise is known for having unique weapons, like guns that can shoot through walls, put up force fields, and fire off tags that cause subsequent shots to flock to the tagged enemy; and yet Resistance is often called generic, bringing nothing new or interesting to the FPS genre…).

But I found the level design to be rather uninspired. It’s literally a by the book shooter. Even a segment that has your character deep undercover, and working with some Russian terrorists who are casually strolling through an airport, slaughtering innocent civilians by the boatload it seems felt like it was on rails and heavily scripted. Not to mention incredibly over the top for a game praised for it’s realism. The gunfights in the game are fast, as I imagine they are in real life, but they don’t have an impact on the player. I never felt white-knuckled, like I was getting by by the skin of my teeth, or that I was actually a part of a real war, with comrades fighting and dying beside me.

I can’t help but feel that Modern Warfare 2 and it’s flaws are given a free pass from the media. After all, the game has a 5 hour single player campaign. Multi-player, while still relatively the same as the first, has been paired down from 32 players to 18. Beyond new maps, there really isn’t much that Modern Warfare 2 is offering that you can’t get in Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, and yet the game is getting universal praise and adoration from the gaming media.

This is the same gaming media that called Killzone 2 generic, uninspired, with a weak cast of characters and excellent online. Killzone 2 is hard sci fi, with a deep, complex world, which is, unfortunately, barely skimmed in the narrative of the story. The main cast is most certainly weak, but no different than the “meatheads with guns” cast that is in Gears of War, and certainly more than the non-characters in Modern Warfare 2. The narrative is interesting enough, following a squad of soldiers on a mission to capture the Helghan Prime Minister Skolar Visari. They discover a few Helghan secrets, and the game ends on a rather ominous, if not thought-provoking note. Nothing so deep as Saving Private Ryan, but it’s more than just, “here’s your next mission kid, go get em!” like in the presentation of MW2.

Game play wise, Killzone 2 is hectic. Waves of Helghast soldiers try and take you down, using incredible AI and tactics that I haven’t seen in a console FPS game. The first person cover system (something new to the FPS genre, conveniently overlooked by the gaming media that harasses Killzone 2 for not bringing anything fresh or innovative) is surprisingly useful and well implemented, and the environments, despite being confined to the Helghan home planet, range from large, wide open bridges and valleys, to small corridors and rooms and factories. The single player campaign will also clock in at a good 10-12 hours. Over twice as long as Modern Warfare 2’s single player. The controls were also rather unconventional for an FPS, with characters and weapons having a heft  and weight to them that had many people complaining about “sluggish” controls, when it was  a design decision intended to increase immersion in the game’s highly detailed environment. It succeeded, but due to a bitter and jaded press, developer Guerrilla Games ended up issuing a patch that allowed gamers to adjust the controls to a more Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare style sensitivity.

The multi-player in Killzone 2 also supports up to 32 players (unlike Modern Warfare 2’s 18), and a class system that allows players to earn badges, which in turn can be used to customize a character more to their play style. For example, it’s possible to mix the Saboteur’s Primary Badge with the Scout’s Secondary Badge, and get a player that can disguise himself as the other team, and use the Scout’s scan ability to reveal the enemy team’s positions to his own team. Being able to mix and match the Primary and Secondary badges of the 6 classes was a unique feature for console FPSes, and yet it also went ignored or downplayed by the media. Killzone 2 also included “Skirmish mode,” which allowed players to seamlessly segue from one gameplay mode into the other without having to quit out into the lobby. For instance, transitioning from Team Deathmatch to Assassination to Search and Destroy was done in game, with no break in the game play. This forced players to think on their feet, and adjust their tactics to the new game mode on the fly. It made the online battles that much more exciting and unpredictable, but this was also ignored and downplayed by the press.

So, here, we have Modern Warfare 2 which barely iterates over the original release, has just as short of a single player campaign, and scaled back Multi-player, with bland, uninteresting level designs and characters, getting no shortage of praise and worship from the gaming media.

And on the other hand, we have Killzone 2, which defied all expectations, set a new bar for visuals in the console FPS market, and actually added to, and improved upon standard MP features by adding it’s own twist, and it was called everything from uninspired to generic.

There are media outlets that claim to value “originality,” and “innovation” in games when scoring it high marks, giving PS3 exclusives like Ratchet and Clank and Uncharted 2 lower marks for lack of originality and innovation, and yet those same outlets have scored near perfect scores to Modern Warfare 2, despite it’s lack of originality and innovation.

This isn’t a call out of Modern Warfare 2. Far from it. The game is most certainly a solid FPS title, despite it’s shortcomings. This is calling out the gaming media for being hypocrites and completely discrediting themselves and the review system with their double standards.

If you are going to call out a game for being “generic,” or “unoriginal,” or “uninspired,” then do the same for ALL games, and not just games you have a bone to pick with. Don’t give Modern Warfare 2 free passes on short length, downscaled multi-player, and uneven game design, but tear apart a game like Killzone 2, which features a long campaign, fully featured multi-player, and rock solid, tense game design, just because you have a soft spot for Modern Warfare.

This does more damage than good, because it encourages a lack of progress in the industry, while punishing the developers out there willing to try and do something new and different to help push the industry forward and keep it from stagnating.

There is room for FPS games like Modern Warfare 2 AND Killzone 2. They are different sides to the same coin, and both have their merits. You don’t have to tear one down to build up the other. No, Modern Warfare 2 doesn’t have to match Killzone 2 in graphics to be a good game, nor does Killzone 2 have to have the same exact controls as Modern Warfare 2 to be a good game.

Unfortunately, baiting the reader garners hits on their websites, so they continue to do it. They continue to build up hype for games, by calling them a “insert popular franchise here Killer,” and talking up unreleased games to the point where the gaming community is willing to believe what they have read and heard, without experiencing the games for themselves.

I had heard so much overwhelming praise and hyperbole for Modern Warfare 2, that my experience with the game was marred. I usually don’t take such hyperbole to heart, but when the review scores and statements from the  press are saying a game surpasses another in all areas, you will most certainly go into the experience with a bit more expectation than usual.

I miss the days where there was less fanboyism in the gaming media, and more genuine gamers that were able to report on the games as they are, not as what they could, should, or would be if something or other had been done instead.

As it stands, I think they are doing a great injustice to Modern Warfare 2, as well as Killzone 2 with their questionable tactics, double standards, and outright hypocrisy. The fact that they don’t even seem to realize that they are doing it is the worst injustice of it all.

Ignition Entertainment has announced that they will be bringing Access Game’s “Deadly Premonition” to Xbox 360 next year.

The survival horror game follows FBI Agent Francis York Morgan, who is investigating a murder in a small town. As you expect, all is not as it seems in the town, and a web of really creepy mystery unravels. Not much else is known about the gameplay other than players will be able to avoid enemies stealthily, or barge in guns blazing.

Check out the teaser trailer at the official site link below. I for one am always up for more survival games (not enough this generation, honestly), so I’ll definitely keep you posted on this intriguing title as more is known.

Link – Official Site

Jonathan Blow, creator of the time twisting platformer Braid, has confirmed that the title will finally make it’s way to the PSN on November 12th. That’d be next week Thursday.

I personally loved the game on the Xbox 360, so I don’t see why I wouldn’t love it on the PSN either. It’s clever, unique, and most importantly, very fun. I highly recommend it as a purchase. It will retail for $14.99 (USD)

An Editorial By Figboy

Like most of my editorials, this one is also spurred by a growing hypocrisy and double standard ravaging the gaming community and gaming media at large. This time, my laser pointer is aimed at game sequels, and why some can be praised for keeping the status quo, and others criticized for keeping the status quo. How some sequels can be praised for shaking things up, and others criticized for shaking things up.

I recently completed the latest Ratchet and Clank title, A Crack in Time, and prior to getting the game, I had ready plenty of coverage/reviews concerning the game. Despite some overall positive scores, there were a few that criticized the game for staying true to the Ratchet and Clank titles of yesteryear. There is certainly nothing wrong with calling a game out for not progressing, but then again, there are plenty of other sequels that these very same reviewers praised for “keeping the same game play you know and love.”

For example, Gears of War 2 was very much like the first game. In practically every way. The controls were still the same, the gruff, hard as nails protagonists were still, well, gruff and hard as nails, and the same hectic and visceral game play was in tact. As far as new features go, the game only really added 2 more players in multi-player, bringing the count up from 8 to 10, and a new mode called Horde mode, which let five friends battle it out against, you guessed it, Hordes of increasingly difficult enemies. There were a few tweaks of course, but the core of the series was the same. In short, Gears of War 2 stayed extremely true to the original, but was no less as fun, so it got a pass. It was never docked points in reviews, or criticized negatively for being “more of the same.” In the case of Gears 2, it was “more of the same game play you have grown to know and love.”

On the flip side, the latest Ratchet and Clank was docked points for being “more of the same,” despite the Ratchet and Clank franchise having one of the most polished, enjoyable formulas in gaming. Each game changes things up, but of all the games to receive the most negative criticism about being “more of the same,” Ratchet and Clank Future: A Crack in Time has a dirty little secret: it’s not as cookie cutter R&C as the gaming media has lead us to believe. In fact, the game boasts quite a few significant changes to the series, although the core game play (action/platforming and weapons), remains in tact. After all, if you removed those elements from Ratchet and Clank, it wouldn’t be Ratchet and Clank anymore.

I discuss it in my review, but I’ll briefly reiterate here. While the above mentioned core game play of A Crack in Time is there, the other changes are quite different. For one, you play over 3 quarters of the game as Ratchet. Clank is nowhere to be found, and those that are familiar with the series know that Clank is a rather vital component to the overall game play of the series. He helps Ratchet across chasms, and generally uses some type of gadgets or machines that help solve puzzles in his own mini-games.

Playing as a solo Ratchet was usually a chore in previous games, but one of the big changes Insomniac added to help Ratchet become a more enjoyable stand alone hero is the addition of Hover Boots, which expand his move set to partially make up for the lack of Clank, and he is able to perform more useful things with his wrench, like throw it while moving (before, he would have to stop, crouch, and throw the wrench), and also using it to tether to objects in the world and manipulate them to advance (like using it to grip a floating platform and move it to a point where he could jump onto it). Basically, Ratchet is a blast to play with now. Quite a change, and yet it is ignored by those wanting to cry more of the same.

Even the Clank game play is vastly different from any of the games before it. Gone are the helpful bots or Zoni that Clank commands, and in it’s place are a series of cleverly designed time puzzles, in which Clank must record and utilize past versions of himself to solve the puzzle. It is ingenious, and it’s a shame that are so few of them in the game. He also gains a Time Bomb, which allows him to throw a bomb that slows down anything caught in it’s area of effect, like enemies or fast-spinning platforms that then slow to the point where he can leap on them. Another addition is the Time Scepter, which lets him fix broken segments of the environment with a whack, or repelling enemy projectiles. These sections alone show a vast maturation of the game design abilities of Insomniac Games, and yet they are just as ignored and dismissed by the gaming media as Ratchet’s improved game play.

But by far the biggest change to the series, and the one that should be spoken of more, are the free form space segments. Gone are choosing the next planet from a list and warping to it (although you can still warp to the destination if you choose), and in it’s place are 6 huge sectors of explorable space with small moons to explore, sub-quests to complete, enemy ships to destroy, and of course, the various planets and ships that will be your mission objectives for the story. Exploring the small moons is a treat, as they are reminiscent of the few moon sections in previous games, but their level design is often quite creative, and are almost puzzles in themselves as you try and find every Gold Bolt and Zoni scattered throughout the 6 sectors.

I think, by this point, you can see that while Ratchet and Clank Future: A Crack in Time is still true to what makes the R&C franchise so enjoyable, Insomniac Games altered enough game play (even certain weapons and how you customize them), that the “more of the same” argument hardly applies. Whatever happened to “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it?” Ratchet’s game play is hardly broke, and even the very reviews that condemn it say, “Fans of the Ratchet games will find more of the same fun game play here, but…” Why add the “but?” Why not just leave it at what it is: a fun new entry in the series that fans and newcomers will enjoy. After all, the fans will buy the game because they are fans, and since the game play is still top notch, they won’t mind if there are some similar elements to past games. And if you are a newcomer to the series, you will have never played a R&C game before, so it will be all new to you anyway, so what’s the problem?

There are plenty of other sequels that don’t change a thing about their game play and they aren’t dinged for it. The latest Resident Evil is a good example, Halo 3 is another, but there is another, more baffling phenomena amongst the masses and the media that I can’t help but understand when a developer plays it safe.

There is a rather vocal bunch of the gaming media and gaming community that complain when a sequel DOES change up the status quo. For example, GTAIV. The game received rave reviews from the critics (most critics), but received an incredible amount of fallout from the fans. The game had a more realistic aesthetic, down to the game play, and despite rendering a fantastically believable facsimile of New York City (in the form of Liberty City), and improving some niggling GTA issues (like driving mechanics and shooting mechanics), people didn’t like the change.

Resistance 2 (another Insomniac Games title), while improving upon the original in all areas from controls, to graphics, to narrative, it was still criticized for changing game mechanics like the weapon wheel, removing the narrator from the first game and focusing more on evolving the game’s actual protagonist, Nathan Hale. They even changed the multi-player and co-op by bumping up the player count from 40 to 60, and eliminating story based co-op in favor of a deeper, more involved class based co-op system for up to 8 players.

All of these changes were met with harsh criticism and disdain. I suppose my question is: Which is it? Do gamers and the gaming media want games that are constantly changing the status quo, altering game play just to satiate some urge on the gamers part for more and different types of game play, even at the cost of the core of the series? As noted above, changing that status quo is often met with a negative reaction. The message that the gamers are sending to the game development community is, “What the hell are you doing to the game I know and love? Don’t change a thing!”

But then, hypocritically, when a developer keeps the core the same, and iterates on it (ie, as in Ratchet and Clank Future: A Crack in Time), the message gamers and reviewers are sending to the game development community is “This is the same game as before! Why don’t you change anything? Shake it up some!” It’s mixed signals, to say the least.

Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, is, on the surface, very similar to Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune. The action/platformer/shooter feels nearly identical, and yet developer Naughty Dog managed to deliver a sequel that surpasses the original in every way. The visuals, the pacing, the characterization, it’s all superb. It is a sequel that does not change much of the status quo of the series and it’s characters, and yet it is received with open arms. It’s very confusing to developers when they see fresh ideas/takes on established franchises suffer on the shelves, and same ol’ same ol’ sequels flourish.

That is another issue developers have to consider seriously when creating a follow-up to a game. Contrary to popular belief, the hard working men and women in game development are trying to make a living. They have mouths to feed and are doing this not only as a labor of love for the craft of creating video games, but for their livelihood as well. Because of this, considering what the market wants is very important. If the market wants more of the same, that is what they will get. Look at the Madden and Tony Hawk franchises, which have remained stagnant for decades. Even formerly new franchises like Guitar Hero and Rock Band are just adding new song tracks to what is essentially the same game mechanics since the original releases.

The reality is that the market dictates a lot of what a sequel will be. Companies like Insomniac Games, which are independent, have more freedom to express themselves creating, which is why the Resistance and Ratchet franchises are able to mix it up more often in terms of game play, regardless of the critical and commercial reaction. But even so, Sony, while not owning Insomniac, owns the rights to Resistance and Ratchet, and will, therefore, want to make sure that the series do well. Fortunately, even with the changes, the series are commercial successes, although Resistance 2 fared worse than the original and the Ratchet and Clank games. Only the future knows what this will spell for the inevitable 3rd entry in the series.

Personally, I just want fun video game experiences, whether brand new, or new coats of paint on game play that I know and love from an established franchise. I happen to adore Resistance 2, even though it did shake up quite a bit about the series and it’s game play. I also happen to adore the latest Ratchet and Clank game, even though it still stays true to the core of the series, but alters the presentation and execution enough to keep it feeling fresh and exciting (not to mention that the stories in sequels, as well as locations and setpieces are generally different). I love Uncharted 2: Among Thieves for being more of the same with a new coat of paint, because the core game play from the original was excellent to begin with. If a sequel happens to innovate or take a new approach to the series and it works out, that’s great, and I’m all for it too.

I don’t think game developers should institute radical changes just for the sake of it, or to appease whiny fanboys or the overly critical gaming media. In the case of Ratchet, Insomniac changed the game in ways the series needed to, and naturally, evolved to. Those changes should be celebrated, as well as the overall evolution of Insomniac as a game development house. A Crack in Time is truly the best Ratchet game yet, refining what makes the series great to a fine sheen. The same applies to Uncharted 2. Unlike Ratchet, it isn’t the 8th in the series, but it polishes the core Uncharted game play and sets a new standard for visuals and storytelling presentation.

Thoughts: Do you want sequels to be more of the same game play you love, or a radical change in the status quo of the franchise?

Genre: Action/Platformer
Platforms: Playstation 3
Developer: Insomniac Games
Price: $59.99 (USD)

I’ve always enjoyed the Ratchet and Clank games, but it wasn’t until 2007’s Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction that I became a fan of the series. The visuals, the humor, the story and game play were polished to a fine sheen. It truly was Ratchet and Clank from the PS2 days on the PS3, in glorious HD. Of course, with that adherence to what has come before, the game garnered a lot of criticism for playing it so safe.

2008’s PSN download only Ratchet and Clank Future: Quest for Booty removed Clank from the scenario and focused solely on Ratchet and a mini-tale involving his search for his missing friend. The platform heavy game nixed all things planet hopping, as well as the heavy emphasis on weapons and upgrading that the series was known for, although they did expand on Ratchet’s Omni-wrench by adding a tether grappling mechanic. The game was received with mixed results. Some loved it, others loathed it for what it removed from the R&C franchise, despite it’s smaller, downloadable only package.

Now, here we are, another year, and another Ratchet and Clank title, A Crack in Time, which is the conclusion to the current “Future” series arc, and answers quite a few questions regarding the pasts of both Ratchet and Clank, and boy is it a ride.

Before I begin, I’d like to get something off of my chest that’s been bothering me about the way ACIT has been received. Reviewers have been knocking it for being the same old Ratchet and Clank, but after my 22 hour+ game play session, I have to say I wholeheartedly disagree. And here’s why.

The story in A Crack in Time revolves around Ratchet’s ongoing search for Clank, and Clank’s tale revolves around him becoming the caretaker of the Great Clock, a vastly powerful devise that can manipulate time, but is expressly used to keep time safe, and from being tampered with. Naturally, the villainous Dr. Nefarious of past Ratchet games has captured Clank in an attempt to gain the powers of the Great Clock for his, ahem, nefarious plans. I won’t spoil the story, as it’s very well written, with fantastic humor from the great cast of characters, and many twists and turns. You are playing the game just as much to see how the story unfolds as you are to advance to the next world and weapon’s upgrade.

Visually, the game is beautiful. There is no two ways about it. The levels are massive in scope and detail, character models are detailed and emotive, and the space sections are simply amazing in their colorful representation of the stars. Playing this game on an HDTV is truly a treat, and I find the visuals vastly improved over Tools of Destruction. Insomniac went with a slightly more cartoony aesthetic this time, which not only suits the world better than the previous games, but really helps to sell the game as an animated movie brought to game form. Explosions, water effects, and details like leaves and brick are more stylized, and more appealing as a result.

As for gameplay, this is the section where I feel that ACIT is more different than alike than previous Ratchet and Clank games.

First off is a minor change to the controls that I thoroughly enjoyed. It may not seem like much, but allowing Ratchet to run and throw his wrench at the same time was a brilliant decision, and a long time coming. No more stopping and throwing away, and he can even throw the wrench while jumping in the air. It’s a little change, but it makes game play just that much smoother and more accessible.

As for the bigger changes, the main one will be the now free form space travel sections. Instead of simply selecting the next planet from a list, players are now able to explore the space between the 6 sectors in the game, partaking in “sub-quests,” or exploring nearby moons in order to collect Golden Bolts, Holo-BluePrints for an uber-powerful weapon, the RYNO (a series staple), or collecting Zoni, beings of pure energy that will upgrade Ratchet’s ship, Aphelion, when you collect the required number.

This freedom to explore space does more than just stretch out the game play hours, it makes the world feel that much more cohesive and real. It’s quite impressive to see your destination off in the distance, surrounded by other celestial bodies (or enemy craft). The space combat is simple, but enjoyable. It’s kept on one plane (no Colony Wars-esque game play here), and you have two weapons, a blaster, and missiles, both of which get upgraded as more Zoni are collected. In each of the sectors there are a few enemy satellites that you can destroy after defeating the squadron of their protector ships. These sections could certainly become tedious, but I found it very fun to fly around and engage in them. Of course, you are simply free to warp to the next objective if you don’t feel like flying anywhere.

The next big change to the game is the removal of Clank from the equation for the majority of the game. In previous Ratchet and Clank games, I loathed when I lost Clank and had to hoof it as Ratchet. His platforming always left a lot to be desired due to his limited move set (ie, smaller jump height), and for the first few hours of ACIT, you would be correct in assuming that the feeling was almost the same. However, Insomniac managed to do the unthinkable and made playing as Ratchet genuinely fun. His wrench-tether is implemented in fun ways, and more than that, the addition of hover-boots really opens up his move set, allowing him to compensate somewhat for the lack of Clank. I actually preferred to be playing as Ratchet when the game would switch over to the Clank segments.

Before I get to Clank, I must also note a third change to the game. The way weapons upgrade are nearly the same (killing enemies with said weapon adds to the weapons XP, as well as Ratchet’s overall XP, and they reach a new level when the bar is full, increasing the weapons stats like damage, area of affect, and ammo capacity), but there are specifically 3 weapons in the “Constructo” line that allow players to mix and match a series of upgrades to create the type of weapon they prefer; a pistol, a shotgun, and a grenade glove.

For example, the shotgun weapon has upgrades that allow you to adjust if it has a narrow spread, regular spread, or wide spread, and then mix and match those up with ammo types like explosive rounds, and perforating rounds. I miss the Raritanium style upgrading, but this new system was still enjoyable, and out of the 18 weapons you eventually gain, they are all a blast to use, especially when they reach their max level. In previous Ratchet games, some weapons were just not much fun, even maxed out. Insomniac has went with a few of the best of the Tools of Destruction weapons, and some truly fun new additions.

Now onto Clank, and what I believe to be the final big change to the series’ game play. Each Ratchet and Clank game has had some Clank segments, but he was usually limited to just running, platforming, punching, and utilizing bots (or Zoni, in Tools of Destruction’s case). There are exceptions of course (like Giant Clank), but for the most part, the Clank sections were almost filler. Not so in A Crack in Time. Clank is, in some ways, the true star of the game, in story and even gameplay, as his sections are truly inspired and well conceived.

For his sections, Clank is charged with maintaining the Great Clock. To aid him, he is given three very powerful new abilities. The first is a sceptor that allows him to whack away at enemies, as well as repair broken sections of the Clock by rewinding them to a healthier state. He can also use the sceptor to knock projectiles back at enemies that spew them at him. Secondly, Clank can throw Time Bombs, which detonate into spherical orbs that slow down anything captured within them. The Time Bomb is used in traversing the Great Clock also, by slowing down various fast-spinning gears that would be impossible for Clank to cross at normal speed.

Clank’s third new ability, and by far the most impressive, is his ability to record past versions of himself when solving puzzles. He does this by activating a pad, bringing up the menu with the Triangle button, and selecting “Record”. A simple example is the first: Clank must open a door for himself, so the player must first record himself walking to the switch and stepping on it, then ending the recording, and playing it back (via another platform). While past Clank is stepping on the switch, current Clank is able to run through the now open door. Insomniac uses this mechanic in such clever and devious ways that I was truly stumped on quite a few of the puzzles, and the feeling of triumph when successfully completing them is wonderful. There are also special optional challenges that Clank can do while in the Great Clock if you really enjoy the time manipulating segments (and if you want to collect an additional 4 Gold Bolts for a Trophy).

There’s not much else to say about Ratchet and Clank Future: A Crack in Time, so, as you may have guessed, it’s that time again:

VERDICT: BUY – A Crack in Time is the most polished, humorous, and creative Ratchet and Clank game yet. It stays true to the core game play and style that the fans have grown to love, but it expands upon them with more enjoyable Ratchet only game play, wide open space sections (which hold a lot of promise for future entries in the series), and Clank game play that is truly creative and innovative, as well as evolving the characters into more complex, 3Dimensional beings. In short, Ratchet and Clank has grown up, and any fan should have this stellar title in their collection. Even newcomers can hop on board, as the characters and game play are incredibly accessible.

The Playstation Blog revealed today that Netflix streaming is finally making its way to the Playstation 3 next month. The application will allow users to stream movies and TV shows via the XMB…as long as they have a Netflix account.

According to the press release, PS3 owners will need a disc provided by Netflix that will allow users to access specific BD Live features. Note: You don’t need the disc to stream movies, only to access BD Live features.

You can request the disc here.

The full press release is at the link below.

Source – Playstation Blog

Genre: Crime Sandbox
Platform: PSP (Available on UMD and PSN)
Developer: Rockstar North
Price: $39.99 (USD)

I’ve been playing the Grand Theft Auto games since the original debuted on the Playstation 1 (and PC), back in 1997, and I’ve been a fan ever since. Of course, seeing the series return to it’s top down roots did have me concerned a bit as I fired up the PSP version of the former Nintendo DS exclusive title. Afterall, as enjoyable as I found the top down GTA’s in the past, they were mired by brutal difficulty, exacerbated by a horrible control scheme and finicky driving controls.

Fortunately, I shouldn’t have been worried, as Chinatown Wars takes everything that was fun and unique about the top down version of the game, and marries it with smooth controls, fun mini-games, crisp, stylish visuals, and a story packed with humorous characters and an entertaining story.

Centering around roguish and sarcastic Huang Lee, son of a wealthy (and murdered) Triad boss, the game follows his exploits as he attempts to regain a stolen family heirloom; a sword, from rivals that took it when they tried to kill him upon arriving in Liberty City. Huang turns to his Uncle Wu “Kenny” Lee for help, and ends up becoming his right hand man in Uncle Kenny’s attempts to rise the ranks of the Triads and make Liberty City his. I won’t reveal much else from the plot, just know that it is funny, interesting, and filled with the colorful characters you expect from a “classic” GTA experience.

Being a remake of the Nintendo DS version, the first thing you will notice upon beginning Chinatown Wars is how impressive the visuals are. The game is still played from a top down perspective (instead of the 3rd person perspective known in the other PSP GTA’s: Liberty City Stories, and Vice City Stories), but the visuals have received a bit of an upgrade. They have been properly formatted to fit the PSP’s wide screen, and the textures are sharp, and visual effects like smoke, fire, and character models are sharp. The buildings are impressive and towering, and the vehicles are appropriately shiny. It’s not a technical showpiece for the PSP’s visual prowess, but it’s certainly pleasant on the eyes.

The biggest change to game play from the DS version is, of course, the lack of a touchscreen, which factors into a lot of the many, many, mini-games scattered throughout the game. I found that the mini-games were no less enjoyable, and the way they are mapped to the PSP’s buttons is rather clever. Take for example rooting through a garbage can to find hidden items/weapons. You press up on the analog nub to raise the lid, then alternate between the L and R buttons to clear away the garbage and obtain your prize (or worthless garbage like a moldy hot dog or condom). I really enjoy the mini-games, which include hot-wiring a car, hacking into security terminals, and making molotovs by buying gas from the gas station, then attempting to fill as many bottles as you can before the gas runs out.

One of the biggest issues with the top down GTA’s of old were the cumbersome control scheme. It simply wasn’t user friendly, and made the game unnecessarily difficult. Thankfully, Chinatown Wars lets you control your character with ease using the analog nub, with the face buttons controlling entering/exiting vehicles, attacking, and jumping/rolling. The R button locks onto to enemies (and only enemies when they are around, so no accidental killing of pedestrians), and the digital pad lets you swap between locked on enemies. Overall, combat in the game is easy and satisfying, and given the simplistic nature of the game’s presentation, I wouldn’t ask for a more complex system.

Driving feels good, with cars all looking and handling very differently and fairly believable. The only real difficulty I came across was often, when driving really fast cars, it’s hard to react fast enough to things like turning corners if you aren’t really paying attention to your mini-map or GPS arrows that you can overlay on top of the road. Fortunately, Rockstar attempted to alleviate some of this by allowing you to go into the menu and adjust the game’s “car look ahead” depth. By cranking it up to 10, the game will be panned out a little more in front of you, allowing you to see a bit more of the road without leaving the top down view, or making your vehicle look extremely small.

The game is set in contemporary times, and with that comes a few more gameplay additions that really add to the enjoyability of GTA: Chinatown Wars. First up, is the newly implemented drug trading feature. As you’d expect, this feature allows players to buy and sell drugs to other drug dealers, and make a hefty profit (or take considerable losses if they aren’t careful). It’s rather self explanatory, but players can find and approach a dealer, buy and sell product, then move onto the new dealer and do the same. Players are aided by helpful emails they receive in their PDA (which I’ll touch upon next), that informs them of “hot tips” on who is looking to buy what for high prices, or who is looking to sell for low prices, which in turn, can be sold to an eager buyer for a high price.

For example, I received a tip that one of the dealers was selling Downers for really low price. Upon investigation, I learned that if I bought the Downers at that price, I could earn a profit of $400 when I sold them to another buyer who was in need of Downers. The system is simple, and very enjoyable.

Aside from the drug trader feature, players are able to use a PDA which is the single most important item in the game. It includes a GPS, email, trader information (so you can keep track of all the drug trading tips you receive), and online shopping, allowing you to order all your weapons from Ammu-Nation and have them delivered to your safe house.

The GPS lets you plot courses to any destination you desire, and has a helpful sub-menu accessed by pressing the Square button, which lists important Points of Interest, characters, and more. Email is self explanatory, as is Trader info. You simply select what you are looking for (ie, a drug dealer), press the X Button, and once you leave the GPS, the route is mapped out for you on your mini-map. The only real issue with the PDA is that it takes a good second or two to load the new menu when you press the button. Overall, it’s not a deal-breaker, but I would have liked to have seen a quicker turn around for accessing stuff once in the menu system.

Another welcome addition is the ability to save anywhere as long as you aren’t in a mission, although you will still load into the nearest safe house when you reload the game. The mission structure is still standard GTA, but the missions are in much more manageable bites, which serves the portable nature of the game.

Local Multi-player and co-op is also included in the game, which lets you, naturally, play the game with friends and trade items and unlock missions. There are a host of game modes, such as Race, Season, Stash n Dash, Defend the Base, LC Survivor, and Gang Bang. I didn’t get to spend any time with the MP (nobody with a PSP or Chinatown Wars in the house at the moment), but I’ll add my MP impressions as soon as I’ve spent enough time with it. Even so, I’m not afraid to issue my verdict.

VERDICT: BUY – This take on GTA is both familiar and fresh, combining the old school classic GTA style and presentation with some new and welcome additions to game play and controls. The story is funny, the mini-games are highly enjoyable and unique, and the overall package is polished and enjoyable. You can spend hours at a time lost in this pocket Liberty City, playing mini-games, buying and trading drugs, and purchasing new safe houses. It’s a testament to the fact that good game play doesn’t always need a shiny, HD coat of paint to be good game play. I highly recommend this one.

Konami has officially announced the North American version of the PSP remake of Shadow of Destiny, a title that was released on the Playstation 2 in 2000.  The game is set to release sometime in early 2010 for the PSP.

The tale follows Eike Kusch, who is having a bit of a bad day. As he leaves a coffee shop and is going about his merry way, he is ambushed from behind and stabbed. Instead of dying, he is transported to a strange realm by a mysterious being named Homonculus, who gives Eike a device that will allow him to travel back in time and prevent his death. What follows is a tale of twists, turns, alternate endings, and lots of time travel.

I bought Shadow of Destiny on the PS2 when it released, and it is still one of my favorite games of all time. The story is captivating, the characters interesting, and the gameplay mechanics were risky and original for it’s time (non-combative gameplay, with the bulk of it being wandering around the same town during various eras and gathering clues to solve the mystery of Eike’s multiple deaths and the secrets behind the Homonculus).

The only issue I had with the game was it’s horrid voice acting, but hopefully Konami has recast the roles in the game. Even if they don’t, I highly recommend the game to those that enjoy a good tale and gameplay that is not of the point and shoot variety.

Gearbox Software has resolved the PSN connections issues with Borderlands. No update necessary.