This Isn't Your Father's C++

Face it: gamers are suckers for new things. They love the new and best creation. No one loves the Subaru of gaming. It may be reliable, but it sucks in terms of flashiness. No, gamers are more for the jaguars and the lambourghinis of the world. Developers know this, and the constantly are trying to find new ways of making their games the best and most intriguing they can be. Development has always had its share of "techniques" if you could call them that. There are certain trends and repetitions in the industry that seem to always be a source of that flashiness and popularity. Most of the time the new trends developers try to do crash and burn. This can range from majorly oversized chest areas and inventory wheels. But some of the time developers do find that golden ticket of a technique. They find an implementation that works, and they share it with others, effectively creating a "development technique". Over the last 5 years many more of these have come into play. Once again, most are absolute crap; but some have shown signs of absolute mastery. 5 techniques specifically have changed the face of gaming.

TECHNIQUE #1: Westernization
The power of the west has finally trumped the east. For so long genres such as RPG and RTS have been dominated by the Japanese and Koreans. Eastern development ways and trends dominated so much of the gaming scene since the early 90's. The new millenium saw a subtle shift in this trend, however. You see, western and eastern development are very much day and night. Western development always focused more on an all around experience with great gameplay, great integration, and a great story. Eastern development always focused more on specializing one of these things. In the eras of the PS1 and PS2, Eastern development fit. The power of the machines could only keep up with one of these things. Eastern development found a nice spot in terms of gameplay and graphical capacity, and decided to focus on the unique stories and setpieces that can only come from the east. Games such as Final Fantasy VII and the Tekken series brought the eastern flair to the world. This is what people liked, and what people wanted at the time. But as the graphical and gameplay possibilities began to be experimented upon, western development began to become much more intriguing. These were down to Earth stories, created with the idea of mass appeal. The scales were shifting, and when the new Xbox and Playstation hit the world, the balance of power, especially in terms of RPGs, changed. Western development began much more popular. Techniques such as gigantic development crews and a less linear way of development replaced the old ways of small development numbers paired with a very concrete development scheme. No better example is present than that of Mass Effect. This was one of the first western RPGs to majorly outsell and outlast any Japanese RPGs. The industry looks like it is comfortable now with westernization too. Many successful devs have stated that they are shifting their development philosophies, most recognizably Hideo Kojima, who will be implementing a western development cycle for Metal Gear: Rising.

TECHNIQUE #2: Realism
Another complete shift in game philosophy is realism. Going back several years from the present most developers were focused on a very fantasy and fictitous development realm. They were focused on pushing the envelope in terms of believability. This wasn't a bad thing by any means. Some great games were created because they pushed it in terms of realistic presentation. But just as gamers grew up and had more mature and realistic minds, so did the games they played. Developers recently have shown a trend in making games much more realistic. This is mainly for two reasons. The first is the most obvious: the technical barrier. 10 years ago technology only allowed for so much. There were no tools to create realistic physics or create a believable environment. The best skill to have at the time was to use the tools you had to push the envelope into something completely awesome. You couldn't rely on the technology to give you your perfect vision. If anyone knows this, it would be Tim Shaffer. Some of his greatest games, such as Grim Fandango, were great in vision but flawed due to the low technological capabilities. As tech became better games could do more in the realistic realm. Realistic physics and damager are possible now. Mouths and eyes can be moved to mimic a real person and add detail and personality. These things helped shape a new way of development. Devs don't have to compromise a vision. They can push the limits without the limits breaking. Tim Schaffer can now make a game that fits with his vision (Brutal Legend). Another less obvious reason for more realism is demand. What used to be fun to do isn't anymore. Terrible physics and blocky graphics were acceptable at one time because the scope and the fun of the game made it okay. It was excuseable because there was no way to fix it. Now, real physics is possible. Graphical capabilities are at there highest. There is no excuse for these things. They aren't fun.

TECHNIQUE #3: Guided Free-Roaming
It is as if gamers were pregnant. Early on devs were focused so much on created a linear experience. If you consider some of the best games of the 90's, they are a lot of platformers. This fit for the times. People loved a great experience that led you on a path. Take it to the beginning of the 21st century, free-roam became a very popular trend. This is in part to the major fame and success of the Grand Theft Auto games. These games posed a new way to play a game. No goals. No paths. You choose. This was intriguing. It was amazingly clever. It was awesome. But it got old after a while. Gamers have begun to crave a controlled experience more and more and more. They want that great story and immersiveness. They also wanted choice and freedom, too. Early on it seemed as if these two could never mix. But devs found a way, and games that combine these two things are vast and abound now. This might be from a free-roam game with moral choices. Developers such as Bethesda with Fallout 3 created a gigantic free-roam post-apocalyptic Washington D.C., but they also created a set story (an immersive one at that). They gave the player very tough moral choices, one that affected the story, giving it a linear feel in that respect. This could also be a linear game with openness built in. Games like BioShock have a very set story, but things such as customization in weaponry, plasmids, and equipment and the several hours that can be invested in finding Big Daddies and audio tapes open up the experience. Devs have found a sweet spot. They played around with the chemistry set quite a bit over the years, and they finally found a nice way of making rock candy.

TECHNIQUE #4: More people, less work
This is a plaguing problem with gaming. To make a game it takes many, many hours to make it. Early on in the industry people were working 20 hours a day for at least a year to push a game out into the market, having no idea whether it would do well or not. They were, for lack of a better word, overworked. This is a trend that is dangerous to the gaming industry. Too much commitment to work and not enough liesure time hurts the common worker in any situation. Most people can recall the issue of overworking with EA in the last 7 years. EA has been accused many times of overworking their employees unjustly to push a game out on time. This resulted in a major controversy. Developers have finally realized something: they are a company, and they hire people to work for them. They realize that as the developers now grow older, newcomers will come into the industry. They want to create a good working environment, not one of too much work. So many developers have done a smart thing: hire more people. Through this decision, many side-effect have occured, good ones at that. First, more workers is always good. It allows more flexibility in development cycles. Secondly, more workers has lead to more ambition. Ubisoft Montreal has hired over 400 people for Assassin's Creed II. The ambition for the game is enormous, and instead of tackling the game with 100 people, they spread the workload evenly and well. Lastly, this growth in the number of devs has led to more companies. As veteran devs make room for young developers, they have begun to form there own studios, such as 343 Industries made up of old Bungie employees. Don't get me wrong: gaming is still very constraining in terms of time. But the fact that devs have at least some room for there personal lives is a great.

TECHNIQUE #5: The console is the way
This one is hard for me to fathom. Gaming started on the PC. It was the great ability of the PC community that formed gaming today. Unfortunately, PC no longer has the power it once had. PC used to be a major SKU for developers. Every game that was getting made for a console would be made for the PC. No questions asked. This is in part because porting PC games to a console was extremely easy. The original Xbox (and even the Xbox 360, to an extent) was a glorified PC beneath its chassis. Porting a PC game to it was a piece of cake, and was just more money in the developer's and publisher's pocket. But the new console generation has brought a dilemma to the PC. Consoles are outlasting the PC in almost every way. Graphical capabilities are easier to obtain on the consoles. High quality graphics on the 360 and the PS3 can be compared to top of the line PCs. Most people don't have top of the line PCs, and will gladly fork money over for consoles that have these than constantly purchase high end components for their PCs. Accessibility is much more on the consoles. It is easier to play a game on the consoles than it is on the PC. Even internet, a feature always triumphed by the PC, is being bested by consoles. Face the facts: console games now sell much better than PC games. Developers will prioritize consoles games first, because they make more money. Many devs have even stopped PC development all together. PC isn't gone by any means, but consoles have much more power in sales, and just like a smart company should, developers have flocked towards consoles.

No matter what happens because of these techniques, game developers always have one thing in mind: create the best game they can. They want you to buy their game. They want to make a worth while experience for you. Don't ever think that these new techniques and trends in gaming are to exploit the gamer. These are all changes for the better in my opinion, and they are techniques which I believe will stay for a while. Like it or not, dev trends are changing.

A short post.

At the end of a long weekend, I had not thought up a great topic for a post, so I thought I would leave you this week with a short opinion piece. I hate sports video games. I hate how they have no originality. I hate how they keep getting more and more complicated with every iteration. I hate how a new one must come out every year. I hate everything about them. Why, you ask?

Sports games are everything wrong with the video game industry. The video game industry is one of new and immerging talent and ideas. It is one that strives on innovation every second. Sports games tend to always be a step backward. Every year a new game will come out with the same premise: play the sport. Play football, or play soccer, or play basketball. No innovation. No new ideas. It is just the same video game concept repeated every year. The lack of true innovation in these games is alarming. If you take a copy of Madden 06 and compare it with 09, the differences are minor and nothing close to innovative. Has anything been done in Madden to create an engaging experience? No. It is football again. Only minor things have been changed to "justify" the new game. Down to the core, it is the same game.

Games like Madden also are repetitious in release, too. A new one is released every year. This is bad for consumers and producers. The producer is forced to create a new game every year. Studies and reports in the last 3 years show that employees of EA Tiburon and other primarily sports game-orientated developers have been overworked. A group of wives in 2006 released a statement on the internet complaining about their spouses workloads, stating that they have been working upwards of 85-100 hours a week. Just to pump out another sport game. No other types of games create this much of a strain with its workers. This comes from sports games' dependency upon high numbers of sales every year. Missing a year would be detrimental to the studio's success and cash flow. Sports games have become money creators. Not games for enjoyment, but money makers. This is where the consumer becomes screwed. If you are a fan of the NFL or NHL, every year forces you to buy another game. Although the differences between games are few, the differences create a very detrimental situation for previous games owners, forcing them to buy the next game of the series. Take Madden 10, for example. In order to play franchise mode, owners are forced to pay an additional $10 to take part in a fantasy franchise. This new feature is enticing, and will grab many players. But the hidden payment is cruel and should never be done in a game, especially a console game.

Sports games also have a steep learning curve. Only dedicated players of previous games are able to play these games. Recreational watchers of football or baseball can and will have difficulty playing the game. It requires knowledge of the game itself. You need to know what buttons to press to do certain maneuvers. This is most relevant in wrestling games. A game like UFC Undisputed serves as a great video game for fans of UFC. But the control scheme and the amount of knowledge required to play this game is ridiculous. No game can be successful if it doesn't appeal to a broader audience than this. Without the ability to grab newcomers, games just continue with the same crowd. This is stupid. It stops the amount of people able to become part of the game's community, and it limits the amount of time the game can even have a crowd.

I hate sports games. Period. My rant is very opinionated and very harsh, but I believe them to be all true. What are your feelings on the sports genre? Am I wrong in my claims or did I hit the nail on the head? Let me know. Sorry for the short post again. Long weekend. I'll be back in full force next weekend. :)

HALO 3:ODST part 2

Bungie is good at multiplayer. There is no denying that. Halo 3: ODST brings the multiplayer love in a lot of ways. The first and most obvious of this love is the second disc you get when you buy the game, filled with the entire Halo 3 multiplayer experience. I can't even begin to tell how much of a smart choice this was. Despite popular belief, there are still people out there who don't play Halo 3 multiplayer. There are a big number of gamers who just want to grab some carnage in multiplayer and who don't give much of a crap in terms of singleplayer experiences. It would be an interesting statistic to see how many Halo 3 owners have never played a lick of singleplayer. Halo 3 gains tons of popularity from multiplayer. Making a disc with just this component is almost a dream come true for these gamers. They don't have to mess with multiplayer at all. Just pop in this lovely disc and jump right into needling some noobs. This is a great gift to the community from Bungie, and it should be considered a highlight of this game.

The disc also comes packaged with 3 new multiplayer maps, Citadel, Heretic, and Longshore. I have not had time to try out these maps just yet, but knowing Bungie they should be the same old downloadable map packs they have been rolling out for a while now. The disc also has all of the previous maps included, which is a great plus for those who haven't purchased the maps. All in all this great ensemble of Halo 3 multiplayer adds quite a bit more retail value to Halo 3: ODST. The only downside to a package like this is that there are multiple discs, a feature some may not appreciate. The apparent fact that the new maps are not downloadable (yet) is also somewhat of a bummer for those who enjoy Halo 3 but do not want to invest in ODST.

Of course, Bungie wanted to create a unique multiplayer for ODST. This comes in the new mode named Firefight. This mode has been constantly described as a Horde mode ala Gears of War or a Nazi Zombies mode ala Call of Duty. FIREFIGHT. IS. NOT. HORDE. Firefight is a completely new experience, and calling it just another Horde mode is wrong, stupid, and a complete understatement. This mode was built from the ground up to be a Halo experience, and that is exactly what Firefight is. Through this unique multiplayer game, up to 4 players can fight in one of the campaign's many vistas against countless waves of covenant. This works in a very interesting technique which can best be described as a Bungie version of a Left 4 Dead AI director. Firefight consists of a set which makes up 3 rounds which in turn makes up 15 waves. Each wave brings a new and random set of enemies which are determined based upon things such as how many people are playing, weapons they are using, weapons on the map, the map itself, etc.. This means that every wave of enemy becomes progressively more difficult, but are all unique. In my playtime with Firefight, I encountered a round with a mix of grunts and jackals, and the next round filled with ghosts. This unique and fun change in waves is what makes Firefight different from Horde or Nazi Zombies. You never know what may be ahead of you. Which is where the real fun comes in.

Firefight, more than most of these types of games, makes you think. Sure, you have to consider what weapon you are using in Horde mode, but past that there isn't much tactical thinking. Firefight forces you to assess everything about you and the environment. What type of weapons do you have? How would you handle a Brute cheiftain at thsi moment? It is these questions of "what should I do" that give Firefight it's own flair. More often that not I considered the consequences of my choices in this mode. I remember having the choice of either riding in a ghost and attacking with that or taking a heavily loaded plasma cannon and barracading myself. Firefight gets as close as it can get to putting you in the shoes of an ODST fighting for his or her life. This aspect is pushed to the limit when you play with other people. These decisions suddenly go from a solo decision to a team decision. Firefight does not have a life system. All players share a pool of 7 lives. This forces the teammates to take care of one another, because, and I say this in the truest sense of the phrase, their life is in each other's hands. Each decision is for the team to survive, not just you. In my previous scenario, I probably would have picked barricading myself. This decision is much different in a team setting. A ghost would have been much more useful if I were playing with others.

Prepare to go into the fight for a while with Firefight. On normal, finishing a game takes about 45 minutes to an hour. On normal. I didn't play a Legendary game, but I would imagine it would go in the 3-4 hour range. The maps are modest and provide a variety of different settings and strategies. Overall, the only complaint about Firefight would be the commitment to actually doing something in this game. You need to be committed to your team in Firefight. There is no "stupid running around and seeing how many people you can kill" in this game. You can only be successful in Firefight if you are actually trying, and knowing the brunt of the Halo 3 multiplayer community, some people will try to be selfish. Bungie tries to solve this by only letting friends play Firefight (there is no matchmaking). This in itself solves the problem somewhat, but gets rid of any wide community play, which is kind of a letdown. Still, everyone has enough friends to put on a game of Firefight, so it isn't that big of a problem.

Thing you may have missed: Bungie wanted you to keep on looking around the city of New Mombasa when they created it. Unlike many games, starting a new game of Halo 3: ODST does not get rid of the intelligence you gather from your previous game on your VISR. All of the audio logs, supply caches, and secrets you find stay that way. There is no need to go back to a previous game to get all the collectibles. It sure is nice to be able to work on Legendary difficulty and gather audio logs at the same time.

THE FINAL VERDICT

Halo 3: ODST is a mixed bag in terms of opinions. Regardless of the overall game, the soundtrack and score is amazing, and is one of the best sounding games ever. If more games payed attention to music like this game did scores on other websites may be significantly more. So if there is a video game music enthusiast out there, this game is a must-buy. For Halo singleplayer fans this is a great game to buy. The story is better than most Halo games, and it really shows the new found dedication Bungie has to a well-crafted narrative. Being placed in the shoes of a ODST is different, and fans of Halo 1 will most definitely find some comparisons. Multiplayer fans will have to weigh the pros and cons for this game. While the new mode Firefight is a great new mode and should be given credit and a try be everyone, it may not be worth the 60 dollar price point for some. The extra disc is a great thing to have, but some may be a little put off by having to buy all the maps in the past and now having them all for free on one disc. It still is a great thing to have though, and like I said, Firefight is quality. For anyone who has no idea if they may want to buy or try this game, definitely give Halo 3 a try first. Although this game is a great jump from the normal Halo mix, it still is Halo. It is a great standalone game, but not having a view of the Halo games and not having the perspective of going from the raw power of Chief to the strategy of an ODST weakens the playability. To truly appreciate this game you should definitely play at least Halo 3. In the end, Halo 3: ODST is a great game, and fans of Halo, first person shooters, and video game music will find a great game.

picture courtesy IGN.com

HALO 3:ODST part 1

At it's heart, Halo 3: ODST is just that: a Halo game. In the truest sense I can make it. The folks at Bungie set out at first to make an expansion to Halo 3. As they went through development, their ambitions became greater and the game got larger. The game released at full price as a full title. For months people debated as to whether the game was going to be worth the 60 dollar price point if it was originally an expansion. People asked how it was going to be different. People asked what set it apart from being "just another Halo game". So, what seperates it? Start with the fact that you aren't Master Chief anymore. This is a real gamechanger. The iconic hero of the Halo series is MIA. Not even a spartan in sight. The game instead focuses on the less focused upon ODST's, or Orbital Drop Shock Troopers. These marines are hand picked premium soldiers, second only to Spartans. There story and their perspective is a dynamic shift from Master Chief.

The ODST's are nicknamed "Helljumpers" due to their unique way of entering the battlefield through capsules shot towards the ground from a spacecraft. Halo 3: ODST puts the player in an ODST squad on a special mission during the attack on Mombasa at the beginning of Halo 2. Bungie felt that they needed to expand upon this pivotal point in the human-covenant war, and they did a great job in setting up the story amongst the timeline. Bungie did a complete 180 by creating a story with the ODSTs. So many things about the game changed due to this one shift in setting and placement. This isn't the Halo you know and love. But that isn't a bad thing at all. First off, ODSTs follow a completely different story. The struggles and the triumphs of the ODSTs feel completely different that that of Master Chief. Bungie did something that is very hard to do in any medium: they created a truly unique perspective that feels realistic and at the same time fits with the perspective previously known. So how is the plight and feel of the ODST different?

First off, ODSTs play COMPLETELY different that a Spartan. Gameplay in Halo 3: ODST is not run and gun. Gamers are all familiar with the gameplay style of being a Spartan. Common things such as being able to jump higher than a normal human, being able to take more damage, being able to deal more damage. The list goes on. The 3 gigantic Halo games can make the gamer forget that Master Chief has superhuman abilities. ODSTs don't. They jump the normal height. They take damage quite a bit. They deal only standard amounts of damage. They just aren't as powerful. This game makes you feel like something different. You realize that ODSTs are human and more fragile compared to Spartans, and that the way you approach a situation is different. Bungie creates this by several ways. Health is not regenerative. You have to be cautious about damage taken and look around for health packs to replenish lost health. Weapons are not dual-weildable. Choose your weapon wisely. Don't fret however. You aren't a pushover by any means. The ODSTs may be second best, but that means they are better than everyone else save 1. Bungie implimented a very smart mode called the VISR. The VISR is a vision mode that allows ODSTs to see all enemies and interesting points in the environment. It highlights important things, shows you where your teammates are, and indicateds threats. ODSTs also carry silenced SMGs and pistols, a tool extremely useful in combat. With these tools, Bungie created a new way of playing Halo.

The name of the game is caution. Bungie almost retrains you to think about your environment and the enemies in front of you. The VISR allows you to assess threats and deal with things in a smarter manner. And this skill is vitally important to staying alive in New Mombasa, the setting of Halo 3: ODST. Instead of linear levels, Bungie created the entire city of New Mombasa. From scratch. This is one hell of an amazing feat. A war torn city at night filled with covenant is the perfect setting for the game, and Bungie did one hell of an upstanding job. The game sets you in the shoes of the rookie from the previously stated squad. The rookie awakens several hours after the initially drop of the squad, and he is alone and lost. This is where the game takes a very much welcomed "noire" feeling. The dark color scheme of the city and the sense of loneliness add to the extreme desolation of the story. The rookie is given the entire city of New Mombasa from the beginning, and it is up to him to uncover the story of where his squadmates went. The game jumps to flashback levels ever so often when the rookie finds an area or object of importance. These levels are much more like classic Halo. You'll play with vehicles and spartan lasers and the works. In particular, its this switch from solitude to battle that makes the game so engrossing and engaging. Instead of a continuing story, each level has relevance to the city story. This level of immersiveness creates the perfect Halo story, something that (in my opinion) was not in Halo 3.

Ah, but the crowning jewel has not even been mentioned yet. The greatest things about this game, more than its immersiveness or noire style story, is the score. The music is absolutely amazing. It is the peak of perfection in gaming. Honestly, I have never played a game in my life that has had better music than this. To fit the new perspective, Bungie created a new score for Halo 3: ODST. From the outset, it was meant to keep the feeling of Halo and yet fit the human feeling of being a lone ODST in a strange battle-torn city. The score is almost indiscribably good. You can feel the Halo core of it, but the noire trumpets give it that great almost old feeling. The subtle guitar riffs and almost electronic synthesizers give the city the futuristic feeling. The ups and downs of the rythym fit the ups and downs of the story. It almost puts you to tears how incredible the score is. It is beautiful. This is the shining accomplishment of this game. Not many games put enough emphasis into their scores even though it is subconsciously important. Bungie realized this. The score is incredible. Period.

The story itself is intriguing with its mysterious like flow. The flashback sequences aren't just tacked on; they are real flashbacks that aid the entire story. The story itself is exciting enough. Without spoiling it, it is your classic case of a team going into something and realizing it was a lot more than command told them about. The story is fleshed out perfectly with amazing voice and virtual acting. A great cast with names such as Nathan Fillion and Tricia Helfer create a great number of characters. Halo hasn't exactly had the greatest acting, especially when the majority of the time you either have a virtual chick talking way too much or a wierd sergeant saying the stupidist lines ever. This casting is a great aspect of the game and hopefully marks a new commitment to good virtual acting in games for Bungie. The story is good at pacing. It gives points of excitement filled with points of sheer survival, which is great. The only point where this may be a little flawed is at the end of the game, since the pacing is a bit off, but it isn't that big of a deal.

Stay tuned for Part 2 of the ODST review where I will focus on Firefight, the three new multiplayer maps, and my final reaction.