Nation Red

Today, I played the Steam demo for Nation Red, by DiezelPower. Like several other titles released recently, including Burn Zombie Burn! and Zombie Apocalypse, Nation Red is an isometric zombie shooter. I enjoyed the demo, the frantic struggle to stay away from rushing zombies while simultaneously being forced to run amongst them, dropped weapons, health, and power-ups essential for continued success. The constantly-available option to adjust the difficulty is also much appreciated.

But, without a doubt, the coolest part was the freaking dive-roll. When I pushed the E key for the first time and shot across the screen, I audibly yelped. Aside from the dive animation looking spotless, the feel is extraordinary. The seemingly-insignificant addition of the dive-roll shifts the game's focus, adding spice to the ever-more-standard strafing still pulled from Smash TV. It's interesting how the dive-roll, extracted from the action game (where it is standard), serves to excite the arena-shooter. Honestly, I'm not yet sure if the dive roll is entirely practical in-game, nor if it only muddles the crisp simplicity of the arena-shooter, but it is dane cool.

Heavenly Sword and Skill Bias

Heavenly Sword has proven to me that bias can exist in a game's review. I had previously been conscious of review bias and subjectivity, but I also believe that reviews should seek to present as much of an objective view as possible. And to their credit, I believe that most professional reviewers do aim to discuss games objectively. But through my experiences with Heavenly Sword, I have learned that, sometimes, objectivity just isn't possible.

Towards the end of Heavenly Sword, I was discussing the game's combat system with my brother. "Man, I can't stand this combat, it's awful," I said. "No, its not," he said. He had completed the game long ago, not to mention achieved gold medallions on ever chapter. He said, "I played that game a lot, and I was never annoyed by the combat. You just fail at it."

Well, it turns out that this was half-way true. By the time I'd beaten Heavenly Sword, I still was pretty terrible at the game, or at least, I did not enjoy it that much. I was all ready to rant about the game and its frustrating combat, but I realized that perhaps I should spend some more time with it. Maybe, with more experience with the combat, I would be able to understand its intricacies and would better appreciate the game. Was my frustration with the combat due to my misunderstanding of it, or was the combat just plain bad? Did I have a skill bias?

Having re-played a few chapters, I've become better at the combat and do, in fact, appreciate it more, but many of my original misgivings, reasons for disliking the combat still stand.

Combat in Heavenly Sword revolves around the balancing of three fighting stances: speed, range, and power. Each stance has an associated color: blue for speed, orange for power, and red for unblockable attacks. Range stance, meanwhile, allows Nariko to sweep through arrow barrages. Enemies' attacks are always highlighted with one of these colors, telling players how to defend them. When in the matching stance (e.g. power for an orange attack), Nariko will automatically block incoming attacks, provided that she is standing still and not in the middle of a combo of her own. The game has no dedicated block button. Players must be not-attacking and in the correct stance to block a given attack. One more very important feature of the combat system is the counter button, which, for some reason, every developer of an action game feels absolutely compelled to include. Just following or directly when blocking an attacking, pushing the triangle button will cause Nariko to counter that enemy.

In theory, this sounds great. But in practice it works considerably less well. There are several flaws in the combat system that serve to break the fluidity and fun. AI is one issue. Though Nariko will often be surrounded by ten enemies or more, rarely will any of them have the guts to attack until the moment the player chooses to. Apparently, the attack command orders the enemies in addition to Nariko. And since not-attacking equals blocking, Nariko will get hit the instant players decide to stop waiting around for enemies to be aggressive.

This AI deficit is compounded by the severe numbers of enemies who block (particularly towards the end of the game) and the means by which you break through enemy blocks. By the time you have the full list of combos available, many, many combos are able to break through blocking enemies, opening them up to further attacks. But most of these block-breaking combos don't even injure enemies, as it is the final hit of the combo that eventually breaks their block. Meaning you need to newly attack that same enemy again within the two-second window that he or she is vulnerable. Otherwise, you have to wait for enemies to attack so that you can counter with triangle. And in no galaxy I've ever visited is waiting even remotely fun.

In the meantime, the other dozen or so enemies finally decide to attack Nariko in the middle of her combo. Unfortunately, Nariko's attack animations are fairly sustained and switching stances isn't exactly responsive. Without a direct way to  interrupt combos, I would frequently get attacked mid-combo because there was nothing I could do to prevent it. I do not mind the lack of a block button, but extended combo animations and a delay in switching stances cause the combat system to buckle under its own weight.

My play-through of Heavenly Sword was frustrating, especially during the boss fights and any sequence involving quick-time events, both of which utterly fail. I very much appreciate the linearity of the game and constant switching between combat with Nariko and shooting scenes with Kai or with a cannon. I really like how the game was so concise in its offering, unwilling to offer any fluff just for play-length. It was cool going scene to scene, advancing closer and closer to the castle. However, the combat system for my original play-through was stressful and annoying. And though this may have been due to my failing at combat, ultimately, my enjoyment of the game suffered. For me, the  learning curve of the combat system was too great, causing me to dread playing the game rather than anticipate it. Even after playing the game post-completion and improving my skills, my complaints of the system still remain, in my opinion, something no amount of skill can conquer.

If I had been on a time schedule, had been forced to write this review immediately following my completion of the game, then my criticism would fair considerably less forgiving. A reviewer's opinion of a game is certainly influenced by his or her skill at the gameplay systems, as the reviewer may misplace his or her own failing on part of the game.

Blocking in Action Games

First of all, I want to apologize again for not posting for a week. My brother got married and most of my family was here for a few days and it was hectic as all get out, but a ton of fun. As a warning, I'm going on vacation for a while with my family in a couple of days. You should expect new posts by the end of the month. I'll be making a more official post about this soon .Sorry again, hope you enjoy the post.

There are a lot of action games out there: Dynasty Warriors, Ninja Gaiden, The Legend of Zelda. All of these happen to be close-combat based, swords, essentially. Three other games, two yet to arrive and one already available, are also close-combat action games. These are Fable 2, Heavenly Sword, and Okami. Whats amazing is that each of these titles has a completely different combat system, and, more specifically, different systems for blocking.Fable 2 is Peter Molyneux and Lionhead Studios' upcoming 360 masterpiece. It is innovating in many ways, including combat. Fable 2 features a one button combat system. The X button is devoted to attacking with a short-range weapon, like a sword, and Y and A are devoted to bow/arrow and magic use. But today we're just going to talk about short-range combat. All attacks, throws, and combos while using a sword can be achieved with the X button alone. To attack simply press the button. To combo, players must tap X at varying intervals in tune with a beat. Players can perform finishing moves with a counter by tapping X right when an enemy attacks. The X button is also devoted to blocking with a sword. How? Just hold the button. Holding X allows player characters to block most attacks automatically. And thats it. Tap X to attack. Tap X at the right time to counter. Hold X to block. Its a simple system but becomes progressively more complex as players learn the combo system, Molyneux contends. He even once said that players will be able to beat the game no problem simply by mashing on the X button. Yes, Molyneux condones button mashing. But is there anything wrong with that? I don't think so. It makes the game simple for novice players while remaining appealing. However, he says that if players so desire, they will be able to exploit a deep combat system, all with just one button. Long story short: block by holding X.

Our second featured game is Heavenly Sword. As the beautiful Nariko, players will embark on an epic journey, and all the while slaying countless clone-faced foes. Developer Ninja Theory has invented an intruiging combat system for players to fight with. Nariko has at her disposal three combat stances. Standard is speed, hold L1 to switch to ranged mode, hold R1 to switch to strong. Meanwhile on the controller face, the triangle and square buttons allow Nariko to attack and counter. The shoulder buttons act as modifiers. They change Nariko's stance, and therfore attacks, but they also change her block.

Blocking in Heavenly Sword is fairly unique for video games. Nariko's blocks by not doing anything. Sitting there and not pressing anything allows Nariko to block any standard attacks. However, different enemy types will attack Nariko as well. Stronger blocks will blow right through Nariko's standard block. As will arrows and other projectiles. But switching to the respective stance allows Nariko to block these attacks as well. The enemies and their respective attacks come in three different types too: standard, strong, ranged. By tapping triangle just as the enemy attacks will make Nariko counter, assuming she is in the right stance for that enemy type. Ninja Theory, I think, has created an interesting and balanced combat system. Three different enemy types, three different attack stances, three different means of blocking. Players must constantly be switching up their stance to deal with the varied enemies and incoming attacks. Nariko blocks automatically. However, she will have to be in the correct stance to block the different enemy types. The other fulcrum of balance, if you will, is the players choice to attack or sit still. If you attack, you risk the chance of being hit. If you sit still, you'll be more likely to deflect an attack, or at least more focused if the need to switch stance arrives, as it will often.

The third game is Okami. This epic is the only game discussed today that has already been released. Clover Studios, unfortunately disbanded, was the developer behind Okami, and also created classics like Viewtiful Joe and Killer 7. Okami has gameplay very much like The Legend of Zelda. Which means adventure over an expansive fictional land. However, the great Ameratsu's combat style differs greatly from Link's. First, players can use brush techniques to help defeat enemies. Second, Okami has multiple weapons that she can switch out to serve as primary or secondary. The primary attack works as you might imagine, just tap the button to attack repeatedly. The sub weapon serves varying purposes depending on the weapon itself. At the beginning of the game, Okami has no means to block. She can run around, and jump, and dodge eventually. But before players cannot block until they get a weapon of the type Reflector. Equiping the reflector as a sub weapon and pressing triangle in combat will bring up a large round shiled in front of Okami. But the shield will not stay up. Regardless if the players tap or hold triangle, the shield will only stay up for a second. After the shield comes down, Ameratsu will be momentarily defensless until she overcomes her shield lag. However, the shield will only lower if nothing hits it. If the shield does block an attack like fire, it will remain up and continue to block Okami until the attack subsides. Sometimes long, constant attacks will bombard Okami, like fire or poison. Bringing up the shield before the attack hits will block the entire attack stream. Also, pressing triangle right in front of enemy will make Okami grab it and pile drive it into the dirt. Its awesome and does a ton of damage. I think its an interesting way to form a block mechanic, the shield is there when you need it but gone when you don't.

These are not the only blocking mechanics nor combat systems to be found in action games. They are a sampling, they represent a diversity of systems present in a single genre of video games. The point is, there are millions of ways to achieve something. Look at something as simple as blocking, even this can be designed in a variety of ways, as we have just seen. This is true across all of game design. Everything can be designed in different ways. This is how whole genres are born. When designing a game, dont just rely on one system or mechanic. Just out of sight, hidden in your labrythine mind, there may be a solution or superior alternative awaiting discovery.


Who do you think is coolest: Ameratsu Okami, Nariko, or Peter Molyneux?

Cueing Player Action

Hello everyone, last night I saw a play at my school called Oroonoko. Besides the fact that it was a great play, I noticed something that all plays do: cueing the actors. But cues are not just effective on stage, they can be very useful in games as well. Signals can be given in game to "prompt" a player to do something. This happen all the time in probably every game you play, and is a big part of how you know where to go and what to do as a player.

When thinking about this, the first example I came upon was for a stealth game, not unlike Splinter Cell. When presented with crossing a narrow hallway with gaurds lining the walls, the player could be cued to act when the overhead light shuts off for a few seconds. Other examples are when gaurds speak with each other while the player is eavesdropping; "Hey Bob, I left the gate key in my locker, just pick it up there when you go on shift." An actual game example is The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker, where you know to use the baton evey time you see a tri-force symbol on the floor. There are tons of these to be found in probably every game you play, new or old.

In summary: Cues can be used to prompt the player. In most cases, a player should know where to go and at least an idea of what to do at all times. The game should accomodate this need by providing cues, which, off the player hints or whistle him or her into action. Its effective, necesary, and a great part of game design.
-Gryffin