Castlevania: Symphony of the Night

The Short

Pros
- Reinvented Castlevania by taking the aesthetic and mixing it with Metroid-style exploration
- Single-handedly invented the "Metroidvania" (or "Castletroid" if you're a tool) genre
- RPG elements including leveling, gear, and currency all play a role in this new style
- Fantastic 2D art mixed with some 2D and 3D backdrops make the game look good
- Music is absolutely some of the best in the series with almost all new tracks
- Long adventure, with the "inverse castle" twist still crazy
- First game to introduce Ayami Kojima's fantastic gothic artwork for the series
- Buttload of secrets, including fighting game-style magic combos
- Can be a genuine challenge if you play with the "max luck, low everything else" code, which makes the game as hard as the old-school Castlevanias (aka the best way to play SOTN)
- "WHAT IS A MAN?!"

Cons
- Game balance in terms of difficulty is all over the place.
- That being said, 99% of the game is pretty easy, the exception being a few bosses
- These said bosses you pretty much have to cheese using the broken and op items (the sword dropped in the inverse library or the Shield Rod + Alucard Shield combo)
- Recycles a lot of assets from Rondo of Blood from the CD Engine.
- Marked the official end of linear style Castlevania games, which is too bad
- Spawned roughly eight trillion modern day indie (and commercial) games that knocked off the game's formula
- Inverse castle is basically just a hard-mode straight shot, without any story and just one song for the whole area (what is up with that?)
- PSP re-release re-dubbed and retranslated all the lines. They aren't much better, but the corniness is gone, so that's a con.

Dracula: Expert on men and what they are.

The Long

Symphony of the Night was NOT the first Metroidvania game I ever played. That reward goes to Circle of the Moon, though I beat Aria of Sorrow first. I just figured I'd toss that out there just so you know I play games in totally the wrong order, and that's ok.

Anyway, everybody's heard the story, whether or not it's true. Koji Igarashi went to Sony to say that they wanted to make not a 3D, but a 2D Castlevania game on their new Playstation system. Sony told him to suck it up and make it 3D, because 3D was the future. Then Koji went to Konami, and Konami said "No 2D Castlevania, no Metal Gear Solid," so Sony relented. Then the game actually sold pretty badly on release and only really picked up after gaining a cult following a few years down the road (enough to get it "Greatest Hits" status, at least).

I think this story is totally fake, but it does prove a point: game developers know what is good for their series. Most of the time. If you look at Symphony of the Night and compare it to the "modern" 3D Castlevania 64, it's pretty clear that Sony got the way better deal out of this.

Nintendo really should have looked into that "Blast Processing" tech when it had the chance. 

Anyway, the game is pretty much a legend at this point, because it spawned the genre that Castlevania stuck pretty rigidly too in regards to it's handheld iterations for over a decade. It wasn't until Lords of Shadow had to show up and ruin everything that our 2D Castlevanias were squarely in the "Metroidvania" category of game design.

But let's say you know nothing about this nonsense I'm spouting, and need a full rundown. Is this game good? Has it aged well? Is it worth playing on it's re-release on every gaming system ever? Well...probably. I guess. Here's a review anyway.

That's using your head. 

Story-wise, it's the same old nonsense, though it does present it in an interesting way. The game actually starts on the last level of Rondo of Blood (complete with it's level intro graphic, though it calls the stage "Bloodlines," which is in fact the first stage in Rondo of Blood. Come on, Konami, I'm just a huge nerd, I didn't even design the game and I noticed this!), where you as Rictor Belmont bust into Dracula's joint and whip him good. Following which you get a massive text crawl explaining Rictor is missing, and Dracula's son Alucard (last seen in Castlevania III: True Blood) is off to punch him in the face and blow up his castle.

So you play as Alucard instead of a whipping Belmont. This isn't the first time we've mixed it up (Bloodlines didn't have a Belmont, and it had a dude with a whip and a dude with a spear), but the fact there are no whips at all until after you beat the game and enter an unlock to play as Rictor is pretty unique.

Anyway, the story's simple. Rictor's lost his marbles and thinks he's the king of Castlevania, and his sister Maria (who has gone from being a tiny girl to an actual woman) wants Alucard to beat some sense into him. The game does have different endings (based on if you kill Rictor or bring him to his senses, which unlocks a buttload more game to play) which is neat, but the story is hardly worth mentioning.

Minus the atrocious script and god-awful voice acting. It's so bad it's downright lovely. Seriously, I really, really dig this game's atrocious voice actors. They weren't even trying.

You tell 'em, Rictor. 

No, the biggest change is this is not a linear, straight shot Castlevania game. Instead, you as Alucard are tasked to explore the entirety of the castle, gaining power-ups and items that allow you to access further and deeper portions in your quest to find the princess. Wait, that's Mario. Whatever. 

If that sounds like Metroid, then you're both right and have reading comprehension, because I only mentioned that like fifteen times already. The map screen? Ripped from Metroid. Power ups like double jump to get to new areas? Metroid. It does have a few super cool changes, like Alucard can change into a sprinting dog, form of mist to pass through grates and other small areas, and a bat that can fly, all of which unlock new areas to further your exploration. It's cool, and you can see how they took the Metroid formula, flavored it up with some Castlevania style, and it ended up alright. 

The main difference is this isn't a game that you can speed run, nor one that is based on skill like Metroid or the earlier Castlevanias. While, yes, some skill is required for the bosses, the game actually has a level-up system, similar to Simon's Quest. Sort of. Only not at all. I just thought I'd drop that comparison for some reason.

You get XP and level, learn spells by inputting fighting game-style combo moves, find new weapons and armor and equip them, all in a 2D platforming sense. This isn't the first time this has been done (one could argue Zelda 2 did it a billion years before), but it actually feels...well, good. While skill can technically be replaced with level grinding and number crunching, it's still very satisfying to get that 3D "Level Up!" text and have Alucard glow all crazy. Mixing RPG elements with Metroid exploration was, frankly, brilliant, and it shows because they kept using it for future games.

The combination of 2D and 3D in the backgrounds makes this game gorgeous. 

All is not perfect in Symphony of the Night, however. While the equips and level up system are nice, they're also a bit simple. In fact, the whole game feels a bit dumbed down. Focus isn't really on the enemies or the challenge, the meticulous platforming and merciless bosses. Instead it's about exploration and the adventure of finding every secret and rotting in every nook and cranny the castle has to offer. Is this bad? No, not really. But it is quite different from other Castlevania games in nearly every regard. As well as much, much easier. 

While one can argue the second or inverse castle offers the real challenge (and it does), the whole first half of the game is an absolute cakewalk. This is mostly because Alucard, unlike his Belmont buddies in earlier games, controls like a dream. He slides gracefully with way too many frames of animation across the screen, can change his direction mid-air, can easily morph into any animal or form he wants, and has a quick-dash to get him out of sticky situations (or just slide across the floor for fun in reverse). Much like Super Castlevania IV, the game didn't really scale it's difficulty for all these new abilities, meaning if you even have a basic grasp of how to play a 2D platformer you'll stomp your way through this game in no time. Minus the few secret bosses that you have to cheese to beat with the absolutely broken "ultra" weapons. Balance is thrown out the window pretty quickly in, and it just keeps blasting out of control from there. You could be murdering things without even trying, take a wrong turn, and die in two hits. It's a bit like a massive mixed bag of imbalance. 

That looks like a good place to go. 

What isn't a giant mixed bag of imbalance is the graphics and music. I'll say I think this is one of the best looking and sounding PS1 games out there, and certainly the best 2D one. The pixel art is phenomenal and gothic, with the backgrounds often hybridizing 2D and 3D elements to make it feel both modern and retro. As mentioned, Alucard has way too many frames of pixelated animation to be legal, and the enemies all look phenomenal, from the huge bosses to the tiny skeletons.

The music is also absolutely rocking, so much so I actually imported the soundtrack. The opening song (which I will embed below) is probably one of my favorite intro songs in a game to date, with all the rest being just as fantastic. I really only have two gripes: the absence of any "classic" Castlevania tunes (Bloody Tears, Vampire Hunter, etc.) and the fact that the inverted castle uses the same song for 90% of it. Seriously? And it isn't even that great of a song compared to the rest. Come on, guys.

Now that's rockin.'

Symphony of the Night is difficult to review, mostly because of my immense love for the linear Castlevania games. That being said, I absolutely fell in love with SOTN after I first played it, and even to this day I often revisit the game and rebeat it, both with Alucard and the unlocked Rictor. While it does have some serious balance problems, and most skill is easily replaced by grinding or just knowing where the broken items are, Symphony of the Night remains a complete and wholly decent adventure into Dracula's lair. While I honestly wouldn't rank it up as high on my favorites as the best 2D linear Castlevania games, I can say it is still one of my favorites in the series, and highly recommend you get the re-release on PSN or Xbox 360 if you haven't already. 

A new direction, a new style for Castlevania, and a hundred indie game creators rejoice. Finally, something they can overuse now that they've ground duel-stick shooters into the ground.

Four out of five stars. 

What is going on here I don't even know.

The Baconing

The Short

Pros
- Basic loot driven action RPG
- It has dialogue in it
- Graphics look cartoony and nice
- Kind of reminds me a lot of the Deathspank games

Cons
- Good thing this isn't a Deathspank game, because if it was it would be the same recycled crap all over again
- I mean, really. It clearly isn't. "Deathspank" isn't even in the title
- As a savvy consumer, I have brand awareness, and based on that alone I can conclude this is not, in fact Deathspank 3
- Because if it was Deathspank 3, it would be one of the laziest, lamest, most unfunny rehashes of an already beaten-to-death game series I've ever played
- And this would be especially bad if it was $15

Thank goodness! A new action RPG from the makers of Deathspank!

The Long

Wow, Hothead is really amazing! After releasing the sort-of-good-despite-itself Deathspank, they followed it up with a really cashed-in, mediocre sequel Deathspank: Thongs of Virtue. I was worried that they'd keep trying to milk this franchise with something like Deathspank 3, probably using a corny subtitle involving bacon that is drawn out and not funny, but I was in luck! It seems Hothead is trying a whole new franchise, completely separate from that other basic Diablo knock-off game with bits of humor (and by "humor" I mean "the one Ron Gilbert wrote was sort of funny" [and by "the one Ron Gilbert wrote was sort of funny" I mean "Deathspank 1"]). I must commend them for releasing two new IPs in such a short span of time, completely different and not at all the same as each other.

So let's take a closer look at this totally unique, not-Deathspank sequel because if it were it would say "Deathspank" in the title: The Baconing.

If you are not a savvy gamer, you may think this is a picture of Deathspank. BUT YOU ARE WRONG, GAMER TROGLODITE! FOR THIS IS CLEARLY NOT DEATHSPANK, YOU CASUAL ANGRY BIRDS PLAYING TARD!

The Baconing has a rich and unique storyline not at all tied to previous Deathspank games. In The Baconing our main character Deathspank (which I assume is a totally unique and new character who just so happens to have the same name as the iconic character from the Deathspank games, which are totally unrelated to The Baconing) has rid the world of all evil (prequel potential?) and is now bored out of his skull. He also wears a lot of thongs, which is also unexplained, though it does seem oddly similar to Deathspank: Thongs of Virtue's ending. Luckily,  I'm smart and know this is not the case.

Anyway, these thongs are evil, so he has to travel the world and throw them into the sacred Bacon Fires in order to stop an uber-Deathspank mech from destroying the world. 

I will say this: I sure am glad The Baconing is its own original IP and not a Deathspank: Thongs of Virtue sequel. Because if it was, it would be one of the lamest, poorest, most desperate attempts to extend an already concluded story (with multiple endings) into a completely asinine premise. 

Also, this game thinks its funny but it really isn't. At all. I'd say something here like "it's somehow even less funner than Thongs of Virtue", but since the two games are clearly unrelated I will refrain from saying something so uneducated an uninformed. I do have gamer blog integrity here, you action RPG peasant. 

This casino includes a delightful new feature: run around a whole lot to get quests far away that do nothing. Once unique to Deathspank, now a part of The Baconing

Speaking of Action RPGs, that's what The Baconing is, if you took everything that made them compelling and streamlined it to the point of extreme boredom. Plenty of gear drops, but there isn't any big decisions to be made here, so much so that you can have an "automatically equip best stuff" button so you don't even have to go into the menu. Brilliant. Why even have armor at all? Who knows. 

This is a similar system that was implemented in Deathspank and, while tolerable there, got extremely boring in Thongs of Virtue, especially once you realized all the little "ticks" that make these grindy-looty type games actually enjoyable were streamlined so much they were completely gone, and you were just playing the same damn game over again. But this is not Deathspank, this is The Baconing, so what would have been an absurdly tired and downright monotonous tedium-fest through the quagmire of boring suckness is now amazingly bright and fresh again. I squealed with glee every time I leveled and the bonuses were so small and gated it didn't matter. I was overjoyed when I kept getting variations of the same weapon that just did slightly more damage, essentially meaning the game never changed. I was enraptured in the throngs of virtue (whatever that means) as I spent the majority of the game walking and eating food on a timer because the potion limit is so obscenely small. All these features, which were tolerable in Deathspank only because it was the first to do it, were magically made fresh because this game was called The Baconing and not Deathspank III. Thank goodness for that.

Also Strong Bad is in this game. COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT MUCH?!

This game looks totally and completely fresh, assuming you have never played, seen, or been around someone who has ever played a Deathspank game in their lives. Which, considering this is a new IP, you probably haven't! And a good thing, too, because this is by far way blander than any of those games. While the sort of weird computer world is cool, you only go there for a few brief moments, and the rest of the world is brown and gray. Even sailing (a feature I'd say was lifted from Deathspank II without frills, but this is a new IP so forget I said anything I should just delete this sentence on nooooo) is on muddy looking water with tons of random islands that look bad and have nothing to do on them. The Animal Crossing-esque world rotation is still sort of a neat gimmick, but it's been overdone in the Deathspank games. Too bad games from a totally different series coincidentally had a similar art style that tarnished what would have been The Baconing's unique and lemony-fresh graphical style.

The music, I am sorry to say, is directly ripped from Deathspank. I don't know if The Baconing (as a new IP) was made by a fringe group in Hothead or something, but the Deathspank guys really should sue them, if that's possible within a company. Every song is exactly the freaking same as Deathspank, from the battle songs to most of the roaming music. I mean, come on guys! I know we recycled sound effects and stuff in the NES days, but this is 2013! Get with the program! 

This game has clones in it, which is weird because The Baconing feels like a clone of Deathspank. But luckily it's a totally different game, as I might have said once or twice during this review. 

Thank goodness Hothead knows what they were doing. Had this been a third Deathspank game, one without any notable improvements, upgrades, or even the slightest of changes, I'd have been downright infuriated to have had been forced to play it. It would have been one of the most cashed in, cheapest sequels I've ever experienced, with recycled music, graphics, and even less humor than the already unfunny Thongs of Virtue. Not to mention the streamlined ARPG mechanics, which were decent at best previously, would now only exacerbate the fact that this game is the same monotonous tripe we experienced in Thongs of Virtue, and trying to stretch the idea for a freaking third game would have been abhorrant and downright insulting. In brief, the game would have been literally painful to play, and this reviewer wouldn't even have had finished it, quitting shortly after the 2/3rds mark.

HOWEVER!!!

Since The Baconing CLEARLY does not have the word "Deathspank" anywhere in its title, I am completely sold on the fact is is a new IP and thus everything in this game is fresh, unique, and fabulous. Thank you, Hothead. Thank you for not releasing useless drivel that causes me actual, physical pain to experience. Thank you for not filling me with regret for even installing the game, despite having gotten it as an extra in an indie bundle. Thank you for calling this The Baconing, and distancing yourself completely from the Deathspank IP. 

Because if you hadn't, it would have been beating a dead horse into the ground that had already been beaten to death in Thongs of Virtue. Much like the overrunning joke for this review has been completely and utterly wrung dry, probably back on like the third paragraph.

One out of five stars. 

Editors note: The Baconing is actually Deathspank 3. This review was supposed to be funny as an overexaggurated reaction to the fact they took "Deathspank" from the title, obviously because people were seriously bored of the IP by this point. I apologize if somehow you got to the end of this without understanding, but if you did...maybe The Baconing is the game for you.

Homefront

The Short

Pros
- Decent enough shooter...that is, it never really broke
- Premise is interesting
- Multiplayer is stable and has a few unique ideas
- Graphics aren't...awful
- Explosive barrels are yellow instead of red. That's...a good thing.

Cons
- Single player is three hours long.
- Story is bland, patronizing to the intelligence of its audience, and borderline racist
- Shooting feels weak and bland
- Guns, sound effects, and voice acting are all very lame
- Even more "paint by numbers" than other Call of Duty clones on the market
- Controller support works, but only just
- Tons of blatant, in-game avertising
- Playing this game right after Spec Ops: The Line was a bad idea

Objectives: Keepin it simple for the dumb shooter fans

The Long

So let's get something out of the way real fast, despite my scathing reviews of the genre on this blog, I don't mind modern military shooters. I used to be really deep into Modern Warfare 2, and Black Ops, and for the most part I figure if you enjoy those types of games, that's cool and all. I mean, I wouldn't have played Homefront or Medal of Honor or all those other games if I didn't actually enjoy parts of the genre, right?

That being said, Homefront is an absolute disaster. 

I was actually looking forward to this game pre-release, and almost even pre-ordered it. As a fan of Call of Duty who was obviously seeing the series multiplayer (and single player) stagnate, I was more than willing to let THQ start up their own thing that could overcome it. However, after just a few minutes in both Homefront's borderline-offensive single player and shockingly boring multiplayer made me realize that Homefront is nothing more than an inferior clone, and all of THQ's large aspirations to make the game "better" than its competitors completely stumbled out of the gate. That, or died before even leaving the gate. 

So let's talk about Homefront.

Aiming down a red dot site? Never seen that before. 

Probably the worst thing about Homefront is its single player. Again, I felt the story had a lot of promise. It starts by giving you a stylized intro splicing real footage with obvious actors to show a series of events leading to North Korea taking over South Korea, allying with China to take over the majority of Eastern Asia, invading Hawaii, and occupying the Western side of the United States. It's actually somewhat chilling, especially for those who have followed North Korea in the news, because let's be honest...that country can be pretty scary. While the idea of it taking over the US is pretty far-fetched (especially since, I dunno, where the crap is the rest of Europe during all of this?), it's an interesting idea. Set a game in the US where half the country is occupied, and people are having to fend for themselves.

Homefront takes what could have been a decent premise and makes it downright stupid, and borderline racist.

Let me get this off my chest first, because I'm itching to say it: racial slurs for enemies, even if you made them up specifically for this game and are very obviously referencing "North Koreans," is not OK in your game. I get it, you want to show the people hate the North Koreans occupying their country, but having your team toss around racial slurs when you gun down people or using them amidst military jargon is not cool. I wouldn't say I'm one to get all uppity about this sort of thing, since I'm not a Korean-American and thus can't give my opinion on this game's representation of (what I'm assuming, based on the preface) is essentially both North and South Koreans, but still...seriously. There's even a scene in the game where they condemn a group of weird survivalists hicks (out of Utah, apparently  Do they have like ten wives too?) for being racist against your teammate who is Asian-American. Um...but you were all tossing around these racial slurs for the thousands of Koreans you gunned down during the game. But it's ok now because in-game you showed your guys are clearly incapable of racism because they defended your one team member who was Korean (and, also, the brilliant nerdy machine guy. Stereotypes, ahoy! Also, the black guy dies first. Again, awesome.).

First thing I said when I saw this cozy home base: it only exists to be burned in a "dramatic" moment later. SPOILER: I was right. 

Speaking of your companions, none of them are likable (except the Korean, weirdly enough. At least he was sort of witty). You have your rough-neck leader who is supposed to be a role model, but instead he's just a huge dick. You have your sort of hispanic girl ally who has a bare midriff and whenever an explosion happens that launches you all on the ground she somehow lands so her perfectly-rendered, jeans-covered butt is facing you. Classy. And...that's it, actually. There's a black commander but he dies (um...spoilers?) in like the first two missions so...awesome.

But where this game really fries my bacon is with it's attempts to be "edgy." It starts with Koreans busting into your house and putting you out on a bus that drives slowly through town. As you do this, you can watch all the atrocities that the North Koreans are doing to the enslaved Americans. Taking them to labor camps, shooting one that tries to one away, randomly gunning down a set of parents in front of their child (seriously...why?), complete with blood (that looks like bad ketchup, by the way) splattering on your bus window. You know. Edgy.

It only gets worse from there. As mentioned in the image, you find this utopian little self-sustaining refugee house, which exists for you to walk through once and come back to find it burned and everybody strung up and dead. You see them shoveling bodies into mass graves, only to have to "press X to hide in mass grave" later to avoid overhead choppers. You find a bunch of rednecks who just want to linch your Korean buddy and rape the girl, who spend their time torturing everybody they find but especially North Koreans. It's just one obvious attempt to "push the envelope" after the next, and all of it feels so fake and forced it's more offensive for being stupid rather than offensive to have a purpose. 

Seriously? This is the worst. 

[Tangent inbound]

See, I'm all for edgy content, or stuff that makes me thing. But that's just it: edgy content needs to have a purpose. It needs to serve the story, or at least (in a game's sense) the gameplay. The problem is, while books and movies have gotten this right, games rarely do. Mostly we have crap like "No Russian" from Call of Duty, that exists just to be "shocking." It isn't really shocking because it's only skin deep. You can distance yourself from it because there's no deeper story implications, nothing that makes you mull it over and consider how it applies to yourself. Not to butt in on another review, but Spec Ops: The Line has a lot of very similar elements as Homefront, but because it addresses them serious and as the atrocious as they actually are (like using white phosphorous and burning people alive, which you do in Homefront without batting and eye but face some awful consequences in Spec Ops) the story has impact. Homefront is like that punk 12-year-old kid that you know who swears all the time around you and talks about sex or whatever. He's trying his hardest to get a rise and be "adult," but he's so ignorant and blatant it's just him making a fool of himself. Because Homefront doesn't use any of its shocking imagery, it all comes off as weak and bland.

Not to mention it falls into that "shoot thousands of non-white people as a totally white person America #1 Hoo Ra!" problem that plagues this whole genre. Makes me a little sick to my stomach. 

I'd also like to lastly point out that this is the first game where they actually recorded voice for "Take cover inside the Hooters!" and "Regroup in the White Castle!" I'm so glad to see in-game ads playing prominently in video games these days that an entire level is about infiltrating a TigerDirect.com physical store, complete with "half off!" and "killer deals on GPUs!" adds plastered everywhere. Maybe it was because I was playing the PC version, and if I'd done it on Xbox it would have been a Microsoft Store or something. 

Mediocre at best, deplorable at worst. 

It's also worth mentioning the single player is three hours long. No, that's not me exaggerating  I checked my Steam time after burning through the game on easy (including all deaths, menu navigations, me trying to figure out how to make the controller work properly, etc.) and my in-game time was just over three hours. Seven missions, one of which is maybe ten minutes long. What a great value. 

Multiplayer tends to be a bit better in terms of content, at least. It actually is pretty clever. The better you play, the higher your "priority" ranks up. So you get better unlocks (like weapons, scout drones [my personal favorite] that you can use to tag people for your allies, attack drones, etc.) but as your stars get higher and higher the other team sees your general location on the map and gets a massive points bonus for hunting you down. This idea of somewhat penalizing players for doing well (to aid the other team) is actually a pretty decent idea. And, as stated, the power-ups are cool (and there's vehicles in this game), like the scout drones and other stuff.

The problem is the shooting in Homefront is just as bland as its story and copy-cat feel.

Plus, really bad looking blood. 

Guns sound awful, to start, like pea-shooters. While I was annoyed at Metal of Honor for running by the book, at least Dice knows how to make a game sound good. Homefront doesn't. The guns sound bad, as does all the voice acting and everything else in the game. I guess I usually put this paragraph by the graphics section, but whatever.

Shooting is serviceable but not tight. While Call of Duty and Medal of Honor are obviously developed by people who have made these types shooters in the past, Homefront feels lacking. While I'll admit it was hardly bad, when I played on a controller the auto-aim seemed borked, and when I switched to a keyboard and mouse it felt waaaay too imprecise, even after messing with my mouse settings. This is combined by unrealistic and unreliable "kicks" from guns, weird iron-sights that never seem to hit where I point them, and the fact that most SMGs are just straight up underpowered, this game feels like a budget game. Which it wasn't released as, it was released as a Call of Duty killer. Sorry, not gonna happen.

Kills earn points, which you can cash in for one of two rewards. Not a bad system, honestly. 

Graphically this game looks dated. It's hard to describe, though, with static images. The game looks ok in screenshots, with a lot of texture detail, bump-mapping, and despite looking generic at least it appears to be...ok. The problem is this game looks horrible in action, and I'm not talking about the framerate. It just looks...well...the textures look like early Xbox 360 games. You know what I'm talking about, the ones that just discovered HD, so everything looks kind of weirdly shiny, like it was up-rezzed? Again, it's hard to describe, but I played the game both on the Xbox 360 and then on the PC with everything jammed up to max settings, and it looks...straight up bad. Like a budget game.

And "Domination." Woo. 

Homefront is an excellent example of failed expectations. Again, I was looking forward to this game for quite a bit, thinking it could convey a dark and interesting storyline and an actual multiplayer experience to compete with Call of Duty. Instead, we get a game that's a cheap knock-off and feels like it at every turn. It's story tries too hard to get attention and ends up floundering, the multiplayer doesn't do anything that breaks the mold or even matches it, and the game looks and sounds straight up bad.

I've been putting off playing Homefront despite having gotten it on Steam a while back because of what I've heard, and I kind of wish I'd listened. Sure, it was only about three hours of my time I sunk into the single-player, but I'd much rather have spent that time doing just about anything else.

Unless you really like bland modern military shooters, Homefront can remain forgotten. One out of five stars. I'd recommend Medal of Honor over it any day.

One of the worst thing ever.

Persona 4 Arena

The Short

Pros
- Excellently crafted fighting game from the creators of Guilty Gear and Blazblue
- Accessible combos and moves make this Arc System's most "noob friendly" game yet
- Game is gorgeous and follows a similar art/aesthetic style to Persona 3 and 4
- Story mode does a decent job connecting the characters from Persona 3 and 4 while adding some entertaining foils
- Voice acting is spot on, as it usually is with these games, and the localization team still rocks
- Music is excellent, featuring a mix of P3 and P4 tracks that have been remixed, as well as some original songs
- Works surprisingly well in the Persona universe, despite my immense doubts as to how it would fit
- We finally figure out what the heck Elizabeth has been doing since the end of P3 in greater detail. Which is awesome.

Cons
- Limited roster of characters, and most are from P4 (13, with two being new)
- The presentation of the visual-novel style story mode is completely at odds with the dialogue-based character development presented in the series Persona games
- The protagonist from P4 has both a voice, name, and inner monologue. I don't think I like it.
- They changed Chie's voice actor so she doesn't sound like a 30-year-old women. Yes, this is a con.
- I still hate how homophobic Atlas is when it comes to everything involving Kanji. Seriously...it isn't funny.

Welcome to the Velvet Room.

The Long

My eyebrows nearly hit the ceiling in raised...ness when Atlas and Arc Systems announced Persona 4 Arena. I mean...did anybody's not? Taking one of the most popular (and possibly best) JRPGs crafted in recent memory and turning into a fighting game...well...that didn't make a lot of sense. Especially considering the main focus of the games was heavy on story, dialogue, and character interaction, there really isn't much for that in a fighting game (the only "character interaction" is them beating the crap out of each other). 

However, as the development cycle went on (and I got fully exposed to the rest of Arc Systems games, and they are arguably my favorite fighting game company to date) I began to have hope that this game would work out. Especially after Atlas pointed out that 1. This game is canon (?!) 2. It would have Persona 3 characters and 3. It would have a heavy emphasis on a story that fused (hur hur, Persona puns) together; I decided to give them the benefit of the doubt and allow Persona 4 Arena a shot at life.

So, as a hardcore Persona fan, Arc Systems fan, and writer, what is my opinion of Persona 4 Arena? Well, it has a whole lot of good, and a decent amount of mediocre. Read on and I'll explain.

If you like text, this game has got you covered. 

Let's go over what I'll probably talk the most about: Persona 4 Arena's absolutely colossal story mode. Considering this was what most fans considered the most sacrilegious part of the game (and the one with the biggest chance to screw everything up), I figured it deserves more than a brief mention.

The game allows you to play as every single character through the story mode, starting with the "core" Persona 4 characters (Yosuke, Yu [Aka the Protag], Chie, and Yukiko. After beating one of theirs you unlock Teddie and Kanji (who had a different path), and then the Persona 3 characters Mitsuru, Akihiko, and Aigis, as well as the last P4 straggler, Naoto. There's one final new character who you play last (Labrys), and after beating her mission you can replay all other stories from the "cliffhanger" ending to see the different ways the story plays out with your chosen character as the center of attention. Finally, after getting the "true" endings from the P4 and then P3 cast, you unlock Elizabeth's story, which is arguably the biggest fan-servicy one of them all as it seems to mostly focus more on resolving parts of Persona 3's story rather than Persona 4's. 

Point being: there's a butt-load of story here, and you are going to be spending tons of hours burning through it all if you are a Persona fan (I did). So since I spent all this time beating every character to 100% and seeing every ending, that means I loved the story mode right? Right?

Um...ok, let's talk about that.

Teddy is still a lovable idiot, and his story is one of the best (if only because of his moronic monologue)

So I'll get this out of the way first: I don't really dig the "visual novel" style of some Japanese games. Don't get me wrong, it can work (Phoenix Wright is a sterling example of this) but in most cases they become exposition heavy, monologue riddled messes that spend far too much time "thinking" rather than actually moving the plot forward. They're designed to bare everything through pages and pages of text, which can be good for some people, but for me I prefer a level of subtlety in writing. On the "show, don't tell" spectrum, they tend to be heavily lodged in the "tell" section, and it irks me.

Persona 4 Arena's story mode is super exposition heavy, and nearly drowns in its monologues. I kid you not when I say there's probably 7-8 paragraphs of monologue for every spoken line in this game, and that might actually be a low estimate. As you'd expect, you spend more time in character's heads than they do actually participating in the tournament, and that makes the story's pace drag to an un-bear-able crawl (see that pun? Teddy would be proud).

This is especially noticeable (in a bad way) for the main character, Yu's, story arch. In the games he was a silent protagonist, allowing the player to project themselves onto him. Since they couldn't do that in this game he has both a voice and pages of internal dialogue with himself, most of which is boring and generic. Not to be "that guy," but my Bob (which is what I named him in P4) wouldn't be nearly as big a toolbox as Yu is in this game. Not to mention that, since he didn't really have a personality  they can only draw on things P4 forced on his character, like his relation to Nanako. This makes him seem a hollow shell of the deep character I developed (in my own head, admittedly) during Persona 4, and makes his entire scenario really awkward to experience.

Elizabeth is on the moon. Don't ask why. 

This sense of awkwardness carried over to nearly all the Persona 4 characters I played, especially considering Yosuke, Chie, and Yukiko have literally the exact same character arc for their stories. And that arc is identical to their Shadow trial in Persona 4, which makes it seem double lazy. I understand playing it safe, but come on! Not to mention their internal monologues, which I'm certain were meant to make the characters more three-dimensional, actually focuses more on their two-dimensional character attributes, making them flatter than 2D Teddy. The Persona games always conveyed incredible character depth through dialogue only, since the only thoughts you could perceive were the protagonist's (and you usually directed them). It made you feel like you really knew these people without getting into their heads, and as such make the relationships feel more...real. I mean, you don't know the exact thoughts of your best friends, right? Unless you are some sort of freaky mind reader. 

Persona 4 Arena botches this when it comes to its storytelling. By going the "easy" way out and making it a visual novel method of storytelling, it loses the depth and personality found in the Persona games and just makes it a long, droning look inside the heads of people I really didn't want to see the thoughts of. I knew them well enough before, thanks.

If I'm sounding a bit too hard on the story, that might actually be the case, because despite my complaints I really enjoyed the plot at hand. Whenever dialogue did emerge it was usually excellent, and there was some fantastic character banter (again, why I play these games) in each story (except Yu's. His was dull). And the "get inside their heads" actually worked very well for Kanji, Teddie, Aigis, Elizabeth, and Labrys' story arcs (mostly because all save the latter were quite funny). The story itself is also fairly decent, and seeing it unfold from different views (as the angle gets wider and wider as you back into Persona 3 character territory and finally see what's actually going on with Labrys' story) is genuinely clever. It's just too bad you have to sift through tons of useless fluff in order to actually get to the good stuff. 

General Teddie knows how to dress. 

At the risk of running long in the tooth here, let me end this briefly: Persona 4 Arena's story does an adequate job connecting the worlds of P3 and P4, is chock full of some fantastic fan-service, has a decent plot (once you actually get to it), the voice acting is excellent, and it made me genuinely excited to see where this series will go in Persona 5. It also works the whole "fighting game" mechanics into the world in a way that is surprisingly not lame, so the idea of these characters fighting each other actually makes sense, so that's a credit. While the method of administering the story was arguably the worst way they could have chosen, it's still worth looking into if you are a P3 or P4 fan.

Oh, last thing: you'll have to have played both Persona 3 and 4 to really understand and get the story here, and you'll even have to have beaten the optional velvet room bosses from both games to really get the story here (or Elizabeth's, at least). I'm serious, both games. While it does a decent job expositioning the crap out of you in case you missed one of the two games, it isn't sufficient enough if you are going in completely dry. So play the story after beating both games, alright? There, I'm done.

On to what really matters. 

Ok, so story beats out of the way (and see how I avoided spoilers? You'll thank me later), let's talk about what actually matters in terms of gameplay: the fighting itself. For those who have played previous Arc Systems games, you'll know they're big on lots of half rolls and multiple button mashes and loads of counters and crazy combos. And, for those who like their other games like BlazBlue or Guilty Gear, you'll be pleased to know Persona 4 Arena is absolutely an Arc Systems game. In fact, it might be their best one in terms of control.

The gamepad is very simply laid out. You have two buttons that are your character's physical attacks (light and heavy) and two that are their Persona attacks (also light and heavy). Most major specials require use of Personas, which can be banished if the Personas themselves are hit four times during a match (they'll return after a brief recharge). Across the board, most characters have all the exact same sets of moves (forward half-roll + physical attack, forward half roll + Persona attack, two forward half rolls + persona for an SP special) which means you can easily pick up any character and start figuring out how they work without worry about what unique controls you have to manuiver. There are, of course, a few exceptions to this (Aigis' different modes, and Elizabeth's absolutely insane self-damaging/self-healing sets of abilities), but as a whole this is the most accessible fighting game I've probably ever played. It's very easy to pick up and do moves, though figuring out how to best use each character's unique arsenal is the "hard to master" part of this discussion.

Robot battles.

There's also a lot of Persona-themed flavor to be had here, too. Moves are named after spells, so if you know your "Zio" from your "Bufu," you're in for a treat. You gain "SP" at the bottom which is used for the more powerful specials (which are all magic taken from the series), and there are even status ailments that you can inflict on your enemies to mess 'em up (as well as All Out Attacks, though those aren't particularly useful). Characters execute their own personal signature moves from their respective games, including their common phrases used in battle. While it certainly looks and feels like an Arc Systems fighting game, the Persona flavor is still very much there, and as such adds a sense of weird style that isn't found in many other fighting games. It's a weird mix, to be sure, but I was greatly surprised at how seamlessly it blended.

It's worth pointing out, however, that if you plan on playing this online, the Xbox 360 online community seems to be pretty much dead. The netcode wasn't that great on that system to begin with, so I suppose it was inevitable (plus 360 owners tend to play more first person shooters than super Japanese fighting games based on super Japanese RPGs about monster collecting and dating...), but I've heard the PS3 version still has a decent community. There's plenty of options for couch combat if that's your thing (that's how we usually play), and as stated the story and arcade modes are pretty robust, but if online's your thing...note it.

If there's anything I can agree with, it's Chie beating up Naoto.

Here's a question: what happens when you fuse the uber-detailed, HD animated sprites from BlazeBlue with the super stylish, super flashy design of Persona 4? If you answered "something awesome," you'd be totally right. 

Persona 4 Arena looks downright incredible. From the awesome yellow theme in the menues (mixed a bit with the heavy "blue" theme from Persona 3) to the gorgeous characters and their respective Personas, Persona 4 Arena is glorious on an HD TV. Characters look very accurate to their Persona 4 counterparts, though I did notice they tended to lean a bit towards the "Arc Systems" style of art rather than their Atlas inspirations, but not enough that it bothered me. As stated previously, the effects are super flashy and look fantastic, while the menues are stylized and striking. It's a great looking game that is loyal to its source material.

Same goes for the voice acting. All the voice actors are pulled over from the original games, except Chie and Teddie. And here's where I'll make a special note. I don't mind Teddie's new voice actor (I honestly can't really tell the difference) but new Chie really irks me. A friend of mine pointed out she sounds like a 30-year-old woman in the PS2 Persona 4, but there was something about her voice that grew on you in that game. Plus, she was my favorite character in P4, so having a completely different voice was really jarring. Not enough to piss me off or anything, just...weird. I hear it's the same VA that's in P4Golden on the Vita, so there's consistency there, but it still is weird. 

Music is, as expected, fantastic, featuring killer remixes (and originals) of songs from both Persona 3 and 4. That stupid battle song from P4 is still the catchiest thing ever, and you'll probably be humming most of the tunes long after the game is turned off.

Plus, the used the final boss song from P3 for Elizabeth, which is the dopest song in the game. So there's that. 

A year later, and Kanji still is a big chicken.

I will say I was very surprised by Persona 4 Arena, in both a good and a bad way. Good because they were very loyal to the source games, the fighting is fantastic, and I love the connection between P3 and P4. Bad because the story presentation is absolutely unfitting to the series it's presenting, it has some horrible pacing, and Chie's voice actor is different. Yes, I'm still harping on that.

All that aside, however, I have to commend Atlas for this. They made a game that crossed two genres that most people don't play both of (lengthy JRPGs fused with fighting games) and managed to create a game that would appeal to both. By having it be both accessible yet competent, and paired with the charming and memorable characters from both games, Persona 4 Arena is an anomaly of gaming that shouldn't work but somehow totally does. If you enjoy either Arc Systems fighting games or the Persona series, you should check it out. Plus, it's like $20, and if you plan on playing Persona 5 I'm pretty sure some stuff in this game will be referenced. It is canon, you know.

If they'd just presented the story better, this would probably earn a perfect score. But for now, it still gets a glowing four out of five stars.

And remember: every day's great at your Junes

God of War: Origins Collection

The Short

Pros
- Excellent ports of the PSP God of War games
- Includes one awesome game and one...ok one
- Ghost of Sparta looks quite good in HD. Chains of Olympus...looks ok
- Has 3D support but...um...does anybody care about that?
- Controls have been modified for the Duelshock, meaning right stick rolls! Hooray!
- Runs at a consistently smooth 60 fps
- Trophy support for both games is a great addition
- All in all, this is the best version of these two games

Cons
- Chains of Olympus, while looking great on the PSP, shows its technical limitations in HD
- It also feels much shorter when you play it on an console, which isn't a plus
- I downloaded it off PSN. Don't ever download big files off PSN
- Cutscenes (mostly in Chains of Olympus; Ghost of Sparta does them in-engine) are not upscaled, so they look...really bad. PSP quality bad

Chains of Olympus shows its hardware limitations in HD

The Long

As I did in my God of War Collection review, this is not a review of the individual games included in this package (as I've already reviewed Chains of Olympus and Ghost of Sparta previously). Instead, I'll be going quickly over how these games ported up to HD, and whether or not this collection is worth your time.

This collection, as you've probably guessed already, is an HD port of the two PSP games. This, in my opinion, was an absolutely fantastic idea. As someone who has no interest in owning a PSP (had to borrow one whenever I wanted to play a PSP game), getting two of the best games on the system in a heavily discounted HD PS3 package is like Christmas, especially considering how much I love the God of War franchise. But, as one might guess, porting PSP games up to the PS3 is a little different than PS2 ones were in the original God of War Collection. How does the Origins collection hold up?

Ghost of Sparta fares much better with the upgrade

I enjoyed both of these games, but I can say that after playing them on the HD collection that Chains of Olympus isn't really well suited for a console experience. It's still a fun little romp, mind you, but it really shows it's short length and dated graphics when being slapped up on my 37" HDTV. While I will still say it's probably on par with the first God of War in terms of character sprites, the backgrounds look muddy and the effects (blood, etc.) look pretty bland. It's still worth playing, just be aware that it's a short game and won't exactly dazzle your eyes.

Ghost of Sparta, however, turned out much better, probably because the art direction was significantly improved in the original PSP version. Since it takes you to much more memorable locations (a volcano, Atlantis, the realm of Death), it gives a chance for the HD visual to shine. The meticulous effects look even better in HD, as do the sprites. Kratos in particular looks really good, probably the best he has before God of War III. 

Both games have a much cleaner look and are far less grainy, but in Chains of Olympus' case it just shows the low poly-count more. Ghost of Sparta benefits most from this upgrade, looking downright incredible.

This is one pretty game

For a brief recap on my opinion of these two PSP games as, well, games, I enjoyed Chains of Olympus for being a God of War Lite, and love love loved Ghost of Sparta's excellent story, strong pacing, and fantastic combat. Both games still feel a bit stripped down when compared to their console brethren  but honestly this didn't bother me much. Chains of Olympus is kind of lame, but Ghost of Sparta feels more refined, if anything. In either case, both game play better on the PS3 because you can use the right stick to dodge instead of being stuck pressing L1+R1 to roll. So this is absolutely the ideal way to play these games, assuming you didn't want to play them on the toilet.

And if you do, just move your TV into the bathroom! What? Is that weird or something?

In addition to the upgraded visuals and controls, you also get full trophy support, as well as 3D support if you one one of those "passing fad" 3D TVs. I don't have a 3D TV so I can't attest, but I'm guessing it probably washes out the colors for a very moderate 3D effect. Yeah, my opinion of 3D tvs isn't that high, I'll admit. But it is nice to have trophies.

You also get much better control. The PSP versions of these games required you to press L+R and the left "stick" of the PSP for rolling (a core move in the God of War franchise). With this collection, it's mapped like it is on the console versions: to the right stick. It's a great improvement and easily makes these versions of the games the best to control.

The last thing I'll mention is the upgraded (or not upgraded) pre-rendered cutscenes. This was extra annoying in God of War Collection, which uses a trillion of these things. Chains of Olympus also suffers, but Ghost of Sparta was smart and did most of their cutscenes in-engine. As such, that game looks extra good because it isn't full of crappy SD video causing visual dissonance.

Flame on. 

God of War: Origins Collection is a must-buy for fans of the series. While Chains of Olympus is a pretty weak entry, Ghost of Sparta more than makes up for it. While many will consider these inferior spinoffs of the original games, I think this HD collection confirms they should rightly be placed next to the main series, and the main games could especially learn a bit about storytelling and character growth from Ghost of Sparta.

A word of warning, however: the God of War Saga Collection (ever game in the series up to this point) does not include a disc of Origins. Rather, it has two download codes to redeem on PSN. As someone who owns both an Xbox 360 and a PS3, I'm certain anyone can agree with me in saying PSN's bottlenecked download times are horrendous. This is a 12 GB+ download (which I unfortunately bought off PSN), which (unless you do some trick router configurations and give your PS3 a static IP) could mean long, long hours of downloading. If you are a physical media guy, your best bet is to ignore the collection and buy it's parts separately at the slightly-increased cost. 

That aside, God of War: Origins Collection is certainly worth purchasing, especially if you are a fan of the series and do not own a PSP. Choosing them over the original games is really the preference of mobility, but I for one like the improved Ghost of Sparta graphics far more than their fuzzy portable counterparts.

Fans, eat your hearts out. Four out of five stars.

BUY THIS GAME RAAAR.

Bonus:

Considering this is my last God of War review (until Ascension comes out), I figured I'd give you my personal ranking of the games in the God of War series.

1. God of War: Ghost of Sparta

2. God of War

3. God of War II

4. God of War: Chains of Olympus

5. God of War III

6. God of War: Betrayal (the cell-phone game which I will not be reviewing...maybe)

God of War III

The Short

Pros
- Finale in the fantastic action-game trilogy
- Possibly the most refined variation of the core combat to date
- Absolutely insane setpieces with some of the best graphics I've ever seen in any game to date
- Seriously, this game looks so good your eyes will bleed
- Fantastic voice work, sound effects, and soundtrack (as usual)
- Lengthy quest that takes you all over the place and back again

Cons
- The final nail on the coffin that was the sympathy for Kratos' character
- Not just a character failure, but the story itself is incredibly weak and convoluted
- Seriously, there's so many cliches, plot holes, and downright despicable moments it's hard to not fixate on them
- All the bonus weapons except the massive fists are pretty much useless. Just stick to the Blades
- Doesn't feel quite as good to play as the previous two games; the "weight" of the weapons felt off
- Seriously though, a little girl? A weird dream sequence? That ending?! Man, where did this series go so far off track?

Pushing the "M" rating to its limits

The Long

I think it's worth mentioning before I start this review: I really do like the God of War trilogy, probably more than it deserves. They just feel so...so good to play. Plus they have a sense of scale and dip into the wonderful richness of Greek mythology that I can't help but be engrossed (and grossed out) as I play through them. God of War was an absolutely incredible revelation, a complete package through and through that came out of nowhere. God of War II improved on the combat but began to lose sight of the original creative vision in terms of the storytelling. Despite this, both are two of my absolute most favorite games from the past console generation.

Which is why it hurts me to say how much I just didn't enjoy God of War III. 

God of War III is the end. It proudly pronounced this in all its advertising, trying to get a similar Halo 3 "Finish the Fight" vibe. This is the part where Kratos murders all the gods on Olympus and, at last, gets his revenge that only started in the second game. This is also the game where any hope I still had that this game would use the fantastic storytelling elements of the first game to build into something great was shattered, and when I got so upset with the series that I actually quit it for several years.

And on that positive note, let's overanalyze this, shall we?

Guess what. Kratos is still angry. 

Let me say one thing first: I get a bit annoyed when people dismiss these games as stupid, gory action games that have no redeeming qualities. I mean, you guys are right, but I would have to disagree when it comes to the first God of War (and Ghost of Sparta on the PSP). As stated in previous reviews, God of War used its gory, over-the-top awfulness to better convey Kratos' character in a way that actually tied in really well with the story. I saw his brutality as a man yearning for release, absolutely haunted and (frankly) destroyed by this mistakes of his past. His violence was all he had left, a mask to hide how completely and utterly ruined as a human being he was. Had they expanded on this original promise in the second and third games, these might have gone down as some fantastic pieces of storytelling, a downright modern Greek tragedy where the corrupt, arrogant hero gets his come-uppance and there's a life lesson to be learned.

This is not to be found in God of War III.

I'm going to try my best to not go on about this, I really am, because I don't want to bore people who don't care. But God of War III is (in terms of its story and character development) utterly and completely irredeemable, much like Kratos himself. There are just so many things that are done completely wrong here (and almost offensively so in how they poorly attempt to tamper with our emotions) that I could write whole essays on this, but instead I'll condense it to two key things: Kratos as a character, and the story upon which this series is based (and concludes) on. 

Kratos: maybe the worst person ever. 

I make mention that I felt Kratos was actually an excellent and surprisingly "adult" character coming out of God of War. Had they expanded on this original blueprint, he could have easily evolved into a three-dimensional, flawed, and very sympathetic character.

I was worried after the second game that they weren't taking Kratos in a good direction, removing what made him interesting (his suppressed humanity) and adding more of what made him boring (his generic rage and childish arrogance), but he wasn't completely ruined. I thought they could fix this in the third game, tying it all together and making it work (kind of what they did in Prince of Persia: The Two Thrones, even if it wasn't perfect). Hint: they don't.

There is so little to Kratos as a character in this game I think even calling him a "character" might be going too far. Kratos exists to do two things: scream bloody revenge at anything that moves and then kill said thing in a horrific way. Enemies, allies, gods, titans, innocents, those guilty; everybody. Kratos never once pauses to think of the damage his actions are causing (as the world falls to ruin as each god is slain) and never once shows any remorse for his actions. He also never seems to care about what happened to his family, the key driving force in the first game (though I guess the storywriters in II and III were too shallow to understand that his revenge was an effect, not a cause. The cause was the mistake, the effect was his desired revenge against Ares). Kratos exists simply as a mechanism to murder, which I think is a damn shame.

There is a small scene near the very end where we enter Kratos' mind and see a bit of the pent up remorse for all the awful things he'd done, and for a second I had hope that finally Kratos would realize what he'd become and succumb. But, nope, it just ends with an even more brutal, first person finisher of the final boss. Why did you even put this in the game? To tease me? You all suck.

Point being: this game was the nail on "Kratos as Character"'s coffin. I downright hated the guy after the first hour of the game, hating him so much it actually made it hard for me to continue playing.

Punch 'em good, Kratos. That's all you're good for. 

The story this character destruction is "woven" over doesn't fare much better. The second game at least knew it didn't have any story and thus didn't try to force any contrived scenes or out-of-place plot arcs on us. This game, however, isn't so lucky. Very quickly Kratos burns all his bridges and ends up back in the underworld (AGAIN. He seriously goes there in every single game except Ghost of Sparta, where he goes to the "land of the dead" instead. Much better, that.), swearing revenge on literally everything in creation. Athena, who died at the end of #2, is also somehow...back? And never really explained? If she can come back, why not Ares? Or all the gods Kratos kills, for that matter? Never mind; they needed someone to tell you what to do, so she's back. Great.

It just keeps falling apart at every turn. We are introduced to Pandora, a little girl who apparently opened the box (which we used in the first game to kill Ares), and now she exists to be sort of Kratos' humanity or something. But she is never used correctly, and when bad things happen to her, Kratos' reactions are so half-assed I have no idea what's actually going on in his head. They couldn't even use the bland little girl plot device effectively! How do you screw that up?

There's some contrived thing about needing the flame of olympus and Pandora's box to kill Zeus, which makes no sense because I almost killed him just fine with the sword of Olympus at the end of game 2, so much so that Athena sacrificed herself to save him and I doubt she would have if she knew he was in no real danger as this third game says, but whatever... continuity is for chumps. It basically just turns in to Kratos murdering everything for more are more obscure and contrived reasons until you get to the end.

WARNING: I AM GOING TO SPOIL THE END OF THIS GAME UNTIL THE NEXT IMAGE.

Ok, so the ending of God of War III is an unmitigated disaster on every front. In short, Pandora sacrifices herself (in what I'm guessing was supposed to be an emotional moment for Kratos and the player? Because it isn't) to bring "Hope" back. Except apparently Kratos...had "hope" from the start? Also it seems when Kratos opened the box it sent corruption and evil into the world, which is what made the gods all dislike Kratos. Oh...kay? So you are trying to justify my slaughter by saying all the gods were corrupt? I'm pretty sure they all hated Kratos because he acted like an enormous asshole and baby constantly, and the gods bicker all the time anyway. Also, if you introduce that at the end it looks phoned in (because it was) rather than actually, I don't know, MAKING SENSE.

So Kratos goes into his own psyche as stated previously and learns nothing because he brutally murders Zeus and thus all the gods of Olympus are dead, the world they kept in balance is completely destroyed (though in the other games when you killed the gods nothing bad happened. Um...ok?), and Kratos is left alone with the ghost of Athena who wants the power of Hope for whatever reason. That was like...her scheme this whole time?

Let me state something fast here: if it sounds like this is all just piling up at the end, it's because it was. None of this is foreshadowed, hinted at, or even mentioned during the course of the entire series or game. It's all just expositioned all over you during the final half hour or so. 

Anyway, to finish this off here, Kratos decides to give Athena the finger one last time and stabs himself in the chest, destroying hope and screwing the world over as well as any final glimmer of hope I had that he'd be a decent character. Except wait...maybe he isn't dead?! The post credits reveal hints at that, which also makes no sense because if he's still alive Athena could get what he wants.

This is the point: this is one of the worst endings of any game series I've ever played in my life, and it makes me wonder why this game didn't get so much flack for it like Mass Effect 3 did (which had a mediocre ending but this one is far worse). It basically just takes a huge dump on God of War and everything the first game stood for, leaving a sour taste in my mouth so bad it actually tainted my opinion of the rest of the series.

Ok, I'm done with the story now, promise. 

Back to using a god's head as a flashlight.

Combat wise, God of War III fares a lot better. Most of the combos are still carried over from the first two games, with a few minor exceptions, all for the better. The triple Triangle (aka ultimate heavy attack) has been retimed and animated so it's much more useful, but the best improvement is the fact that they finally figured out what to do with the L1+Square button combo. In previous games it usually did a useless, unbreakable combo, but in this game it's like a grapple move. Kratos shoots his chains out at whomever you are targeting and slams himself into them, closing the distance and doing a good deal of damage. It's great for getting close to dodging enemies for finishers, and while it does make the game a little too easy, it's the best use of that button combination to date.

Another great improvement is the magic, to a point. The "generic ranged" ability now takes energy from its own, regenerating bar rather than your magic meter, meaning ranged attacks are a much more viable option. Magic is tied to the new sets of weapons you get, which is also a great idea, though of the three replacement weapons you get only one is worth using ever, the heavy punchy fists. The other two are just variations on your chain swords that aren't as good as your chain swords, so screw 'em. 

Boom.

The pacing is still quite good, though I will admit it felt a bit slower at times when compared to the non-stop action of God of War II. While it's still better paced than most games, God of War III is certainly amongst the weakest in the series, where I did get a bit bored a few times. It also has some really annoying puzzles, which draw back from the fun as well, but overall it isn't enough to make you straight up stop playing.

I also felt the weapons didn't feel as...heavy as they did in the first two games. They really felt like they were making a solid impact when I struck guys in the first game, and this one they feel a bit more wispy. Maybe it's the new blood graphic or new sound effects or something, but I felt that none of the weapons has the same amount of punch. Still, it's an extremely solid action game with some of the best combat in the series (and certainly the most refined), so on that front I really can't complain.

Kratos has a new kite. 

This game is a graphical marvel. I still don't know how they got Kratos' muscles to look and move so realistically, and that level of detail carries over to the enemies, bosses, and landscapes. And man...the landscapes! You start the game fighting on the back of a giant, moving titan amongst other moving titans as they ascend Mount Olympus, every tree on her back rustling as she climbs, all in real time. It's absolutely staggering to watch.

The lighting is also worth mentioning, as it looks better than what most movie studios can pull off with a wide range of rendering software. Every bloody, gory bit is meticulously recreated in some genuinely stomach-wrenching scenes, so those of you who are gore-averse should seriously avoid this game. It was easy enough to tolerate in the first two games as the graphics made everything feel a bit less realistic, but this one doesn't hold back. There's some really nasty stuff here.

Music and voice work is stellar all around, even if the script is an abomination. The tunes aren't quite as good as the rest of the series, but they are certainly booming and catchy. The soundtrack for the whole trilogy is all on my computer, and I do listen to it frequently.

Kratos doesn't share trees.

Despite the horrific abomination that is God of War III's story, it's hard for me to be so quick to critique the rest of the game similarly as it is, still, extremely solid. I will admit it was getting a bit familiar at this point (mix up the combos once, why don't you?), but it all felt so tight and was set to such crazy action that I was willing to forgive. As far as action games go, God of War III is very, very solid, and tied with some incredible and unforgettable visual sequences.

That being said, the destruction of Kratos' character was so off-putting to me I found it hard to enjoy the game. Watching him brutally cut the legs off of Hermes wasn't interesting or enjoyable, it made me feel like an awful person. I was willing to forgive (and even revel; I'll admit it. Good stress relief) in these atrocities in the first two games because I felt the actions were justified. In this one, I felt like Kratos was the villain and everybody else was the good guy, so forgive me if hitting buttons to rip people to pieces makes me feel a bit bad. And yeah, I know what an "antihero" is, but Kratos is not an antihero. He's a psychopath who is completely unlikable, so much so that it completely taints the violence-glorifying game he's inserted into.

Games exist so that we can go places we can't in real life, either as ourselves (in terms of games with silent protagonists or with first-person views) or as other people. But when our eyes into this world become something we don't want to be, do we really want to continue? This medium is so unique and powerful, it really can be used to convey a whole new dimension of storytelling. God of War III squanders and, frankly, abuses this privilege. And for what purpose? Did this really sell more copies, turning off all mature players of your games? I understand I'm judging a God of War game by a higher standard, but it really should be judged that way. God of War was so good, and God of War III is so very, very far from that game's mark and vision. It's a damn shame this is how it ended.

I was torn between two and three stars, but I'm going to round up and give it three out of five, but the star rating shouldn't matter. My opinions on this game are absolutely clear. If you are capable of turning your brain off and just slaughtering tons of mythological things, this game will be perfect for you. But if not, expect a rather hearty amount of dissonance in your future. 

But at least it looks good. I guess.