My latest Variety review looks at Mercenaries 2, which I like quite a bit -- and I'm surprised I like it so much. Yeah, I thought I wouldn't like it at all -- because "console blockbusters" are traditionally vapid? Because I don't tend to like "run around with heavy armaments" games? Because it "seems masculine?"
Recently, I've been languishing in a little bit of disinterest in games in general; blame the summer lull, blame the occasional periods of burnout I get from having to focus on such a high-volume industry all the time. I sometimes wonder if working in games hasn't, over time, begun to affect my enjoyment of them. But then I notice that it's not really that I haven't enjoyed playing games lately -- it's been that I've enjoyed playing a narrower range of games than usual.
I don't really have the luxury of only playing those games which immediately appeal to me. Not only do I get assigned reviews on a fairly regular basis, but my interest as a games writer is largely the culture surrounding games, which means that I learn a lot by trying many different things and trying to empathize with different segments of the audience. Before I was involved in game journalism to the extent I am now, I literally never played first-person shooters at all, because I thought I hated them. Since then, I've played a lot, and while I still wouldn't call it my preferred genre, there've been a few that I enjoyed -- if I'd stuck religiously to my law, I'd never have played BioShock, for example, and that would have been a big miss, to say the least. I like that my job makes me try things I ordinarily wouldn't.
And because it's important to me to have a broad lens on the industry overall, I try to take an objective stance with just about everything, to the point that I forget I do have niche preferences of my own. I tend to have irrational guilt if I focus on one title to the exclusion of all else -- how "up on things" can I be if all I feel like doing is playing Symphony of the Night for the umpteenth time?
Everyone's excited about Spore, and I am too, but how I feel right now is damn irritated that Amazon has bungled my preorder of Harvest Moon: Island of Happiness, even though it's likely to be largely similar to every other Harvest Moon title I've dumped hundreds of hours into already.
Maybe, though, there's a lesson to be taken from my own regressive preferences, since I'm sure I'm not alone in this. I've expressed a tick of frustration recently over the overwhelmingly fast pace of our industry and the high volume of new releases, when major titles that took years to develop feel done-with and "old" only a few months after they launch. Completion feels good, doesn't it? It's satisfying to know a title like the back of your hand, to be intimately familiar with it, to have spent enough time with it to develop habitual, personal association. And today's console titles are, as a rule, so large that it seems rather difficult to do that with them, doesn't it?
I feel vaguely guilty that I just want to play Castlevania. I feel guilty that, as I keep an eye on the plethora of downloadable titles released on each of the platforms I own week after week, I'm still playing PixelJunk Eden practically every day even though that one is a few weeks "old" already. I resent that guilt.
So maybe I tend to resent the "traditional," highly-anticipated console blockbuster because here's more to see and do, here's another huge "can't-miss" title that I'll feel pressured to finish in time for the next major release. I think really, beyond its testosterone-fueled explosive destruction and rat-a-tat gunfire mechanics, this principle is really why I thought I wasn't going to like Mercenaries 2 -- less to do with my usual console preferences and more to do with my state of overwhelm and my longing for a title that's simple enough that I can map it all to my heart, hand and mind and give it some sense of permanence.
Mercs 2 is simple enough -- in fact, the majority of the glowing sentiment I accorded it in my review is for the ingeniousness of the design that makes it fun to play without being overcomplex. I was pretty amazed as I learned my way in via the tutorial level and found myself thinking, "you know, I bet a non-gamer could pick this up and enjoy it." But it's pretty wild fun. As I said, running around with an AK-47 tends not to hold my interest for long, but if there's one thing I love to do it's destroy environments and blow things up -- in light of that, there's no other word for Mercs 2 but satisfying.
And it's even more fun with a buddy. And I mean to play co-op with people more, I really do -- but, y'know, at the end of my workday, I really just want to play a little more Eden, maybe a little SotN. And right now, I'm gonna refuse to feel guilty about that.
Anyhow, check out Mercs 2 review at Variety. I really think a broader range of player types will enjoy it than might be expected from a quick glance, even if it's "not usually their thing."
[Update: My editor at Variety, Ben Fritz, writes about a really cool free gas publicity stunt in the middle of L.A. that EA pulled off to promote the game. You crazy left-coasters!]
25 comments:
I get that too! There are periods where I just look at what I've got and what's coming out and wonder what the heck is going on with games. It makes me wonder if this is me moving on. Then something awesome comes out and I'm back to playing again. I've no idea what brings it on though.
I saw this review in my RSS feed earlier and was surprised to see you reviewing this title and even more surprised that you liked it.
Most reviewers who go out of genre tend to let their biases show. A forgiveable mistake to be sure, but it's better when the reviewer passes that test, which you did. I found this post interesting to read so I could see your thought process and your struggles as you reviewed it, balancing your internal "meh" with the requirements of your job.
"Keeping up" also means that video game "culture," or at least video game journalist "culture," is increasingly disconnected from how people actually play games in my experience. I know two or three guys who tend to play a lot of new releases; but I know (or know of) a ton of people who play maybe two games a year. I know several people who will only now finally get an XBox 360 (their first current gen system) this Christmas.
I might be projecting my own lower-income childhood memories on other people, but the typical game player stretches a title out for months. Even somebody like me, the kind of person who reads SVGL and checks Kotaku at least twice a day, often takes one to three months with a given title... well after its shelf date. (Which increasingly is "one week after release date," as harried journalists are already on the prerelease code for next month's releases.)
I'm not burning out on games but I am burning out on the "culture," the blogs and podcasts, where I'm bombarded with info on games I can't play yet; and then when I am finally basking in them, they're forgotten. I feel like I'm being alienated, or at least left behind, if I don't beat games within a week or two of release and move on. I guess that's what the industry wants...?
The rising cost of game development (and increased number of financial failures) might be a good thing. Variety and choice might be replaced by a more cohesive culture, like when every gamer you knew had played the same games (because their weren't so many, and the masterpieces stood out) and you could talk about them.
But playing with our people means having to deal with their needs!
The biggest problem with experimenting outside ones area means having to deal with the possibility of a large cost in time and money to find yourself bored or frustrated. You rent a bad movie, you're out $3 and 90 minutes. You buy a bad game and you are out at least $20 and how much time you give it to get good.
Now there is something to feeling left out and trying to understand the culture around something. For example I'm physically unable to play Guitar Hero. Meaning I just don't get it because for me to play it means physical pain. So while I understand it, I don't really understand it.
We-ell, I wouldn't say it was an "internal meh," -- I go into all games I review with the same open mind, or I really try to. You know, like if I have pre-conceptions, I just ditch em as soon as I switch the console on. I just meant as this isn't usually my genre, I was really pleasantly surprised by how much fun I had.
And actually, I'm really in favor of reviewers going out of genre sometimes. You have to think about who a review is for, really -- those who consider Etrian Odyssey "their genre" will probably buy the game with or without the review. I'm sure they'd find it useful to hear it weighed against other similar titles by someone familiar with the genre, and that is important -- but there is also a need for a review that serves people outside that niche who would like to know if they might enjoy going out of genre, too.
This review I wrote of Fire Emblem back in the day was pretty controversially received because I essentially dislike games like this and rarely play them. But I thought it was an interesting experience for me as a reviewer, and I was enormously up front about the state of mind I went into the review on so that people could weigh it accordingly.
The result was that the review infuriated Fire Emblem fans, but I got a lot of emails from people who aren't necessarily tactics fans who appreciated a perspective on a game from someone like them -- someone who is, if I may be blunt, other than a fanboy.
Ideally, though, I think the best reviews are done by people who have a broad enough understanding of many audiences and genres to apply intelligent and useful criticism to whatever they play, factoring in larger things than just personal taste.
And in the end, I do buy the argument that people well versed in a franchise or genre are the ones best-suited to review it. Of course, I don't see how someone could review MGS4 without having played the previous games -- but then, that's just me being a fangirl. :) Still, I often find it useful to read reviews by people I know are entering the experience from a different standpoint than I am.
Maybe GI (I use them as an example because they could do it with the least amount of disruption to their production process) can have a "favored-genre" and "non-favored-genre" viewpoint when they do reviews.
It's a dichotomy that I think few would oppose, and it would increase the value with which the reviews are read.
(To be fair, the GI staff lists their genre preferences, but they don't present or assign based on this dichotomy.)
As a general rule, no one ever needs to apologize for Symphony of the Night. I say this as I contemplate buying it for my PSP, Xbox 360 or both while still having access to my playstation 2.
Alvin: I have it on PlayStation, PSP, Xbox 360 AND PS3, which means I think it's the game I have on the most platforms and have bought the most times.
On the note of reviewer preference (for or against) I suppose it's a bit of a double-edged sword, isn't it?
I mean, if the reviewer is a fan of the type of game they're reviewing then they're theoretically more able to adequately judge the game amongst its peers. On the other hand, it could be argued that a review by such a person would be heavily subject to personal bias.
If the reviewer doesn't hold an interest in the type of game they're reviewing, that can also be good because, as you mention, it's important to have a perspective from someone who's new to the genre as well. However, I often find that any negativity in such reviews tend to be subject to rather volatile fanboy reactions ^_^ ;;
Yeah, but we've gotta overlook the fanboy reactions. If we keep it in mind while we're writing, we're not being honest -- we're either trying to provoke someone, or censoring ourselves to avoid provoking someone. The only reaction reviewers should focus on is whether the people who are interested in the review will get what they need from it.
If you liked Mercenaries 2 you should try the first one and Hulk: Ultimate Destruction. You can get them at a used at a ebgames for almost nothing. Prototype is a game that the makers of Hulk are working on. Its another game like Mercenaries 2 that was delayed for huge amounts of time around when GTA4 came out.
Really high quality games just don't come out all the time. More you limited the genres you enjoy the more that is true. For some genres the really good games have already come out and everything after is just a copy. Gets boring playing the same thing.
I love Symphony of the Night, and, having aged a little since my more game-intensive days (plus having started to feel a little disconnected from the gaming "world" partly for the reasons you mentioned), I only have it for PS1, not four systems. "Not that there's anything wrong with that." :-)
I read the Fire Emblem review you linked to and appreciated your honesty. I do like some strategy games although it seems like they have (in general) gotten a lot more complicated--as if that equated to "better". Anyway it's always refreshing to see someone with an open mind, which you seem to have cultivated. I am grateful for your commentary on games and their relation to the issues of today. I probably couldn't make myself play all the games you do, but reading your discussions of them makes me feel like part of the "community." Thank you for what you do and for doing it with style and heart.
So true about "not-keeping up" guilt, or just the guilt of wasting a few hours on a video-game. My Xbox decided to break on me the other week, so I've slid back to the PS2, and damn, for a good while there I could barely play it; feeling obliged to go blog or read fresh info on the Nets. The guilt is rooted out- so now I can play through MGS2+3, God of War, SotC/Ico and Max Payne without guilt! Good call Beeporama-the information culture that has grown around video games can definately aim people away from the games themselves; or at least how they should enjoy games.
Interesting take on Mercs 2 also, taking it for what it is and enjoying it. A lot of negative reviews really seem to try too hard to analyse it, and I guess that just isn't what Pandemic were going for.
I've always wondered how someone can be a critic or review when they have a certain bias or lean one way. you see it all the time with movie critics and some bash a movie without even seeing it. I hate first person shooters too, they never seem first person enough to me usually just a floating gun or whatever in front with no view or peripheral vision. at some point you will see your body when you look down or around.
Hello readers of Sexy Videogameland, my name is Sarah Palin and I am the Republican nominee for vice president of America.
First off, I object to this name Sexy Videogameland as Jesus has shown us that the ethical application of sex is babymaking, this casual usage of an unethical colloquial term implies it is good. I would not object to Babymaking Videogameland, though. Also, I do not believe Videogameland is a place in America, but I am yet to ask the advisers who are briefing me on this great country if it is. Because I am a person of the people, I will report back to you with my finding. If such a place is not in America, I suggest a namechange.
Secondly, I love mercenaries. I bake a batch of chocolate chip mercenaries every week. Pipper and Wilow just love them! When president, I will release the Palin recipe for mercenary goodness.
Sincerely,
Governor Sarah Palin
I've put about 4-7 hours into Mercs 2 and I just don't see where the fun is at. The graphics are underwhelming on the 360, the landscape is quite barren and devoid of life, and I had a far better time playing GTA IV as far as open-world games go. I'll delve further when I throw up a review on my blog, but the game feels like it should have came out about 3 years ago. There's a bunch of wonky things going on in the game one of them being the whole relationship between the vehicles and the landscape, literally every time I leave the PMC compound and take Fiona's car, when I drive full blast over the little hump of road to leave the mansion the car takes 10-15 damage. Things like that happen all over the roads they've built. Like I said, the game is full of little bugs and glitches and when you add that with stale gameplay I lose interest quick. Perhaps the studio stretched themselves thin by working on Mercs 2, LOTR:Conquest, and Saboteur all at once. I just hope that Saboteur is given care and ends up fun.
I often find myself wishing video game reviews were more like good film reviews. When I read a film review, knowing whether the reviewer likes the film is only part of my interest in the review. Film reviewers watch a lot of movies and KNOW a lot about movies. A good film reviewer understands the allusions a film is making to other movies. He or she is keenly aware of some of the subtle elements of cinematography and performance, and can draw attention to noteworthy moments in the review. In short, I can learn something about the movie and maybe (if I go see it) appreciate it a little more for the education the reviewer has provided.
By the same token, I would love to read more game reviews that applied that type of analysis to games. I feel like most reviews are still grade school "book reports," rather than more nuanced analytical essays.
Yeah I think in general it's good to throw out assumptions on what we may or may not like - in gaming, because like with movies and music what we thought we'd hate sometimes ends up being what we can't live without.
Does this disgust you like it did me?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26531658/
@etelmik:
"Most reviewers who go out of genre tend to let their biases show. A forgiveable mistake to be sure, but it's better when the reviewer passes that test, which you did."
Then again, it can work the other way around, too. When someone reviews a game from a genre they're relatively unfamiliar with, they might be more positive toward it because the game elements seem a lot fresher to them than to reviewers who already have a lot of experience with that particular game type.
This might explain why the general critical reaction to Mercenaries 2 is a lot less positive (with criticisms of the game's derivativeness especially numerous) than Leigh's.
@laura:
The most disgusting thing about it is that most women present apparently didn't find it disgusting.
If a guy asks a public panel how to get her more into gaming, with her standing right next to him, and she apparently thinks that it's okay that he thinks that he can learn more about her from a videogame panel than by asking her directly... I don't even wanna know what that relationship is like.
Also:
"Chicks like flattery."
Says the Xbox Live Community Manager.
Who happens to be female.
Oh my fucking God.
Really, I think we're overdue here for another bishoujo game review.
Ever since I've looked at the stars and realized that in all likelihood I would never leave this planet, I've resorted to destroying all my biases. I stick around people i hate, say things I think are 'gay' and yes, I'm a male feminist. Being raised by a single mom might have something to do with it, and my choice in women often follows the path on non traditional females. I followed this post from another site, and I might just be ranting right now as i have no clue what my point is going to be.
I only play with female characters in soul calibur, TAki, Ivy, and Xing, I love their fighting styles, coincidentally they're female also. I hate harvest moon but I'm pretty sure I've done things that homosexuals would classify as gay so thats not really the issue.
There does seem to be a niche genre for female gamers. I say its slow paced, creative titles, like RPGS, Adventure games. I noticed that all the female gamers I've played with arent very good, and even when playing fast paced games they tend to slow it down. What I would defintely classify as a trait would be competitiveness. God, women.. too competitive, as long as the game is challenging I think they'll play it. Guys on the other hand seem to prefer games that they have hope of beating rather than something that presents a challenge, I think i'll stop there because I'm starting to cross that border of pure stereotyping.
"I'm a male feminist"-anthony alexander
I have not looked up the meaning of the word but I'm kind of sure that the femin part means you are a woman for female rights, you can say you are a guy that supports female rights but a male feminist is sort of like saying you are a straight homosexual. I'm interested to know what are Leigh's feelings on sport games like NBA live and Madden does she play them?
Post a Comment