Go Buy Tetris Evolution!

The first time I encountered Tetris Evolution a friend-of-a-friend brought it with some other games to an evening of Xbox fun. It was an instant hit that everyone could get into. I picked it up because I love the old-school puzzler, it would be great for party gaming, and because it’s a third of the cost of a new release (and I got two achievements so I had to get some more). What I didn’t realize was the huge amount of variety which lay under the proverbial hood.

Lots of people would pop in the disk and just play the old-fashioned Marathon mode. There’s no problem with that. Those people would probably enjoy themselves and consider that experience to be what you get for a budget-priced game. In fact, from the night when I actually got to try the game that’s all I foresaw. I noticed, however, that there were achievements for each different game mode. That’s when I realized just how many game modes there are: eight all told. Each of these different play types reward using the same mechanics in different ways. In Hotline, for instance, you get points for clearing lines over specially coloured watermarks. The higher the watermark the more points. While you can get points for playing each type as you would Marathon, you won’t get the achievements that way. To get those you have to strategize and adjust how you play things. I realized quickly that the only way I would get anything like a high score in Hotline was to fill the bottom half of the screen with random pieces in order to get some decent points, but at the same time if I got too greedy I would loose before the lines paid out. There are still a number of achievements for pulling off unique moves, but you could ignore those and still have a ton of variety in your gameplay.

But what about multiplayer? There’s nothing quite like getting back-to-back Tetrises and flooding your opponent’s screen with lines. There’s a good variety in multiplayer too. You can play all the same game types in up to four-player multiplayer locally. You can also compete over Live, which is a great way to put your skills to the test against other players you have lots of practice under their belts.

Now I would expect a lot of gameplay hours out of a game which sells for full price. Even at $40 I would want the variable settings you get to further customize each mode. But for $20! This game is not just a steal, it’s a BARGOON! I strongly recommend this title for anyone looking to round out their collection. This game isn’t the only game you should own for your Xbox 360, but it should definitely be one of few you do own, as I guarantee you’ll be able to go back to it again and again.

Hi, My Name is Trumpcard, and I’m an Achievement Whore

Before I begin on my rant I should note a few things about the site. First off, I’m still getting the hang of the whole interface. As a consequence, there may have been comments which have slipped by me in the spam filter. It’s almost too good, and if I don’t watch it ever-so-closely things are deleted before I can rescue them. So if you see your comment isn’t up because the spam filter got it, I apologize and promise to do better in the future. Also, you’ll notice that I’ve started posting a few links on the sidebar. I hope to add to these as I go with what I read about videogames in general. Pretty soon I’m going to stop linking to these pages in my posts. Therefore, if you see me mention a site without linking, check the sidebar. It means I’m enough of a fan to go back again and again to see what they post.

I still remember when I first got my Xbox 360. That night my friend came over and we played Marvel Ultimate Alliance for hours. I noticed when my first achievement popped up, but I didn’t think anything of it. In fact, it was the next day before I really went through my dashboard and saw what it was and how it affected my gamerscore. At that moment I was hooked. Now I feel kind of like Sonic.

I know that much ink has been spilt about games which award achievements for little effort or simply “grinding”. Knuckles Dawson wrote some pretty great articles about achievements over at Rooster Teeth in the past (some of which may be repeated in here), and now he’s working with them on the new Achievement Hunter site, which I think is pretty great. I get most of my achievement-whore info from there now, though I still refer back to Xbox360Achievements.org every once in a while. Unlike most of the visitors to these sites, I have a pretty low percentage for completed achievements. I pull in at around 30% of the achievements I could have in my gamerscore. That being said, I’m constantly revisiting old games to explore new avenues of play. I usually shoot for about 600 points on full games, and I pretty much consider anything I get in arcade titles as gravy (save Penny Arcade Adventures: On the Rain-Slicked Precipice of Darkness Episode 1, since it’s really more of a full game). I dip a little lower than 60% on most games with multiplayer achievements, because I spend most of my gaming time on the single-player experience. Just because I don’t need them all doesn’t mean I don’t still covet each little achievement I get.

As I said, Knuckles did some great analysis of how achievements can encourage players to explore different was to play a game, which is very true. Crackdown is an excellent example of that. I already explained how the orb collectables encourage you to search the city to its fullest, and the achievements do a similar job of getting you to explore the gameplay mechanics, particularly the driving. Personally, I don’t like to drive. I prefer the rooftop rout in Crackdown, but I know that if I want those few points I need to get my ass streetside, exposing me to another avenue of gameplay.

Something I’ve noticed personally, which I haven’t seen others mentioning, is that I play more of my games than I used to. I used to buy a lot of games without having finished my previous games. I would often set aside old games and never get back to them, or if I finished a game I would never go back to get those last few collectables. Now I do go back since I get a persistent and quantifiable reward. Part of the reason I don’t mind being at 30% completion for my achievement points is that I don’t often look at that percentage. I watch my gamerscore, still less than a year old, slowly growing. Each new achievement is a personal best and so long as I am able to slow the influx of new games I’m able to increase that percentage.

Slowing that influx is another personal best which achievements have helped me with. I used to buy games whenever I felt like it. This nasty habit resulted in a stack of unopened games (referred to in this article as a “pile of shame”). I still have Bioshock in its shrinkwrap, which tortures my soul a little each time I think about buying a new game. How did achievements keep me from spending like the consumer whore that I am? It’s quite simple really: I worked out a ratio of achievement points to dollars which dictates how much I spend. The more I get out of the games I have, the more I can spend on new games. Yes, it does seem a little childish, but it works. Also, since achievements keep me going back to past games I’ve completed before, I actually make use of the game library I collect, as opposed to just thinking “Someday I’ll get around to beating the toughest difficulty setting”.

I realize that not everybody gets the warm and fuzzies from achievements, but I think it’s fair to say that there’s more to them than just a contest against other players. I’d be lying if I said I didn’t compare scores with others on my friends list, but I like having achievements for the ways that they improve my play. Now I’ve got to get back to grinding on Soul Calibur IV.

Should it Pay to be a Packrat?

A little while ago the KOXM pod cast (put together by Dan and Ryan from The Official Xbox Magazine) received a listener voicemail about collectable items in games today. The listener made this case: collectable items have become tacked on in many games today, lacking any real design integration. Do these collectable items really add to gameplay, or are they just tacked on to extend a game’s lifespan?

The obvious answer is that it depends on the game. Is Gears of War the blockbuster hit that it is because you can collect COG tags throughout the experience? I’d say no. In fact, I believe that Gears is one of the games that is actually set back by this collectable experience, since it pulls you out of the game experience. Perhaps it’s just my lack of military experience, but I’m thinking that when you’re doing your best to avoid being cut in two by enemy fire, you won’t be looking for glowing tags hidden in the darkest corners of the environment. The result: I’m deeply involved in fighting back waves of locusts, but once they’re all dead I’m zig-zagging around looking for those little bits of blue.

One of the games that does it right, in my opinion, is Crackdown. Crackdown has two types of “orbs” to collect: 500 agility orbs, available at high peaks, and 300 secret orbs, hidden throughout. While these seem like huge quantities, what they do is make sure that you explore the entire open world. I realize that most games are trying to get you to explore their world with collectables, but that’s not really necessary in a linear game. In a linear game, you’re seeing the environment, whether or not you’re pushing the character over the far right to get that token just slightly off-screen.

But this is neglecting to take note of what makes Crackdown’s system truly worth while: Crackdown takes collectable orbs and works them into the game mechanics. When you collect an orb, you get a slight increase in your statistics. This increase isn’t a lot. You could probably get through the game without them, but you do get something for collecting them. Another game which did interesting things with collectables was The Darkness. In The Darkness you get to unlock various extras through the use of collectables you find along the way. You do get an achievement if you get them all, but if not you still get some great concept art and videos. A game I loved but which I didn’t like the collectable system in is Assassin’s Creed. I did try and find a lot of the flags in that game, and in doing so I found parts of the world that I had never looked at before, but I just couldn’t stay motivated. I got a lot of other achievements in the game, so my gamerscore wasn’t suffering, and there was no real advantage to having just one more flag.

That actually brings me back to something which Gears of War did right: achievements for collectables. While I don’t think that this game needed to have collectables, I do like that they reward you for getting a few along the way. Perhaps I would have got more flags in Assassin’s Creed if I got a few points for getting a third of them, and a few more for getting two thirds. I’m ready to admit that I may not find EVERY collectable, but I would like to get something for trying. That’s part of why Crackdown still has a great system, despite no achievement points. Instead you get the in-game mechanic rewards.

Ultimately, however, I think that collectables come down to whatever you want to make of them. Some people will always collect everything, and those who choose not to may just ignore those collectables. Suckers like myself who choose to sacrifice gameplay in a misplaced attempt to get ‘em all ought to be few and far between. And perhaps if we aren’t such rare gamers the game design will start to adapt to really examine whether or not a game should have collectables before including them.

Supporting The Industry

I often find myself taking choice for granted. While this applies to many facets of my life, I’m referring specifically to my choice in gaming applications. We often think that innovation and success go hand-in-hand in the videogame industry, but that’s not always the case. Beyond Good and Evil springs to mind as a game which received excellent reviews across the board, sported some innovation, and had less-than-astounding sales. What got me thinking about supporting game designers was this post about the high cost of Braid on Xbox Live this week. I think Mr. Blow has a valid point. Game development costs money, and pricing has to reflect that. It doesn’t matter if you’ve made the best game of all time if you go bankrupt doing it. Many gamers will argue that a game of high quality will drive its sales so that price need not be a factor. If that were true we would pay a lot less for all games. Then there are the previous games which have received critical acclaim and yet underperformed when it comes to revenue. I think that gamers ought to at least play the trial of a game before they claim that it is not worth the price. I played the Braid trial this week, and I can say I will purchase the complete game. Why? Because I think the time-bending gameplay is really unique. I also love the platforming/puzzle solving style is really fun. And possibly most of all, I really love the look and environment of the game. There’s a really great Gamasutra article which is written by the art creator for the game. It does a great job explaining the beautiful art which takes place in this game. I strongly recommend you check this game out.

This topic also loops back to something Tycho at Penny Arcade once wrote about buying previously used games. He pointed out something I had neglected to realize before that: buying used games doesn’t help the people who make them. I was already unhappy with EB Games for giving me $2 for a game they would turn around and sell for $35, but the fact is that the only people who see any profit from used games are the retailers. So while it might seem like a good idea to save a few dollars by getting a used copy of a great game, it doesn’t make sure that the people who make that game are able to keep innovating and providing the industry with great products. The result: I stopped buying used games. I still look for deals, but I do my best to keep it to new copies to insure that at least some of it is supporting the actual developer and not just a retail machine.

Despite my reservations in the buy-used system, however, I had completely neglected Xbox Live. I love being able to download trial versions, but seldom did I get around to actually buying the games. Since there’s a steady stream of retail games coming out to keep me busy I’ve been neglecting to buy these great games on Live, but now that I’ve put a little thought into my practices as a consumer I’ve decided to make a change. Just like I stopped buying used games, I vow to start buying Xbox Live games that I find really interesting. My dollars will go towards advancing developers who create really great games on this downloadable service. Hopefully others will be doing the same thing, and we can make sure that we’re able to enjoy really great games for years to come.

Silly Gamer, Cartoons are for Kids

I’m a huge fan of comic books and cartoons. I still have all my action figures from the ‘80’s and can put together Devastator from muscle memory. I also have a number of large boxes overflowing with comics, many of them new titles looking at old franchises such as Transformers, G.I. Joe, and even Megaman. Whenever there’s a new interpretation of one of these favourites I examine it with careful attention. I even watched the too-short-lived Silver Surfer series on Fox back in the day. Knowing my affection for cartoon/comic franchises from my youth you would expect that I get let down a lot by modern reinterpretations of my childhood memories. Well I’m not, and I think that most people who are should be more understanding. I came to this decision while thinking about two different games this last week.

*Note: I link to Kotaku. I’m not trying to beat up on Kotaku authors, they just happen to be the most accessible examples of what I’m talking about.*

The first was a post on Kotaku about a new Transformers G1 game. I agree that this looks like an awesome turn-based game and I wish it was coming out for the DS or perhaps Xbox Live rather than a mobile game. But this got me thinking about all the other recent attempts to overhaul the Transformers franchise. Some people expect that all these new Transformers iterations ought to be aging with the people who watched the original G1 series. I believe this is due to Dreamwave publishing’s amazing comics a few years back which, let’s face it, spoiled us. They were comics made by Transformers fans for the fans, and they had all that amazing stuff we all wanted about all our favourite characters. But the cartoons have always been another story (and let’s face it, that’s where the games are finding their source material). Most people I talk to or read say that the new Transformers suck because they’re all about kids and stupid after-school-special lessons rather than robot civil war. To those people I say “Go and rewatch all of Generation One”. Seriously. They’re awful. Season three, after the movie, felt horribly tacked on and had really bad dialogue and plot. There are continuity issues such as the Constructicons being built on Earth but in a Cybertron flashback. The answer is that the shows were for kids, so they didn’t care. They wanted to make a show kids would watch and have fun with. I’ve watched the new series, and I think it’s really good. The art style is different, but everything is now. It’s got all the kid stuff in it, but they do some really great throwbacks to the previous series (such as bringing in characters like Wreck-Gar and Blurr). I think that’s the best any of us ought to expect. We’re getting older and we should be happy that new generations are able to fall in love with cars that turn into robots and back. If creators for this generation give a nod to the past, all the better. At least now they worry about things like continuity and refreshing the franchise on a regular basis.

My other issue has to do with Spider-Man. Comic characters tend to be a little different, mostly because comic writers realized that their core market was getting older and matured the characters to match. So as we’ve all gotten older our favourite characters have too. Spider-Man got a job, married, divorced, etc. We like how this helps us to identify with the character. But somewhere along there we, the fans, forgot that there’s a whole generation behind us who loves the character too and wants to play games based on him too. What I’m really talking about here is the game Spider-Man: Friend or Foe. Now some people thought it was too childish. By some I mean most. It’s a simple brawler which you can get through by pretty much just mashing at the controller. On occasion you need to do some specific attack, but the skill required is pretty low. The dialogue is very early-Spidey kid-friendly fun (which I must say is fresh since it became cool to be dark and tortured). The game’s also kind of short. You could probably polish it off in one sitting if you really wanted to. I still haven’t completed the game though, and I’ve had it since Christmas. Why not? Because I play it almost exclusively co-op with friends. Not only that, I play with one particular friend when we get together to drink and game until the wee hours of the morning. After the Halo 3 and the Guitar Hero and everyone else has gone home, we kick back and beat some bad guys. What made me decide to do this post was yesterday morning, a morning after, when I decided to go back and play through some levels on my own (and sober) to get a few collectables we’d missed. You know what I noticed? This game is awesome! I realized that as Blade’s glaive flew around the screen and hit five enemies, but only if I aimed at an enemy. If not, it missed. I then really took note how well the collision detection worked. True, the graphics aren’t amazingly next-gen, but I don’t care. I know who Spider-Man is, I know who the friend is, and I know who the bad guys are. What this game has is depth. I still haven’t unlocked every character and I’ve got Doc Oc, Green Goblin, Silver Sable, The Prowler, Iron Fist, Black Cat, Sandman, Rhino, The Lizard, Scorpion, and of course Blade, all available as cooperative playable characters. Not to mention all the upgrades and special attacks. I mean, there’s a lot there. You can also unlock character bios and such, which I think help round it out. Could the achievement structure be a little more involved? Yes. Could the plot have more twists? Definitely. Does it maintain the integrity of the characters, remain kid-friendly, and provide fun for all ages all at once. Hells yes! In my opinion that’s almost a pure game as far as the franchise is concerned. Of course Spider-Man 2 will remain sacred in my heart because it’s the most faithful adaptation of Spider-Man in a video-game, but that’s not to say I can’t enjoy this game too.

That’s what’s great about these IP’s from our youth. They can grow up, but at the same time they’re constantly being rejuvenated and promote innovation. Not everything’s a winner for sure, but they still remain lots of fun and actually give us something in common with other generations. So before you put down a game because it doesn’t meet with your expectations of the franchise which you have meticulously constructed over the years, try it out. See if it’s actually fun. Because, let’s face it, that’s what all this is supposed to be about to begin with.