August
11
Notes from an unpopular E3 awards judge
I don't think I ever actually noted on here that I was one of the 36 videogame writers who voted for the "Best of E3" awards announced last week, but indeed I was. (The full winner's list is here.)
Given that I have found my taste to be a bit eclectic compared to many game writers (Last year I championed "The Simpsons Game," didn't lavish superlatives on "Super Mario Galaxy," and didn't much enjoy "Mass Effect." Though I did love "Portal" and "Bioshock" and "Rock Band" -- I'm not completely out there), it's perhaps not surprising that very few of my votes were the games that won. In fact of the 11 categories in which I voted, I only picked two of the winners. Just by pure chance I should have done at least a little better. (Those two winners were "Spore" as best PC game and "Pure" as best racing game.)
That being said, I wasn't offended by most of the choices either. "Fallout 3," "LittleBigPlanet," "Dead Space" and "Left4Dead" are all really good games with the potential, based on the limited time I got to see them, to be fantastic. 
The only winner I really disagreed with was "Mirror's Edge" for best original game. To me it seemed more gimmicky (A hot chick in the future who does parkour!) than substantive to me, the first person perspective really didn't work for a game where you're trying to manipulate a character through complex spatial puzzles, and the challenge often felt more about timing (can you jump off this ledge with enough speed at the very last second?) than brains.
I also couldn't bring myself to vote for "Gears of War 2" for Best Action Game not because it's bad in any way, but because it's so "Gears of War 1.5." The improvements are so minor over "Gears 2" that I was really surprised to see my fellow critics pick it over "Resistance 2," which strikes me as a much more dramatic leap forward in campaign and multi-player. (I felt the same way about "Rock Band 2," which looks awesome but is, by Harmonix's own admission, really "Rock Band 1.5.")
My biggest disappointment, however, is that my
favorite game at E3 didn't get a single award at all. I'm talking about "Fable 2." Speaking as someone who
found the first "Fable" to be a colossal disappointment, I think "Fable 2" looks like it really will deliver on developer Peter Molyneux's promises. The combat system is amazingly simple, but can be leveled up in complex ways for those who care. The open-world roleplaying elements look like they're really tightly integrated into the story, rather than being utterly pointless like in "Fable" 1. The drop-in co-op is pretty damned cool. The human interactions, from multiple gay marriages to public druknenness, seem really fun. There are some wonderful but not overbearing
references to the first "Fable." And I love that this week's downloadable "pub games" let players earn money to use later in the game -- Molyneux even said that his studio Lionhead is making an SDK available so others can make games that integrate into the "Fable 2" world.
Of course half an hour or less of hands-on time at E3 only tells you so much. I could reverse myself on every one of these opinions when I finally play the games. But based on my takes so far, it looks like I may be in a minority once again this fall.
Update: Commenter Eric makes an excellent point below: "You said the 1st person perspective "doesn't work for a game trying to manipulate a character through complex spatial puzzles." Isn't that exactly what Portal is?" I guess a more precise description would be that my problem with "Mirror's Edge" is that the character is climbing, jumping, etc. while moving at a very fast pace. I found it really difficult to figure out exactly where she is in the environment in the first person view, which made it tough figure out if I'm precisely lined up for to jump or climb in the right place while running. In "Portal" on the other hand, you can usually take as much time as you need to look around the room, line yourself up for things, etc. And since you often have to fire precise shots, the first person view is helpful. Based on the 15 or 20 minutes I played, it's not so helpful in "Mirror's Edge." I really felt like I needed a broader view with my character as part of it.
Chris Morris reports on the business and culture of video games and offers analysis of recent events and industry trends.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
I agree with most points in this article. Especially about Gears of War 2.
But I always thought of Mirror's Edge as more of a fast-paced adventure game, since so far, I haven't seen any challange in the game worthy of being called a "puzzle". I am however looking forward to it, and it most definitely looks to be one of the more playable games this year.
Posted by: Oyunlar | April 07, 2009 at 01:29 PM
penisbuyutuculeri.com
sexshopum.com
sexshopum.net
sexshopevim.com
aseks.net
eturknet.com
tecavuz.net
itirafet.org
azdirici.com
geciktiriciler.com
penisbuyutuculer.com
Posted by: seks shop | March 06, 2009 at 04:54 AM
thanks
Posted by: sikiş | January 30, 2009 at 02:28 PM
Also have my doubts about LBP. I must confess I'm not a PS3 owner so this might sound a little bit like flamebait, but, well, how can people really be so excited about this game? 99.95% of mods are rubbish,
Posted by: oyun oyna | January 18, 2009 at 01:31 PM
thanks you staff.
Posted by: chat | December 05, 2008 at 04:46 PM
Fable 2 not getting anything surprised me as well. It really looks like it'll win me over this time. Fable 1 was just a little eh to me. Good game definitely but not was promised, not by a long shot.
Posted by: GeorgeR | August 14, 2008 at 11:07 AM
Try practicing Parkour yourself before writing off "Mirror's Edge".
More often than not, I find myself frustrated with the lack of freedom of movement in video games. Specifically when I'm in a situation in a video game that I could easily get around or through in real life without finding the blue key.
Posted by: Andrew Medina | August 13, 2008 at 03:17 PM
When I want cutting edge insight on games from a professional gamer, I go to bobwhoeverwrotethis!
Doesn't get much more pro than this. (gotta say I agree with the yawn at GoW2 and ME, tho...but he probably thought Halo 3 was innovative)
Posted by: cliffbuttstinksky | August 13, 2008 at 06:16 AM
Ben,
I agree with your assessment on Resistance 2 over Gears 2. Back in 2006, Resistance just felt like a generic shooter. In fact, it seemed to be a somewhat cynical attempt at cornering two popular FPS genres - WWII and marines vs. aliens. The original Gears of War was such a fresh experience.
But this time around, I think Gears 2 really is indeed "more of the same", but that's only because what Gears 1 did right the first time worked so well. It's the Resistance series that really needs to grow, and it seems like Resistance 2 will illustrate that growth by quite a measurement.
My gut feeling is that people (critics and the gamer masses alike) will bestow laurels upon Gears 2, based mostly on its pedigree, and Resistance 2's enhancements will be acknowledged, but the game will still live in Marcus Fenix's shadow.
Oh well, we'll find out in November...
Posted by: Little Dieter | August 13, 2008 at 12:24 AM
SuicideNinja you're definitely right and I would give "Gears" 1 an award over "Resistance" 1 in a minute. But based on what I've seen so far, I think "Resistance" 2 will be a better game than "Gears" 2. Does "Gears 2" suffer a bit because I've "seen it all before," so to speak? Sure. But I bet Insomniac would give up the praise today in order to have the sales and acclaim that Epic got for the original "Gears" its first go around.
Not to mention that I think "Gears" will and should sell gangbusters. After two years of playing basically the same "Gears" (plus a few downloadable maps), I'd personally pay $60 for some moderate improvements in a heart beat.
Anon, I'm not whining. Just expressing my opinion. There's a difference. Hell, maybe I'm wrong and other judges are right.
Posted by: Ben Fritz | August 12, 2008 at 04:13 PM
It wouldn't be hard to best Resistance 1. For me, I could easily see how it would be an "amazing game" for people who didn't have a lot of experience in FPS games, making it a perfect candidate for the PS3.
The weapons were creative, but in practice they didn't feel like anything special...reading the description was cooler than actually using the weapon.
The haphazard story, and drawn-out-far-too-long length, and boring multiplayer...I'd seriously hope the 2nd would outdo it. Gears did "more" right the first time; Resistance had way more to fix than Gears. It seems a little unfair to do the comparison.
Posted by: SuicideNinja | August 12, 2008 at 03:31 PM
What's the matter, Ben? Figured you'd whine in your blog since the other judges didn't want to hear it?
You were outnumbered there, and you are here. Just give it up.
Posted by: Anon | August 12, 2008 at 02:19 PM
The only reason that I'm not posting "FAIL" is because the author loves Bioshock (and Portal).
Posted by: Somewhat Awesome | August 12, 2008 at 01:43 PM
Interesting thoughts. Some responses from someone who hasn't played, but has closely followed all of the above-mentioned games:
I understand your criticism of Gears of War 2, but disagree with your conclusion. Gears 2 is not a complete reinvention, but appears to do what a sequel should: it adds to the story and iterates on the gameplay established in its predecessor.
While Resistance 1 was a "very solid" game, it was hardly spectacular. (Gears does not feature the inventive weapons found in Resistance, but I'd suggest that its nuanced additions to the shooter mechanic have proven to have longer legs and deeper impact in the genre). You're correct that Resistance 2 appears to be a bigger leap forward from Resistance 1, but I wonder whether "most improved" should be a requisite for winning "Best Action Game."
Mirror's Edge - Describing Mirror's Edge as a "hot chick in the future who does parkour!" does seem particularly unfair. It's too easy to dismiss a game by reducing it to a brief story outline. (Though, I'll note that games with female protagonists are rare. And while you call her a "hot chick," I've not seen any media that seemed to sexualize Faith). But the *story* is not what has people excited about Mirror's Edge. People are excited that the game looks and plays differently than any other. Can you think of another game that downplays gun combat and focuses on locomotion from a first person perspective? It's an experiment that could fall flat (though I hear loving accounts from those who have played it). Still, even if it "doesn't work for you," I think you're being overly dismissive.
Posted by: Eudaimo | August 12, 2008 at 12:32 PM
fable 1 was the only game for xbox that, after reading an early preview in a magazine, i followed for 2 years until it was released. and i wasn't dissapointed. fable 2 looks 100x better than fable 1 and once again is the only game coming out to get me excited. imagine what fable 3 will be like :D
Posted by: foss | August 12, 2008 at 10:53 AM
Agreed although I disagree on Mirror's Edge. I really enjoyed the twist on the FPS genre and while it's not quite the revolution that Portal was it's a lot of fun. How much of the game did you get to play at E3?
I still can't believe how much R2 was ignored at E3, especially given the scope of multiplayer options (8 player co-op, 60 player multi) and how superficial the changes to Gears 2 is.
Posted by: Charles | August 12, 2008 at 08:35 AM
You suck.
Posted by: Just A Guy | August 12, 2008 at 05:37 AM
Good article and i agree with most of the opinions expressed here, particularly about gears 1.5. The first gears is my second favourite 360 game (after the awesome bioshock) but I've yet to see anything about the sequel that really excites me. Sure, horde mode sounds interesting, but will it have legs? And screenshots don't look vastly better than those from the first game (which isn't to deny the quality of the first game's visuals).
Not really interested in mirror's edge. Am concerned about fallout 3: i enjoyed morrowind, but oblivion had a *lot* of problems beyond the much-bemoaned levelling system - repetitive environments, an excess reliance on combat to pad the game out (as opposed to the exploration of morrowind), not really that many quests compared to morrowind, the sheer tedium of sameo-sameo oblivion gate dungeons, AWFUL voice acting, unexceptional writing... eek. Will Bethesda fix all of these problems for Fallout 3? Fingers crossed but I have my doubts.
Also have my doubts about LBP. I must confess I'm not a PS3 owner so this might sound a little bit like flamebait, but, well, how can people really be so excited about this game? 99.95% of mods are rubbish, do I really want to play a game focussed on the creation and sharing of user generated content? I know, the game ships with a bunch of levels made by the designers. And they look incredibly bland. And the characters move with an undeniable floatiness. I'd love to have resistance 2 (and maybe even killzone 2 and infamous) on my 360 but the ps3 fanboys can keep this one.
Posted by: tiara | August 12, 2008 at 05:26 AM
I agree with most points in this article. Especially about Gears of War 2.
But I always thought of Mirror's Edge as more of a fast-paced adventure game, since so far, I haven't seen any challange in the game worthy of being called a "puzzle". I am however looking forward to it, and it most definitely looks to be one of the more playable games this year.
Posted by: Josp | August 12, 2008 at 05:13 AM
Okay, first of all, I love Fable as well. However, I wasn't trolling blogs as often, so I had no idea the ambitions Molyneux (and promised) had setting out in development. I'm also SERIOUSLY looking forward to Fable 2 (I just got my codes for the pub games today from GS).
I haven't played Mirror's Edge, but your description doesn't make sense to me. You said the 1st person perspective "doesn't work for a game trying to manipulate a character through complex spatial puzzles." Isn't that exactly what Portal is? You're free to have your own opinon, of course, and like I said I haven't played it. But from an outsiders perspective, Bourne and Bond have some parkour involved, it's starting to be more mainstream.
Anyway, I love your site, it's defintely different from the other blogs out there. Keep it up!
Posted by: Eric | August 11, 2008 at 05:48 PM