Most Disappointing 2010 // Red Dead Redemption

The "Most Disappointing" award goes to the game that seemed like it was going to be absolutely incredible, but for whatever reason, it just didn't live up to the hype. I was expecting to love this game and instead was completely underwhelmed.

Ever since that original teaser trailer back in 2005, I've been pumped to see how Rockstar would handle the Western. Mixing that underused genre with a developer as talented as Rockstar seemed like a recipe for guaranteed success. Every subsequent trailer they released leading up to Red Dead Redemption's release only stoked that excitement further, as did the numerous perfect review scores.

As I made my way through the game's sublime first of three acts, I met some truly extraordinary characters: John Marston, the protagonist, was simultaneously tough and charming, taking each situation with nothing more than a cocked eyebrow and a cavalier outlook. Bonnie MacFarlane, a feisty rancher, proved a great foil to Marston's dry charisma and seemed like an early candidate for a potential love interest. Marshal Johnson, a weathered lawman, easily became my favorite; the kind of old-fashioned, honest sheriff I was hoping to fight alongside for most of the game.

The dialogue was smartly written, the voice acting was perfect, the pacing was excellent, and the story was pinpoint-focused on the "capture or kill" of Bill Williamson, one of Marston's former gang members. To say the least, I was impressed.

The hunt for Bill Williamson was to move down to Mexico, literally half of the game's huge world. And I was ready to chase him to Mexico and beyond, if I had to. I was determined to capture him alive. It only seemed right given Marston's reformed nature.

The first chink in the armor came when Jose Gonzalez's stellar "Far Away" began to play after I arrived in Mexico. What a powerful moment, for a real, honest-to-goodness song to begin playing here in this mostly ambient Western game. I was stunned. I was equally stunned when I got off my horse to pick some flowers (one of the game's collectables) and the song immediately and jarringly stopped playing. What a powerful moment, completely ruined by basic interactivity.

Everything fell apart after that. The focus on Bill Williamson was completely gone, replaced with a Mexican revolution that dragged on and on and never interested me at all. Like Marston (or so he claimed), all I cared about was catching up to Bill Williamson. The phenomenal characters I'd met before were replaced by unlikeable stereotypes. What was going on?

Finally though, Williamson was kneeling in front of me. I relished the moment and tried to figure out how to let the characters surrounding us know that I wanted to take him alive. After about ten seconds, a character I absolutely despised impatiently shot him, robbing me of any satisfaction at all. Wow.

After that, Marston's mission arbitrarily became the killing of the former leader of that gang, a man that had only ever been talked about in passing prior. It felt like the game was being stretched.

Without giving anything away, everything about the game's ending is truly brilliant -- one of the best I've played in years -- but the lead up to that ending is painful. The characters I loved were never revisited again in a meaningful way and the story completely lost the flawless pacing and focus of the first act.

Combine that with an embarrassing number of both game and immersion-breaking glitches, some rough, dated mechanics, and repetitive missions and Red Dead Redemption had completely lost me by the end. No other game this year disappointed me as much as this one did.

Runners-up: Split/Second, God of War III

Shrink post.

Most Potential 2010 // Dark Void

The "Most Potential" award goes to the game that sounded awesome on paper and had real flashes of brilliance, but could still be so much more. Hopefully this game will get a sequel that can deliver on its promise.

Dear Dark Void,

Remember the first time we leapt off that cliff together and activated the jetpack? And those UFOs came chasing after us and we had to do some pretty fancy flying to take them out? They were no match for us. We were a great team.

Or how about the time we had to destroy that crazy, rotating cylinder? Where, instead of taking cover behind those moving platforms, I just rocketed past everything, set it to self-destruct, then flew past everything again to escape? Wow, what a rush! Those were some really fun times.

But I also remember you taking me on lots of incredibly generic third-person shooting adventures too. Those were never your strength, so I don't really understand why you did that. We were having such a good time mixing ground and air combat that I just don't get why you insisted on having missions that focused on one or the other. Staying solely on the ground highlighted that you were pretty bland as a third-person shooter, and staying solely in the air highlighted that you weren't a fantastic air combat game either.

When we first started seeing each other, things were really exciting! You're different than the other games I've played in the past. You had some really cool, fresh twists on an established genre; ideas that I still think sound fantastic. And occasionally, they were. But too often, you fell back on tired gameplay tropes we've both seen elsewhere, done better.

Why didn't you stick with the concepts of dynamic environments, vertigo-inducing scenarios, and nonlinear levels, designed to allow freedom of play style with the jetpack? Sometimes, it felt like we were revolutionaries, man. Breaking new ground. Changing the world. But too often, it felt like we were just playing it safe.

But the thing is, I know you can become the game for me. You really impressed me with your creative ideas and visionary ambition. You always felt like you were on the cusp of something wonderful, something truly amazing. With a little effort, I think know you can soar to heights other games could only dream of.

I believe in you, Dark Void. Hopefully I'll see you again soon.

Love,
Thomas

Runners-up: Split/Second, Heavy Rain

Shrink post.

Review // Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood

By the time the credits were rolling on Assassin's Creed II, I couldn't even imagine how the next game in the series could top it. The leap in quality from the first game to the second was insane. But after watching the credits roll on Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, I can't imagine ever going back.

The Deadliest Man Just Got Deadlier

In past Assassin's Creed games, combat tended to devolve into waiting for enemies to attack so you could parry them for one-hit kills. For Brotherhood though, once you get your first parry, you can go on an unending train of death until either someone interrupts you or there's just no one left to kill. The rhythm of directing your strikes while watching for attacking enemies and occasionally parrying mid-combo feels a lot like Batman: Arkham Asylum. Mind you, it's not quite as good as Batman, but it's definitely a big step in the right direction for the franchise.

The other big change is Ezio's ability to recruit and put to work new Assassins. They'll shadow you day and night until you whistle for them -- while free-roaming, on a mission, whenever -- then will appear out of nowhere to kill whichever unlucky guards you were targeting. It's a thrill that never once got old to watch my recruits fall from the sky and land on enemies. Easily, this is the smartest, coolest departure from past games in the series, and precisely why I can never go back to flying solo; it's just too fun rolling with a crew of Assassins.

For a game that was initially hyped as a mostly multiplayer-focused cash-in, it's pretty astonishing how much better the single-player is than the last two games. It's more expansive, yet more focused at the same time. Really, this game is one pleasant surprise after another and full of unexpected ambition. Much more than either of the first two games, I found myself getting sidetracked for hours on end. There's just so much stuff to see and do that it's almost overwhelming, but always exciting.

Revisiting An Old Friend

Hearing that we'd be saying "ciao" to Ezio once again was initially pretty disappointing, seeming like a missed opportunity at best and an incredibly lazy, uninspired design choice at worst. But as it turns out, Ezio still had plenty of interesting things to contribute to the franchise. While his story initially doesn't feel like it'll end up making a difference overall, it fleshes out the fiction's universe well and becomes much more significant the further you get into it. As well, it's the best story yet in the series, with the most focused campaign and excellent performances from the main cast, particularly from Andreas Apergis, who plays Cesare Borgia like a true madman.

Not to be left out, Desmond's part is infinitely crazier here than ever before, especially at the end, and it's really exciting to see such a big budget franchise continue to take insane risks with the story. But even still, I don't know how much longer Ubisoft can continue to put off making Desmond the main character before the series becomes stale. I feel like Brotherhood represents the pinnacle of what they can do in their current format, so anything going forward needs to shake things up in a meaningful way.

What does shake things up already though is the new multiplayer component. Tasking you with acting like a rote AI character and truly hiding in plain sight (the franchise's ultimate promise) while you covertly hunt other players proves to be a perfect match for the series. Never before have I felt as gleefully paranoid in a video game as I do playing Brotherhood's multiplayer, knowing only that somebody somewhere is on his way to kill me and could literally be anyone. It's not perfect, and I've run across several discouraging exploits, but it truly is an innovative and brilliant addition.

It's hard to believe that Ubisoft could make such an improved, fantastic game in just one year, but they totally did. Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood is bolder and more ambitious than anyone could have predicted it would be, and definitely worth buying.

Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood / $59.99 / PS3 [reviewed], 360, PC

Shrink post.

Review // After Burner Climax

Are you epileptic? No? Would you like to be? Then boy do I have the game for you! After Burner Climax is undoubtedly the fastest game I have ever played, moving at such absurdly ridiculous speeds that it actually becomes hilarious. It's a short game, but it's well worth your money.

Sir, Do You Know How Fast You Were Going?

Normally, I have very little interest in flight combat games. They tend to devolve into me spinning around, following some erratic icon all over the edges of the screen as I circle an enemy who is busy circling me. That's incredibly boring, and not even remotely like After Burner Climax.

Here, enemies will either come hurtling toward you at breakneck speeds or come from behind you, so you'll never have to search the skies for what you're supposed to be shooting. All you need to worry about is to 1) never stop shooting, and 2) go as fast as possible. It's a simple concept, but the game boldly embraces it and keeps everything completely insane from start to finish.

There is some strategy involved, but really, just stick to those two steps listed above and you'll be fine. Just throw in a couple barrel rolls for good measure and remember to use the Climax mode that slows down time, turns your lock-on aiming cursor into a ludicrously-sized, rainbow-colored, flashing circle of death, and allows you to fire infinite missiles at once. Awesome.

This Is Definitely A Roundtrip Flight

Everything about After Burner Climax moves nonsensically fast, even the story. This is an arcade game at heart, so you get an intro cutscene that basically just shows your plane taking off as a guy quickly yells, "HEY SOME BAD GUYS ARE ABOUT TO LAUNCH A NUKE AND IT'S YOUR JOB TO STOP 'EM GO GO GO!!!" and one of three ending cutscenes. It's stupid and silly and I love it.

Something to consider is After Burner Climax's extremely short length. The entire game can be beaten in about 15 minutes, but the key here is that practically every time you play it, you'll be unlocking new and crazier cheats to use that make the game exponentially more fun.

You'll be able to set the normally small cursor to always be at Climax mode size, set your guns to auto-fire, have infinite missiles, and a bevy of other absolutely game-changing enhancements. All of these are unlocked by simply playing more, turning what might've been an ultimately unfulfilling campaign into something much more addicting.

So when it comes down to it, yeah, After Burner Climax is pretty short. But it's so ridiculous and fun that its brevity ceases to matter. It's one of the few games that get better every time you play it. As long as you don't have epilepsy, that is.

After Burner Climax / $9.99 / PS3 [reviewed], 360

Shrink post.

Review // Persona 3: FES

I'm not usually a fan of RPGs without Mario or Earthbound somewhere in the title, but halfway into Giant Bomb's Persona 4 Endurance Run, I couldn't resist picking up Persona 3: FES for an Endurance Run of my own. After thoroughly enjoying the main storyline, I thought Persona 3 could do no wrong. Then I played the bonus campaign.

The Journey Is All That Matters

Persona 3: FES's main storyline, The Journey, feels a lot like Pokémon for adults. It's a darker, more grounded experience that replicates the life of a teenager who has to balance saving the world with being a regular guy. He goes to school, studies, hangs out with friends, goes on dates, and oh yeah, at midnight, he explores a giant tower full of monsters called Shadows.

Other RPGs lose me because they all seem so generic and serious. It's always the same fantasy tropes with the same character archetypes and serious dialogue and nothing I can relate to personally. The Journey is nothing like that. I often went several play sessions without ever seeing a fight and spent the entire time social linking with friends and going to class and, well, just living.

Thankfully, battling in this game is pretty fun too. Like Pokémon, it's all about exploiting weaknesses and finding the right creature for the job. Where it takes a step beyond Pokémon is by letting you fuse new creatures, called Personas, out of the ones you already have. It's confusing at first, but once you get the hang of it all, it's actually really addicting.

The Journey was a fantastic experience, full of laughs and real emotional connection to characters I spent an absurd amount of time with. It easily made it onto my short list of favorite RPGs and I can definitely recommend it to anyone.

Some Questions Are Better Left Unanswered

Persona 3: FES's bonus campaign, The Answer, on the other hand, I wouldn't recommend to anyone, but especially those who really enjoyed The Journey. The Answer caught me totally off guard by completely reversing everything I loved about The Journey: The storyline is weak, forced, and always serious. You never social link or go to class or even leave the room you're stuck in, and every moment is spent either in battle or preparing to be in battle.

Even the characters don't seem to want to be back, all grumbling and griping and saying, "Can we just get this over with?" It reminded me of Heart of Darkness when, about 10 pages in, characters in the novel are already falling asleep listening to the story. I set the book down at the point. I should've done the same here.

Perhaps the most infuriating thing about The Answer isn't the structure, but the awful writing. The Journey was at its best when it was light-hearted fun, but here, it's the same emotional, clichéd garbage that ruins most RPGs. By the end of it, I was muttering things to myself like, "If I have to hear one more line that only consists of one character saying another character's name, I am going to snap the fucking disc in half."

The Answer was so unbearable that I could only play it while keeping the volume down and listening to podcasts. So yeah, you should absolutely buy Persona 3: FES, but do not be tempted by The Answer. The Journey is so much better.

Persona 3: FES / $39.99 / PS2

Shrink post.

Review // Split/Second

I can't tell you how many times I played the Split/Second demo, racing the same track over and over, always with a stupid grin on my face. This is a game I was excited for. But when I finally started playing, and the deeper I got into it, the more it felt like a bad JRPG, and the less I wanted to keep going.

You Got Your Level Grinding In My Racing Game

Split/Second is a game that relies a little too heavily on first impressions. At first glance, it's a phenomenally gorgeous racer with seemingly endless potential for white-knuckled, unpredictable racing. A few hours into the full game, though, revealed a racer where frustration pervades every aspect of the experience, from the race progression to the online play to the actual racing.

Unlocking new "episodes" and cars is as simple as racing the events you already have, with a refreshingly forgiving twist: Even placing last in a race will net you a few points. The problem is that the cars I kept unlocking were always slower than anything I was up against, and sometimes worse than the cars I already had, forcing me to race harder just to stay out of last place.

I felt like I was playing a bad JRPG and was too low level for the current area. I'd unlock a new car and events, then watch AI opponents zip right past me in my fancy new car and end up placing somewhere close to last. I had to go back through old races and grind out enough points to unlock a car with better stats that could at least compete in new events.

Even then, there's a linear progression to the car unlocks, so I still found myself occasionally working to unlock cars I just didn't want. There is no event type in Split/Second that doesn't favor speed and drift above all else, so heavy trucks and cars without fast acceleration are completely useless, no matter what the loading screen tips would have you believe.

When Speed Is Not Enough, Indeed

If Split/Second was a strong enough racer, I probably wouldn't mind grinding to get a better car, but it has a lot of problems. Here are some real notes I made while playing:

• This track? Again? Really?
• The respawn system is really inconsistent. In the same race, I went from 3rd to 1st after a crash, then 1st to 8th.
• Ugh, I hate rubberbanding. These cars keep catching up no matter how well I drive.
• Wow. They wrench control from me to show how I took down an opponent, then point me at a wall or something just before giving me control again. This keeps happening.
• I can't remember the last time I yelled "bullshit!" at a game this much.
• The online is stupidly unbalanced. Everybody is using the exact same car. A car significantly faster than anything I have.

I expected the online play to be Split/Second's saving grace, but it might actually be worse than the single-player. You can only use the cars you've unlocked from the single-player campaign, so there's no point even trying the online play until you've beaten the game since everybody you'll meet already has. The matchmaking does nothing to alleviate this problem, pitting me in my first online match against guys who had already maxed out the online ranking system.

In my first few matches, I watched everyone rocket past me in the first 5 seconds and never saw them again. I decided to stop playing online until I beat the campaign. When I came back, I still didn't quite have the insane car everyone else had, but at least I wasn't coming in last place every time anymore. However, with Split/Second's ranking system, you can earn a level in one race only to have it taken right back after your next race. It felt impossible to rank up. It felt like I was wasting my time.

I had really been looking forward to Split/Second, but it let me down at every turn. If the developer can learn from the mistakes of this game and make the sequel that much better though, I'm definitely on board.

Split/Second / $59.99 / PS3 [reviewed], 360

Shrink post.