Halo Reach?

Xbots like myself are naturally abuzz about Halo Reach, which launched to spectacular fanfare last night. My brother Joe is currently playing his copy (or at least, that's what Xbox LIVE would have me believe) and many others have asked me if I've bought a copy of my own. I haven't, much to the chagrin of my brothers, who are growing tired of Modern Warfare 2 and are anxious to try a new remedy to cure their itching trigger fingers.

The reviews have been stellar, to say the least. One of my friends commented on his facebook this morning that Reach "has lived up to all the hype." I want to hear from the detractors. Pipe up, before I spend more money I don't have and give into the demands of the consumer culture!

I'm a Survivor!

Just finished RE5 with my brother this morning. Not sure if I'm up for a full-fledged review, but as a gamer fairly new to the Resident Evil franchise, I will say I was very pleased with the entire package - the game isn't perfect, but there's nothing really glaringly WRONG with the game, either. It's violent, it's gory, but not in the way the Modern Warfare 2 is; there is no moral relativism-masquerading-as-narrative "depth" here. In fact, without spoiling anything, I dare say the story's themes fit quite well into a well-formed Catholic worldview. I was genuinely surprised by the characterization, too; it's as much of an action game as a horror game, meaning there's equal parts Indiana Jones as there is...well, "Resident Evil" (the movie, of course ;P). Actually, it's better than quite a few movie storylines in the recent past...including the most recent Indiana Jones movie.

It's not a game for the youngsters, and I'm not sure if the game holds up if you go it solo. Without spoiling the more important narrative details, though, I will say this: Resident Evil is a very impressive game. It's visually and aurally outstanding; the narrative is more compelling than most movies from the past year (seriously!), and Capcom managed to synthesize the best elements of a "scare-your-pants-off" atmosphere with action-oriented gameplay (it's not so much a Halo-esque "shooter" as a Devil May Cry "action game") that thrives on cooperation between players rather than competition. It's a little on the short side, and there's nothing truly "innovative" about the actual gameplay itself beyond the cooperative aspect, but it does everything you'd expect - and some things you wouldn't expect - more than adequately. Easily the biggest and best "surprise hit" for 2009.

Readers, please feel free to comment, especially RE: the story in the combox below. I would love to talk about the narrative, characters, etc. in greater depth than this intentionally spoiler-free blog post indicates. Just be careful with spoilers!

Cooperation and Competition in Video Games

First off, a belated Merry Christmas to all readers of this blog. God bless each and every one of you!

Here's what my dad and I bought my younger brothers for Christmas:



I was under the impression that this game was just a "wii-make" of the Nintendo DS game of the same name from three years ago. Turns out I was wrong, and good thing, too: it's as if the game was designed with the Kirchoff clan in mind. It's more cooperative than competitive, which seems to be a rarity for video games these days outside of the shooter genre.

My brother Tim has introduced me to another cooperative game, Resident Evil 5. My aversion to blood, gore, and the like isn't preventing me from enjoying it, either. In fact, I feel like I'm playing some Indiana Jones spin-off more often than not - except for the blood and guts, of course. It may be worth re-examining the last blog post in light of this game, as well.

All that for later, though. The important thing: cooperative multiplayer gaming is AWESOME. Period. And as much as "playing a sport" could probably do this just as well, you can't play basketball outside when there's snow on the ground.

I'll (hopefully) post more detailed impressions of both of these games later (or, alternatively, another poster will!). For now, though, less typing, and more, you know, actual game-playing. Merry Christmas, everyone!

Veni, Vidi, Vici...

So, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 has come and...well, will it EVER be gone? Based on what I've seen (haven't played it yet, though I look to eliminate that anomaly this evening at a gaming party), the multiplayer features of this game should keep trigger-finger gamers entertained for at least as long as the first Modern Warfare game did - which is to say that it's gonna be around for a long time. Its record-shattering sales would also seem to suggest that, as a franchise, Activision, the game's publisher, has something of a sales juggernaut on its hands.

IMO, the last time the gaming world had so hotly anticipated a gaming title was when Halo 2 was released. Ironically enough, I'd say the positive reception of Halo 2 from both critics and gamers mirrors the reception of MW2 thus far, as well. The criticism of MW2's single-player campaign seem vaguely reminiscient of the complaints regarding Halo 2 when it was first released, and, let's face it, the praise of the multiplayer features of both of these games needs no citation.

But is it REALLY as good as everyone claims it is? I'll be sure to proffer my own assessment after tonight, but what's everyone else feeling about this game?