Pandora Perfect 10

Those of you who follow my anticipated games list may have noticed something. I recently awarded two titles in a row perfect tens. Have I finally gone mad? Possibly, but those scores aren’t due to my insanity level, they were well earned.

Uncharted 2 is as polished, beautiful, well-acted, well-scored, and fun of a platform shooter as has ever been made. It should be a PS3 system seller and any true gamer with the disposable income owes it to themselves to play this game, even if it means purchasing a PS3. Uncharted 2 succeeds at everything it attempts to be. It doesn’t really break new ground, but this reviewer doesn’t believe that is necessary to be great. However if innovative greatness is what you are looking for...

Once in a great while, games of such vision come along that they end up being unforgettable, genre defining titles. StarWarsArcade, KungFu, SuperMarioBros, Zelda, Tetris, Gauntlet, MULE, Ultima, ResidentEvil, NFL2K, Halo, CallofDuty, WoW... Each of these games were magical experiences that planted the seeds for my lifetime of video game enjoyment. I remember where I was when I first played them, the theme songs, the addictive game play, in short, how each changed the way I looked at the medium. In this vein, Borderlands is an amazing entertainment experience that I will not soon forget.

As I have written about since early 2008 and more recently with an in-depth preview a few months back, Borderlands is a sci-fi shooter and original intellectual property (IP) from Gearbox Software. When I first read the GameInformer preview I was intrigued, as it spoke of a Mad Max-like world called Pandora and the game’s artificial intelligence that would randomly generate hundreds of thousands of different weapons for the player to wield. The next few months, heck years, would bring a dramatic art style shift to a more comic book style, a closed-door preview at E3, and a couple focus tests, all confirming for me the game was going to be something special. Well, I finally got my hands on the retail version on the launch day last week and it hasn’t left my 360 or gaming mind since.

Role Playing Games (RPG) and First Person Shooters (FPS) have long been my favorite genres. Last year’s critical and retail hit Fallout 3, attempted to bridge the two genres, but leaned far closer to RPG. Many loved it, I did not. I found it boring, the control frustrating, the inventory management/map poorly implemented, and I was turned off by its bland color palate and art style. That being said, the stat management, huge world, DLC’s, and variety of quests were a step in the right direction. I am very pleased to say that after 24 hours of gameplay or so with Borderlands, it is everything I wished that Fallout 3 could have been.

The balance between FPS and RPG is perfect, forming a fun-first, satisfying shooter that still retains the enjoyable grind and ability progression of an RPG. The art style and humor are a perfect match. Each pull of the trigger is satisfying, equipping every new rare gun like a little Christmas, and stumbling on a hidden weapon cache like finding buried treasure.

Borderlands also succeeds in fixing a longtime issue I have had with every FPS before it... play length. Despite what anyone may tell you, length matters. :) Specifically, even the legendary FPS campaigns like Halo or Call of Duty, play through for an amazing 10-12 hours, but that’s it. After that, if I wish to experience the world again, all I can do is replay the same missions. Borderlands, on the contrary, is enormous, but without the feeling that art assets have just been recycled (ODST cough). It sports a 50-80 hour campaign, whose loot gets better on the second play through.

Combine the size and perfect gameplay with smooth menus/maps, at least one DLC coming before Christmas, and online coop where I can bring my toon into the world of any of my friends and bring back any loot, XP, or money I earn back into my world, and you have an incredibly polished and accessible addictive game. Clearly I’m not the only one that feels this way about Gearbox’s opus. Borderlands sold out at many retailers the first week it launched, is near the top of console online game charts, and has spread like a virus amongst my XboxLive buddies. There hasn’t been a night since launch that I’ve been on and not seen a friend “In the Borderlands.”

Put simply, Borderlands is a once in a hardware generation experience. I truly believe that in a few years, FPS/RPGs will be common place and we take it for granted that the combined genre hadn’t always been around. We will have Gearbox to thank for it. So if you are a gamer and enjoy FPSs, RPGs, or heck, video game fun, get Borderlands. If you enjoy the game only half as much as I have, you are in for a real treat.

I guess that’s about it for my sales pitch. All this writing has got me missing actually playing the game. I’m off to shotgun skags and hunt for a new sniper rifle... Pandora is calling.

We choose to go to the moon.

“We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.” And with that sentence, in 1962, a young President set our course to land human beings on another celestial body. Less than eight years later, Neil Armstrong set foot on the lunar surface, to this day what many, including I, believe was the greatest feat in the history of mankind. Spinoff technologies from that space race ranged from plastic, to light weight alloys, cell phone technology, satellite communications, and the processors that power every computer on the planet. None of these technologies was imaginable in 1962. None was the goal of going to the moon, but all were discovered out of necessity to conquer what was believed to be an impossible goal. All of these innovations put the United States in the technological driver’s seat for the next 50 years. Innovation is what happens when you lack the technology to solve such a problem. That is why we must go back to the moon, then to Mars, and beyond.

Believe me, I do not envy President Obama’s job. He is simultaneously dealing with a deep recession, two wars, and arguably a nation in decline both economically and as a world power. And now in the background, he is being tasked with determining the future of the manned space flight program. The construction of the International Space Station is quickly wrapping up and the deadline to mothball the aging shuttle fleet in 2010 is fast approaching. Funding is scarce and NASA is without a clear mission. Just last week, the “expert” panel recommended scrapping the mission to return to the moon and focusing on landing on a comet or Mars. Despite that, this morning I watched awestruck as America’s first new space vehicle in 30 years, designed to take us to the moon, the Ares I-X, clear the tower. So what do we do? Well, if I had the President’s ear, this is what I would tell him...

As much as it pains me to say, we are not ready to go to Mars. We don’t have the technology or infrastructure in place to do it. We need to learn the lessons of semi-longterm habitation on the surface of a harsh stellar body. The moon is where we must cut our proverbial teeth before pushing onward. Would you climb Everest without first climbing smaller peaks? Run a marathon, without shorter training runs? Attempting to do so would undoubtably lead to failure or worse. Returning to the moon and proving our systems, people, and technology is the right direction to put us on a longterm path to succeed. As for the vehicle...

Unlike the shuttle, which I have always loved but never understood the design or true purpose, Ares and the Constellation program are EXACTLY what we need to be doing. It is an iterative launch platform built on the backbone of existing proven technology borrowed from the shuttle and Apollo programs. These feasible, flexible, and reliable launch systems will be capable of lifting man, cargo, and vehicles to low and high Earth orbit, or launching missions to whatever planets or moons we desire. But it is in dealing with the challenges of long duration space flight, such as the design of the landers, rovers, efficient longterm living quarters, water recycling, power, and food generation systems, that will will push the technological envelope.

Is it truly a stretch of anyone’s logic to understand how advances in recycling, power generation, and efficient hydroponics could help today’s polluted, fossil fuel dependent world? These innovations WILL occur. All NASA needs is the continued funding and clear direction from another young President. So Mr. Obama, if you or your advisers are listening, please let all my friends at NASA do what they do best: Lead the world in innovation, lead the world in exploration, lead our countrymen into the heavens. Please tell them to fly... First to the moon, then to Mars, and then beyond. Tell them to “go to the moon and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.” We’re Americans. It’s what we do.

The Dirty Trade

For months I have awaited the deluge of game releases that is the Fall. Now that triple A titles are launching virtually every other day, I have gone from gaming famine to feast. In fact, I have too many big games to play and too little time. So as we head deeper into the heart of the 2009 video game season, I am confronted with a moral conundrum. To trade or not to trade. More specifically, to acquire some of my most anticipated titles used, to buy them new now and have them collect dust, or to just hold off until they hit the bargain bin. Each presents it’s advantages and problems, but my most likely solution makes me feel dirty...

Requesting the games I want to play, but am not dying to play, on used game trading sites like Goozex.com is by far the most economical solution. As I have about 5000 points to burn, roughly equivalent to five new releases, it’s easy for me to throw some titles into the request queue and wait for them to appear in my mailbox like magic. However, I feel quite guilty for in doing so, some amazing developers are not being rewarded for their hard work, as buying or trading used games gives no profits for the developer. So essentially, I am not voting with my hard earned monies for them to continue making the games I greatly enjoy playing.

I love Tim Schaffer (Brutal Legend), Bioware (Dragon Age), and Insomniac (Ratchet and Clank) and want to support them, especially in a recession. But the reality is, I currently have my hands full with Uncharted 2 and Borderlands. With Assassin’s Creed 2 and Modern Warfare 2 rapidly approaching, my gaming slate is more than full. I have no need to buy other titles now, as I won’t likely play them until January. And I haven’t even mentioned Borderlands DLC due out before Christmas. Sigh.

As much as it pains me, I will likely go the game trading route. Perhaps this post of more of a cry of help to the developers: Hey fellas, there are 52 weeks in the year, maybe you should start aiming for more than eight of them. If you do, I promise you that you’ll get my money on launch day. Until then, I’ll feel a bit dirty for using Goozex, but also be cash heavy.

WTF is wrong with gaming?

Or more specifically, what is wrong with multiplayer? Let me explain...

Over the last few weeks, I have played quite a bit of competitive multiplayer for research and today tried my hand at Modern Warfare’s online offerings. So there I was, online with the pinnacle of lag-free, fragfest technology. Expertly recreated weapons, hand-crafted maps, and a match-making system allegedly second to none. After an hour or so of team death match, I put down the controller... in complete disgust. My stint surrounded by map-memorizing, FPS idiot savants left me flustered and angry. What is not to enjoy about going up against players with superior weapons and perks, that have memorized the maps, and can take me out from across the map? Nothing quite like five second bursts of life ended quickly by two shots from a player I never even saw.

My experience today epitomized what I believe is wrong with online multiplayer. Game designers are so focused on rewarding hardcore gamers for constantly playing their game that they quickly alienate anything but those most hardcore shooter fans. Take me as the perfect example. I love FPSs. I have played and beaten almost all the major shooters of the decade. But I get on Modern Warfare, Halo 3, or Gears of War and I am left in the dust by a pack of 12 year olds that play nothing but that game for hours at a time every day. Should I have to only play one game and play it for umpteen hours just to enjoy half the game I pay for?

It is literally like me playing soccer, a game I love playing at an amateur level, against FIFA pros. It is neither fun for me nor challenging for them. The competitive divide is made even worse by the perk systems common to most multiplayer FPSs today. As if me not knowing the maps or having the controls down to muscle memory doesn’t place me at a bad enough disadvantage, now games reward experienced players with better guns, grenades, and armor. Between the two of us, who needs a better gun to compete for eff’s sake? My personal favorite is that when said hardcore pimple-faced Halo geniuses wax me seven times in a row, what do they get? A flying gunship that kills me from above with no warning. Brilliant.

And don’t even get me started on the matchmaking system. The theory is great, matching teams evenly. But putting me on the field with level 55’s who have played the game for hundreds of hours is insanity. It doesn’t matter if I have as many level 55’s on my team. I’m dead too quickly to even find my experienced allies. At least Halo tries to pair me with other noobs, but without fail super-experienced players hop online with new XboxLive gamertags courtesy of 30 day Xbox Live cards and I get to be their cannon fodder. Grrr...

Other than playing exclusively closed games with only friends, which still generates MASSIVE skill level stratification, what is to be done? Honestly, I can’t think of a solution. And as much as game makers like having their online multiplayer be the preferred pastime of hardcore gamers, I can’t imagine they are satisfied with having most players (like me) be completely marginalized and not enjoying their products. Yet they haven't come up with much to address the problem.

Cooperative multiplayer experiences, such as Gears of War 2’s horde mode, ODST’s Firefight, Borderlands’ jump in jump out coop, and Modern Warfare 2’s Spec Ops mode are steps in the right direction. But these game modes, where players cooperate towards a common goal, aren’t as much a solution for the competitive multiplayer inequity, but more of a substitute.

Randomly generated maps, standardized controls, and higher hitpoints (cough, fix Modern Warfare, cough) will certainly help level the playing field. But until someone figures it out, I’ll be avoiding competitive multiplayer experiences like the plague. And that’s a real shame considering that I am paying $30 for them everytime I buy a $60 game. Come on nerdisphere I know a solution is out there...

(Sorry for the obscene Spore pic, I just couldn't help myself.)