What computer games are you playing now?

[Black Knight]

After a stint at Sid Meier's Pirates!, I'm back to Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn, which is surely the best D&D video game ever made, despite its age.

[Native Jovian]

Does that count things like Knights of the Old Republic, which aren't technically D&D games, but are essentially the same system regardless?

I'm currently making another go at a perfect run in HM64 (last one died when I realized I didn't have enough time left to hit some of the deadlines). Gamefly has informed me that it's shipping out Modern Warfare 2 and Super Mario Galaxy 2. Interesting combination, Gamefly; I see you have an appreciation of juxtaposition.

[Black Knight]

I love KotOR, and both it and BG2 were made by BioWare, but BG2 has better NPCs, better interaction with the world, and far, far more depth. Especially when considering that BG1, BG2, and the BG2 expansion are all a single long story, and that you can take the same character through all of it (and BG1's expansion, though it doesn't deal much with the main story). In true BioWare fashion, there are sometimes as many as three ways to end the same quest in BG2, and almost always two. I can't think of any quest that takes more than five minutes which can only have one solution. There are also many more NPCs available than in the KotOR games, so if one likes a particular character class or skill set there are generally at least three ways to achieve it.

I miss being able to manufacture items, granted, but the BG series is generally so generous with magical items that it's not necessary.

[Zinegata]

There is certainly a level of epicness in BG that has never been replicated in any other RPG. You start from somebody who is afraid of dying to common house rats to becoming a literal God.

Can't get more epic than that!

[foxpaws]

Would really like to play Star Wars: The Old Republic, but companies have gotten pretty good at shutting competitors's employees out of their closed betas. Understandable on a professional level, frustrating on a personal one...

-- Keith

[Native Jovian]

Just finished Modern Warfare 2's campaign. I'm not entirely sure why. It's not like I enjoy being fucked over by the level design and the plot in turn.

Actually, I do know why -- it's because CoD's gameplay has a glorious golden polish that shines through brilliantly when the level design and infuriating plot lets it. It's quite refreshing to be able to put enemies down with a single shot to the torso after you're used to things like Halo, Gears of War, and Fallout 3 that require you to empty a clip into someone's face at point-blank range to actually kill them. Sadly, the game seems intent on punishing you instead of letting you enjoy yourself. Oh well.

[foxpaws]

This isn't the first time that I've heard a person express frustration at Modern Warfare 2's single-player campaign. I've managed to play through it without much difficulty not once, but twice, once on normal and once on hard. And I'm reasonably sure that I'm far from the best at first-person shooters, given how quickly I get slaughtered in multiplayer.

Though anecdotal, I've found that Modern Warfare's game design (on hard mode) affords the player very few 'safe' locations for the player to take cover, thereby forcing the player to find new cover after firing a few bursts. For better or worse, this mirrors real life; there is no such thing as an indefinitely "safe" position from where you can snipe at the opponents at leisure until they are all dead, as the AI tries to smoke you out of your comfort zone.

(Although, the AI cheats on hard mode with infinite enemy respawns until you play the campaign as it was "intended," by storming the spawn point and securing it. On Normal it's actually possible to keep sniping until all the opponents are dead, then mosey on to the next checkpoint.)

-- Keith

[Shiro Amada]

I didn't mind MW2's campaign too much. Though, I feel it was truncated because of the emphasis on multi-player. I view the game as a Michael Bay film: Not much substance, but it's a loud, fun ride anyway.

Though, I admit, the term "Oscar Mike" was possibly used one too many times.

Now I need to head over to the Burger Town because no one else can seem to.

[Native Jovian]

This isn't the first time that I've heard a person express frustration at Modern Warfare 2's single-player campaign.

It wasn't the difficulty that bothered me (it wasn't particularly difficult, as FPSes go), it was the fact that what difficulty was there was usually a direct result of what I believe is termed in the industry as a "fuck you". The Grand Fast Food Battlefield was a good example -- at one point you set up on a roof and are told to defend against people crossing the parking lots. If you actually do this, you get shot in the back by enemies climbing up the two ladders to the roof. If you ignore the people on ground level and camp the two ladders, you do fine until the game decides it's time to move on. This is frustrating for two reasons: one, they give you a mission and then make you do something completely different in order to actually beat the level, and two, your NPC squadmates do absolutely nothing to defend you while you're singlehandedly sniping half a battalion (and let's be honest, NPCs in FPSes exist entirely to keep you from being blindsided and that's about it). They'll yell about guys coming up the ladder, so the AI is certainly capable of noticing their existence, but they will sit there and stare blankly at the Ruskies while they walk up and shoot you in the back of the head. Another good example is the Boneyard. They give you the impression that it's mostly a sneaky mission -- the idea is to avoid drawing attention to yourself while the other two factions shoot each other to death, right? Except then they make you cross a killing zone of a runway with two dueling IFVs, both of which will break off trying to hit each other and focus entirely on you as soon as you break cover. That's wonderful, Infinity Ward. Thanks a lot.

But worse than that is the plot. The plot repeatedly kicks you in the balls for no reason whatsoever, and takes great pains to point out that you're nowhere near as awesome as Infinity Ward's favorite NPCs (that'd be Soap and Price).

Spoilers ahead, for anyone who's still interested in MW2 but hasn't played it yet.

One mission as an Army Ranger apparently qualifies you to be a super-secret undercover agent, where you slaughter dozens of innocents, only to be unceremoniously shot in the head at the end of the mission? So yeah, you just participated in the murder of civilians as an act of terrorism for absolutely nothing. Fuck you, Infinity Ward. When you beat a level, you're supposed to win. Switch this up once, it's dramatic. Switch it up more often than not, and it becomes really goddamn annoying. In MW1, you accomplished the mission you were given plotline wise exactly once (you stopped the nukes from hitting the east coast, though only after failing to do so several times in a row). It's slightly better in MW2, but they make up for it by killing you twice as often. MW1 had the guy who was executed and the guy who was nuked; MW2 has the Ranger that went undercover, the ISS astronaut (which made physics cry, because shockwaves don't propagate in space, geniuses), Roach, and Soap (who didn't actually die, but it has basically the same effect, plotwise). Hell, even Ramirez got a taste of it, what with the Black Hawk Down Redux that they make you play through multiple times for some reason. In addition to outright killing you, they take great joy in showing that you're not as awesome as the NPCs. Whether it's slipping on an icy cliff face and having to be grabbed by your CO, to getting sucker punched into unconsciousness by a guy who's been in a gulag for five years after you blew up a wall directly in his face, to being the guy stuck in the helicopter (presumably wounded) after it crashed while your buddies are apparently unharmed, to being knocked unconscious by falling debris (to no purpose whatsoever other than making you less awesome than everyone else, as they just wake you up and you get lifted out immediately), etc etc. I'm sure I'm forgetting a few. Oh! Having two special forces soldiers get beaten senseless by a single staff officer who just went through a helicopter crash. Okay, they'd just gone off a waterfall, but it was still bullshit. I like doing awesome things in video games, Infinity Ward, not being lame as hell just in time to watch someone else be infinitely more awesome than you'll ever let me be. Especially if it's a bad guy doing the awesome.

The thing I found frustrating was that while the gameplay makes you out to be the next best thing since Rambo, the storyline makes you look like the biggest loser since Leeroy Jenkins. I don't particularly like being repeatedly debadassified by your bullshit cutscenes, Infinity Ward. It's not fun for me to have my sense of accomplishment at beating your (sometimes frustrating) missions stolen from me by your M. Night Shamalan-esque plotlines (what a tweeeeeeest!). The only reason I can think of why they'd do that is because they secretly hate their players.

There's a lot of fun gameplay buried in the Modern Warfare games. The Chernobyl mission in MW1, for example, was brilliantly done. The AC-130 escort mission was a blast too. MW2 also had its moments; the snowmobile escape was shameless action movie style entertainment (in a good way), and the "defend this point!" sections (like outside the nuclear submarine, or inside Makarov's safehouse) were good fun (though they would've been moreso if your NPCs weren't useless tools). The problem is that they bury it under frustrating level design and infuriating plotlines.

Though, I admit, the term "Oscar Mike" was possibly used one too many times.

"Oscar Mike" didn't get to me nearly as much as "Ramirez! [Do everything!]".

[Shiro Amada]

It almost seems like MW2 was pruned of some plot lines or points. Maybe I missed some exposition or something, but what was up with that VIP you had to find in the house? And what exactly was the purpose of pointing out that the dead guy in the house safe room was not your ordinary Russian?

And who the eff was the guy you had to protect in the Burger Town complex anyway and why was he important? I seemed to have missed that particular briefing. Though, I guess as Ramirez was Mr. Do Everything, he probably was out getting coffee and the remote for the UAV while it was taking place.

So, at least in my view, the game seemed to be missing important story points.

[foxpaws]

Funny you should mention AI teammates (not) defending you. In StarCraft II, if you play a 4 vs 4 game, with yourself and 3 other AIs, the 3 other AIs cheerfully disregard you as a weakling human and liability; instead of coming to your defense, they'll leave you to your demise while they blithely go to town against the opposing AIs' base camps. Sometimes it feels like they've set you up to be the fall guy, distraction, or cannon fodder, take your pick. (I suppose that makes them more focused and dedicated than the NPCs one gets stuck with in an FPS, though.)

I haven't seen many games where the AI actually acted "human" enough to bail you out when you actually need help, even if it means putting the overall objective of "team victory" in jeopardy. For better or worse, that is a decidedly human trait. Instead, they're all programmed to win the match, your death be damned - not save the player and make the player feel appreciated and important and loved. "You died to a Zerg rush? Well, that's a damned shame. But we won the match for you, so no hard feelings, right?"

Lesson learned: artificial intelligence isn't very intelligent. Or caring.

Seriously, if you're intent on winning a StarCraft II match, play co-op with a Korean pro-gamer (disclaimer: not me) and show the AIs who's boss. Of course, your contributions will be nowhere near as important as those made by the Korean pro-gamer, but at least you won the match, right?

Also, not all games have to be about you being the alpha dog, Gordon Freeman, Master Chief, Captain America, Tony Stark, Superman, or Batman in the story. I imagine that people who have a problem not being the alpha dog will absolutely hate DC Universe Online, since nobody gets to play as the iconic DC superheroes - you get stuck being a no-name hopeful. (Though it's probably telling that Marvel recognized this to be a problem with their players' expectations - everybody wanting to be Spidey, Wolverine, etc. - and thus canceled Marvel Online years ago.)

Sometimes, it's just about telling a story, with you being an observer swept up in events far larger than yourself. I don't have a problem with that in of itself. The one thing I've learned now that I'm almost 40 years of age is that I know my place in the world; I don't have to act as if I'm an alpha dog, and neither do I need my video games to let me pretend that I am one, either. I'm content to survive to see another day and continue the good fight.

Of course, it helps if it's a well-written story. The comparison of the Modern Warfare series to Michael Bay flicks definitely stands.

-- Keith

[foxpaws]

PS: of course, not letting you be the #1 hero is an important consideration in an MMO where almost everybody wants to be the #1 hero. I'll concede the point that in a single-player game, it's definitely not the norm to not let the player be the top dog. None of us are CEOs, celebrities, or leaders of a nation, and video games are meant to be escapist entertainment that lets us pretend we're involved in something far larger than our usual lives, after all.

-- Keith

[Native Jovian]

My complaints about Modern Warfare boil down to three points: 1) the friendly AI is crap, which I have to assume is deliberate since the enemy AI is fine, 2) the level/mission design is bad, in that the game seems to frequently lie to you about what you actually need to be doing (eg, it says "shoot the guys crossing the parking lot" when the real answer is "shoot the guys climbing the ladders"), and 3), which I find most frustrating, the plotline is terrible and seems to rely on the enemies always being at least a half dozen steps ahead of you, which is neither entertaining nor dramatic, but in fact frustrating as hell. (The fact that they literally make you sit there and watch helplessly as they kill the player character repeatedly is just icing on the "fuck you" cake.)

Regarding the "hero vs. bystander" question, I don't actually mind not being the hero. Some games are good at that. Ace Combat 6 is a good example of this -- yeah, okay, you're a famous ace pilot be the end, but the most powerful thing you can do in the game is call in reinforcements. Seeing friendly NPCs (many of which are reoccuring and have their own personalities and histories that you can glean through their radio chatter) unleash swarms of missile-y death on a target you indicate (or swoop in and "sanitize your six", as the jargon goes) is very powerful both in terms of in-game effectiveness and in terms of reminding you that despite being the biggest badass in the sky, you're still just a tiny part of the overall force involved in the conflict.

But Modern Warfare is not that kind of series. Like it's been said, it's a Michael Bay film in video game form. If I'm playing the FPS version of The Rock, I want to be Nicolas Cage or Sean Connery, not one of the random mook SEALs.

[foxpaws]

I took the parking lot scenario to mean: "try to shoot as many Russians crossing the lot as humanly possible - but shit happens, a few (competent) Russians will sneak through despite being under your fire, and you'll have to shoot the guys climbing up to the roof." On Normal mode, I found that the sentry gun helped a fair amount, and what few Russians did sneak up, I dispatched with a few well-timed hand grenades and (if I remember correctly) some mines placed around the entrance. While I died a number of times during that level, it wasn't due to the rooftop arc, which I played "as scripted."

Of course, to prevent this from devolving into "just camp the roof entrance" and ignoring the intended directive, the creators should have scripted the event in a way that if you only camped the roof entrance and ignored the parking lot, something terrible would happen and you'd fail the mission. Which, as far as I can tell, the creators did not do on Normal mode.

The right way to do this might be to have the Russians start lobbing grenades and mortars and RPG rounds from the lot onto the roof once they get close enough, thus giving you an incentive to shoot as many of them as possible in the lot before they can get within grenade range. (Instead of just camping the rooftop entry.)

The super-cheap way of ensuring this would be a hidden kill counter of "# of Russians shot in parking lot before arc is allowed to end," meaning that you could shoot an infinite number of rooftop Russians by camping the roof entry and never finish that arc of the mission, in turn forcing you to play the game as scripted. In fact, MW2 does this very frequently on Hard Mode and above, with infinite respawns at certain checkpoints, forcing you to storm a position and engage in CQB instead of plinking/sniping away from safe cover until the enemies are all dead, then leisurely strolling up to the checkpoint. (I admittedly did the latter a lot on Normal mode.)

I personally thought this method - infinite enemy respawns unless player plays the game as intended - was a rather cheap and transparent way of ramping up the difficulty in Hard mode. It wasn't quite so bad for me on the first play-through on Normal mode; while I'm a terrible shot in real life, I'm told I'm not a bad shot in FPS games. I shot quite a few Russians in the lot before they got close, and only had to deal with 2-3 attempts at climbing up the ladder...

-- Keith

[Zinegata]

I play Modern Warfare 2 simply because it is a Michael Bay movie with a Hans Zimmer soundtrack. I don't mind getting offed in plot-scripted events at all - it's all in the name of cheap drama.

Also, I've been playing Starcraft (1, not 2) a lot recently. Usually 3 humans against an AI. While I appreciate friends coming to the rescue, I do tend to think that a bloody-minded approach like the AI's would lead to more wins. Gang-bangs by 3 or more enemy AIs are pretty hard to stop even with allied help, and I'm tempted to just signal "Ignore my plight and burn down an enemy base" whenever it happens.

OTOH, whenever I signal "Enemy superior, issue in doubt", it usually turns out all of us are in really dire straits and no help is forthcoming anyway .

Korean pro-gamers are also sick, sick, people who must have grown a new organ to achieve 3 APS -_-.

[foxpaws]

I think you meant 300 actions per second, and whatever new organs they grew must be caffeine-producing glands or something...

-- Keith

[Zinegata]

I think you meant 300 actions per second, and whatever new organs they grew must be caffeine-producing glands or something...

-- Keith

300 Actions per second? Or per minute?

[foxpaws]

Er, meant to write actions per minute, or APM.

-- Keith

PS: I had no idea what the word "mook" meant and had to look it up.

[Mirai Rogue]

So.....Starcraft 2......yeah. In a word....awesome. The Wings of Liberty campaign is just fantastic. By and large the missions are all interesting and fun, apart from that one with the bloody wall of fire...grrrr. I love the whole way that between missions you can interact on the Hyperion. Gives a great level of depth and feeling to what's happening.

I know it's pretty much a given with Blizzard games but the cinematics and soundtrack were first rate. I think the cinematic 'Fire and Fury' is probably one of , if not, the best cinematics I've seen in a game. Sends shivers down my spine ever time I watch it.

I haven't done much in the way of PvP yet. Traditionally I'm not that good at playing RTS games online. I'm not a fan of insane levels of micromanagement and memorising the perfect build orders to counter certain races. That said I'll give it a go eventually.

[Zinegata]

Every epic piece of fiction needs a "Do Not Go Gentle Into The Night" moment. "Fire and Fury" may be the best yet for a video game.

Also, nice tribute to Koiter hidden in there.

[foxpaws]

It's pretty neat how the Dominion Marines have their visors down, but you can still tell from their body language that their spirits are lifted by Raynor's speech.

Rene Koiter is my coworker. I had no idea he had lost a brother until I watched the cinematic.

-- Keith

[Black Knight]

I'm actually getting somewhat interested in SC2, having read some reviews which actually cover the sorts of topics I want a review to cover, rather than simply gushing over finally getting a sequel. Unfortunately, don't have either the time or the opportunity at the moment. And I'm trying to knock out my christmas shopping...

[Black Knight]

Got my copy of Starcraft II; unfortunately, with no way to hook up my computer to the internet for the installation check, I won't even be playing the "Guest" account (why do I have to be a guest on my own computer, with my own copy of the game) until some time after I get back to Leatherneck. I'd heard there was a don't-even-have-to-register-w/-b.net crack, but haven't been able to find it. Oh, well, I can at least read the game booklet until I have it memorized.

Then again, work's been so busy of late that I haven't even played BG2 in over a month. I don't think I need to add sleeplessness-due-to-Starcraft to everything else going on.

[foxpaws]

The game can be installed on multiple machines; the account login ensures that you can only play on one of those machines at any given time. When you connect to Battle.net for the first time, an offline authorization is granted to that machine to enable offline single player. So you have to connect at least once - but after that you can play single player offline.

If you log into SC2 on another machine, Battle.net will revoke the offline/guest authorization from the previous machine when said machine subsequently connects to Battle.net.

-- Keith

[foxpaws]

Addendum: the reason StarCraft became so big in Korea is because it provided a cheap form of entertainment during Korea's recession during the IMF crisis.

Where by "cheap," I mean a keygen that was hacked to Hell and back. StarCraft may be South Korea's national pass-time, but if not for the internet cafes that offered StarCraft for customers and funneled money back to Blizzard, my employer may not have seen a red cent from the Korean market.

So now we get stuck with the "must authorize online once to enable offline single-player" setup. Thank the cheap cheap South Koreans for that.

-- Keith

[Black Knight]

Oh, I know that I can play off-line for 30 days after I connect online once to register the game -- but it's connecting that one time that is proving to be an issue. They don't have free Wi-Fi at Bagram the way they did at Leatherneck, and I probably won't be here long enough to make the paid service worthwhile.

I can understand a lot of the decisions that turned into SC2's "features", but I don't have to agree with them. I also won't attack Blizzard for making those choices, though I will reserve the right to say I think several of them are very stupid.

[foxpaws]

They make armed forces personnel pay for wi-fi over there? That's pretty darn stingy, if a good way of preventing the wi-fi from getting totally overloaded...

-- Keith

[Black Knight]

As I said, they make people pay for it on Bagram, but not at Leatherneck. Just one more reason that one of my corporals refers to Bagram Airfield as being part of "Afgarristan". When I get back to LNK, I'll probably be able to connect & complete my installation, and while playing online won't be feasible, the monthly checkup probably will.

For the moment, I've started playing Dwarf Fortress, which has been a nice mixture of frustrating and amusing.

[Native Jovian]

Which version are you playing? I've taken a crack at Dwarf Fortress a few different times, and new versions tend to fix things that were annoying in the older version while introducing new things that are absolutely infuriating. For example, in the second-most-recent version (v0.28) there were only two or three materials that were "magma safe" (meaning that they didn't melt when covered in lava), which was annoying. In the newest version (v0.31) the list of magma safe materials has greatly expanded, but they've changed the way that farming works so that instead of just designating a farm plot and getting to it, you have to deal with irrigation, which usually involves manually micromanaging individual dwarves with buckets. Urgh.

[Black Knight]

I've been playing the latest version of Dwarf Fortress, so as to not have to unlearn things. Been entertaining, definitely a steep learning curve and a lot of un-intuitive controls/sequencing...but still amusing enough.

[Mirai Rogue]

Playing World of Warcraft: Cataclysm beta.

-- Keith

Damn you sir! Damn you!

Damn me sir! Damn me!

For I am also playing World of Warcraft: Catacylsm beta.

[foxpaws]

Make sure to provide plenty of feedback.

-- Keith

[Mirai Rogue]

We're supposed to provide feedback? ^_^

Actually I was pondering this point. Just how much useful feedback is obtained during this process? Some of the people I've encountered thus far have been, to put it politely, total idiots. Bitching and moaning about one of the quests in the Goblin starting area being bugged and thus not letting anyone advance beyond lvl 4. Sure it is annoying but it's almost as if some of these people have forgotten that it's a beta. oh well I'm having fun with it.