It's a little ironic that this blog post is only two posts away from a rant about the post-reveal fallout. In all honest, I never thought I would have ended up with an Xbox One. My choice had largely been made after E3 and it was really only due to the enormous ineptitude of Harvey Norman and their pathetic system of pre-orders that bumped me out of the launch day queue. I had one dead console and another practically useless for playing any media - I needed a new BR player/Netflix streamer quickly and waiting until the end of the December/Mid-Jan wasn't going to cut it. If even by default, the Xbox One originally got a sale purely because stock was available.
But then I started using it, and was impressed that the majority of the claims Microsoft made, worked. The Windows 8.1 inspired UI is much more refined that it is on PC - allowing a limited amount of customisation, but then also rearranging tile placement based on how the console is actually used. For example - both the TV, Bluray and Netflix apps are largely used more than any other ATM, mainly because I generally *don't play* a lot of games on consoles. They aren't my primary devices - especially when the lineup is fairly sparse. As a result, the Home screen puts those apps in quick and easy focus, allowing me to "Pin" the others in a window to the left.
The other surprisingly good addition is the workable voice activation, that ingrains itself in almost every App. I can pause DVDs, select Netflix profiles, bring up the GPS in NFS: Rivals. It works 9 out of 10 times and is great when you don't have the controller handy or don't feel like digging through menus. The Kinect is much more useful in a more subtle way too - it picks up who is using the console and logs them in, follows the active speaker in Skype, and tracks bodies and even fingers a zillion times better. The only issue I had is that it took a decent amount of calibration and placement to make it reliable.
One very underrated addition is the SmartGlass app - it works *perfectly*. It essentially allows for full remote/local management and control of the Xbox and XBL profile. I can check/add/send friends, messages, achievements. I can control and open apps via a touch remote or direct command. I can load up second screen companions for games. It worked straight out of the gate and it's probably one of the best pieces of software MS have made in quite a few years.
Then there's the controller. It's the 360 controller with grippy analog sticks, better triggers with fine rumble inside them. That's basically it - it's an even better improvement on easily the best controller ever made. A lot of people have claimed it still takes second fiddle to the new DS4 - also a markedly better improvement on the abysmal DS3, but still missing Asymmetric analog sticks and a deeper recess on top.
Really, and most quixotically, what the console is really missing is decent games. Forza 5 and DR3 are great titles - but they aren't really for me. I don't pretend to be into Sims, and a lot of the microtransaction rubbish put me off instantly. DR3 suffers from one of my personal bugbears - a great, fun, engaging title that has awful controls and a silly inventory system. The rest of the lineup is largely cross-plat stuff, but Rivals is really the standout for me. It's a ton of fun to play, doesn't take itself seriously and features a very cool system of cat and mouse with enough extra flavour to not grow old.
Its on that same token that most of the core people I play console games with don't own a XB1. Yet. Half of them bought PS4s or are simply waiting for next year when a killer app pops up that they can't resist. So, essentially, I'm back on the PC until the stars align - which is likely when Watch Dogs and Titanfall arrive in March, forcing people to take the leap. By that point I'll probably have a PS4 anyway which will render any sort of cross-platform problem moot in any case. But for now, I'm happy with the One - it's a supremely capable TV companion that is simply begging for a host of new games, both Indie and AAA.
Sunday, December 1, 2013
Saturday, May 25, 2013
The Xbox One: Or how Microsoft has finally jumped the shark.
I've been bitching, whinging and flat out *moaning* about the Xbox One since I woke up the day after the launch and read through the various summaries of the launch event. Now, it's no secret that I'm significantly more positioned towards the realm of PC - I write primarily for a PC focused website, the platform is my primary games format and I've become less impressed with the conduct of console makers since they decided to turn their back on the customers that actually matter. You know, the ones that evangelize their systems and help to grow their takeup through word of mouth and bucketloads of free internet marketing?
But let's face it - the PS4's bottomless pit of an announcement was a pitiful excuse to stretch hype over 6 months as they fought off concerns of becoming gradually directionless and static. But, for all its flaws (like, you know, not showing the console it was launching) it actually had a focus on games, from start to finish, and exemplified Sony's growing commitment to supporting independent developers and creating a marketplace for innovation. We're told that their E3 conference promises to finally show off the kit, which we basically already know about now, plus embellish a little bit more on what they're planning to bring to the table.
Or, basically, why the fuck we should invest in a PS4 when a Steam Box has cheaper games and the capacity to upgrade. But I digress.
The primary problem with the Xbox is not the Xbox One at all, but more Microsoft's complete lack of long term direction or market realization. Since their campaign to convert the Xbox from a gaming centric device to some kind of Apple TV hybrid has gone down about as well with gamers as a cholera outbreak, Microsoft have chosen to interpret steady sales of the 360 as some kind of mandate to continue to make terrible decisions. These decisions include, but are not exclusive to, the lockout of IPTV applications to non-gold members and to, basically, force people to pay money to harness a primary aspect of the game they have already paid for.
Microsoft figure that Xbox popularity is almost guaranteed, in the same way that iPhone owners continually buy the next iteration without consideration to competition, and have thus created the iPhone 5 upgrade to the iPhone 3S that is the 360. Sure, it's the same OS (largely), same Kinect (basically), and upgraded hardware, so why shouldn't people just dropkick their old systems into the bin and move to the new hotness? Well, I'm sure the fact that none of their titles are backwards compatible would probably be a large factor in reducing the excitement of upgrading.
But what's most painful about this new direction is the focus on something Microsoft has been trying, unsuccessfully, to crack since the mid 90's - TV. They are fucking obsessed with it. From WebTV, to an entire version of XP dedicated to it, Microsoft, for some reason, want you to watch TV through their eyes.
This would have been all well and good... in 1997. But TV is increasingly becoming online, on-demand and unhinged. Smart TVs already include half the shit Microsoft is pushing, and they don't require TWO extra boxes to do the job. Don't have a smart TV? Well, you will within the next 3 years, since it's practically a standard now. The Xbox One's presentation tied itself so tightly into this "innovation" that it practically alienated its entire global install base (which is remarkably sizable and profitable) and relegated their launch devices to be the neutered and empty, missing half the features that took Microsoft almost a year to implement after the original Kinect launched.
That's not even the worst part. Then there's the DRM that needs to check in on your box at least once a day to check you are behaving. Plus the fee that's charged when you buy used game software either at retail or on your device. Then there's the extension of Microsoft's extraordinarily stupid "Gold" program that should NOT include access to multiplayer. Then there's the expansion of voice controls that don't work properly on the original Kinect. Then there is the lack of emphasis on decent titles and a lack of consistency on policy across the board.
It's clear that Microsoft are no longer happy to focus their strengths on the things they can do right - they want to have those dirty fingers in every pie, even if those fingers are literally *covered* in that disgusting cholera.
But let's face it - the PS4's bottomless pit of an announcement was a pitiful excuse to stretch hype over 6 months as they fought off concerns of becoming gradually directionless and static. But, for all its flaws (like, you know, not showing the console it was launching) it actually had a focus on games, from start to finish, and exemplified Sony's growing commitment to supporting independent developers and creating a marketplace for innovation. We're told that their E3 conference promises to finally show off the kit, which we basically already know about now, plus embellish a little bit more on what they're planning to bring to the table.
Or, basically, why the fuck we should invest in a PS4 when a Steam Box has cheaper games and the capacity to upgrade. But I digress.
The primary problem with the Xbox is not the Xbox One at all, but more Microsoft's complete lack of long term direction or market realization. Since their campaign to convert the Xbox from a gaming centric device to some kind of Apple TV hybrid has gone down about as well with gamers as a cholera outbreak, Microsoft have chosen to interpret steady sales of the 360 as some kind of mandate to continue to make terrible decisions. These decisions include, but are not exclusive to, the lockout of IPTV applications to non-gold members and to, basically, force people to pay money to harness a primary aspect of the game they have already paid for.
Microsoft figure that Xbox popularity is almost guaranteed, in the same way that iPhone owners continually buy the next iteration without consideration to competition, and have thus created the iPhone 5 upgrade to the iPhone 3S that is the 360. Sure, it's the same OS (largely), same Kinect (basically), and upgraded hardware, so why shouldn't people just dropkick their old systems into the bin and move to the new hotness? Well, I'm sure the fact that none of their titles are backwards compatible would probably be a large factor in reducing the excitement of upgrading.
But what's most painful about this new direction is the focus on something Microsoft has been trying, unsuccessfully, to crack since the mid 90's - TV. They are fucking obsessed with it. From WebTV, to an entire version of XP dedicated to it, Microsoft, for some reason, want you to watch TV through their eyes.
This would have been all well and good... in 1997. But TV is increasingly becoming online, on-demand and unhinged. Smart TVs already include half the shit Microsoft is pushing, and they don't require TWO extra boxes to do the job. Don't have a smart TV? Well, you will within the next 3 years, since it's practically a standard now. The Xbox One's presentation tied itself so tightly into this "innovation" that it practically alienated its entire global install base (which is remarkably sizable and profitable) and relegated their launch devices to be the neutered and empty, missing half the features that took Microsoft almost a year to implement after the original Kinect launched.
That's not even the worst part. Then there's the DRM that needs to check in on your box at least once a day to check you are behaving. Plus the fee that's charged when you buy used game software either at retail or on your device. Then there's the extension of Microsoft's extraordinarily stupid "Gold" program that should NOT include access to multiplayer. Then there's the expansion of voice controls that don't work properly on the original Kinect. Then there is the lack of emphasis on decent titles and a lack of consistency on policy across the board.
It's clear that Microsoft are no longer happy to focus their strengths on the things they can do right - they want to have those dirty fingers in every pie, even if those fingers are literally *covered* in that disgusting cholera.
Sunday, April 14, 2013
Bioshock Infinite: Almost ruined by combat
Bioshock Infinite has torn me in a manner unlike any other game to date.
On the one hand, I thoughtfully enjoyed it. I adored the floating city of Columbia, the mysterious and hidden path of the protagonist, the idle companionship of Elizabeth, and the frenetic pacing of a story based around regret, redemption, suppression and brutality.
On the other, the longer I played through the game, the more I found myself sighing whenever I popped into the pre-determined arena of a "major" battle. The pre-placed rifts featuring an assortment of health packs, salt, appropriate weapons and almost useless cover. Enemies standing around in well spaced positions, with an array of weaponry designed to swarm and suppress my position as quickly as possible. A few hooks to exploit that rarely available "air to ground" insta-stun that rendered you open to attack from everyone anyway.
There's no strategy here. Enemies don't allow it. Entering the battlefield invites instantaneous flanking, rocket spam, random spawns, and sometimes even a bunny hopping Handyman with a convenient weak spot. You can't stealth in and around to land hard attacks. Elizabeth can't use her immense power to actually harm anyone, for some reason, but can through you ammo and salt at opportune times. Every now and again there's a skyline you can hop on, but I found myself thinking that the pace of these fights didn't match well against the controls nor your field of vision.
But what incensed me more than anything else was the sheer pointlessness of many fights. Why did I have to kill Lady Comstock three times? Why did I need to protect a ship when I could have flown to my destination on a giant robot bird I was able to control? Why did every single nemesis have a team of henchmen that I needed to kill almost constantly, when most of them seemed to enjoy having a yarn? Why did the game feel that I should be able to shoot the innocent poor but not the innocuous rich?
I continued playing because I adored the moments in between. I loved finding audio logs which drip-fed various dimensions of the puzzle and offered a different perspective. Winding my way through Elizabeth's prison and earning her trust. Gazing at the sheer beauty and detail in everything - from Fink's enormous factories to Comstock's multi-structure ode to himself. Digging up the detail of this seemingly picturesque locale that was rotten to the core.
So why did I need to kill everything, almost all of the time? Why was my gun on screen during dialogue, pointing at people it didn't need to be pointing at? Why couldn't I explore an area without having to run into
nameless thugs who rushed me for simply existing in that particular place?
It didn't have to be this way either. The game started well. It offered me a weapon but spent a fairly long time establishing the scene without using it. By the time I had brained my first guard, I was ready for a fight, although I didn't know I'd be hoarding ammo and SCIENCE because of the perpetual chance I'd have to electricute a bunch of guys enough so I could blow *all* of their heads off in one shot.
Combat ceased to be a potent mechanic about halfway through the game. I was tired of it. The rare moments when B:I decided you didn't have to do it if you didn't want to, I breathed a sigh of relief. I could explore a little, stare at the posters and hunt around for more logs. Oh, wait, there's a dude in here, better kill him now he's seen me. Oh great, 20 more dudes. Kllkillkillkill until the music stops.
But the final fight was the last straw. Simply put, it was one of the worst climatic fight scenes I've had the displeasure of experiencing. What could have been a powerful lead up to a spectacular ending, was instead a clusterfuck of timed fighting, waved enemies and my personal pet hate, vehicles with health. I grit my teeth and ground through it.
I loved the ending, but I couldn't help but think it was spoiled by the preceding few hours. At the point things got interesting and ramped up, the designers' felt that their only option was to simply overwhelm the player with combat. So much so, that by the time I reached the bow of the ship to meet Elizabeth, I had 3 shotgun shells left.
On the one hand, I thoughtfully enjoyed it. I adored the floating city of Columbia, the mysterious and hidden path of the protagonist, the idle companionship of Elizabeth, and the frenetic pacing of a story based around regret, redemption, suppression and brutality.
On the other, the longer I played through the game, the more I found myself sighing whenever I popped into the pre-determined arena of a "major" battle. The pre-placed rifts featuring an assortment of health packs, salt, appropriate weapons and almost useless cover. Enemies standing around in well spaced positions, with an array of weaponry designed to swarm and suppress my position as quickly as possible. A few hooks to exploit that rarely available "air to ground" insta-stun that rendered you open to attack from everyone anyway.
There's no strategy here. Enemies don't allow it. Entering the battlefield invites instantaneous flanking, rocket spam, random spawns, and sometimes even a bunny hopping Handyman with a convenient weak spot. You can't stealth in and around to land hard attacks. Elizabeth can't use her immense power to actually harm anyone, for some reason, but can through you ammo and salt at opportune times. Every now and again there's a skyline you can hop on, but I found myself thinking that the pace of these fights didn't match well against the controls nor your field of vision.
But what incensed me more than anything else was the sheer pointlessness of many fights. Why did I have to kill Lady Comstock three times? Why did I need to protect a ship when I could have flown to my destination on a giant robot bird I was able to control? Why did every single nemesis have a team of henchmen that I needed to kill almost constantly, when most of them seemed to enjoy having a yarn? Why did the game feel that I should be able to shoot the innocent poor but not the innocuous rich?
I continued playing because I adored the moments in between. I loved finding audio logs which drip-fed various dimensions of the puzzle and offered a different perspective. Winding my way through Elizabeth's prison and earning her trust. Gazing at the sheer beauty and detail in everything - from Fink's enormous factories to Comstock's multi-structure ode to himself. Digging up the detail of this seemingly picturesque locale that was rotten to the core.
So why did I need to kill everything, almost all of the time? Why was my gun on screen during dialogue, pointing at people it didn't need to be pointing at? Why couldn't I explore an area without having to run into
nameless thugs who rushed me for simply existing in that particular place?
It didn't have to be this way either. The game started well. It offered me a weapon but spent a fairly long time establishing the scene without using it. By the time I had brained my first guard, I was ready for a fight, although I didn't know I'd be hoarding ammo and SCIENCE because of the perpetual chance I'd have to electricute a bunch of guys enough so I could blow *all* of their heads off in one shot.
Combat ceased to be a potent mechanic about halfway through the game. I was tired of it. The rare moments when B:I decided you didn't have to do it if you didn't want to, I breathed a sigh of relief. I could explore a little, stare at the posters and hunt around for more logs. Oh, wait, there's a dude in here, better kill him now he's seen me. Oh great, 20 more dudes. Kllkillkillkill until the music stops.
But the final fight was the last straw. Simply put, it was one of the worst climatic fight scenes I've had the displeasure of experiencing. What could have been a powerful lead up to a spectacular ending, was instead a clusterfuck of timed fighting, waved enemies and my personal pet hate, vehicles with health. I grit my teeth and ground through it.
I loved the ending, but I couldn't help but think it was spoiled by the preceding few hours. At the point things got interesting and ramped up, the designers' felt that their only option was to simply overwhelm the player with combat. So much so, that by the time I reached the bow of the ship to meet Elizabeth, I had 3 shotgun shells left.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)