Guitar Hero Warriors of Rock

The Short


Pros
- Has "2112" by Rush in its entirety
- Has "Wish" by Nine Inch Nails
- Has "Uprising" by Muse
- Returns to Guitar Hero "roots" with harder guitar parts

Cons
- Does nothing to improve the Guitar Hero/Rock Band formula
- No harmonies
- Career mode where rockers turn to "beasts" is unbelievably stupid
- Weak setlist that is completely all over the place
 - Good batch of discs shipped with unreadable errors; buying this game used is dangerous
- Still has a poor selection of DLC
- Incompatible with wireless "Lips" mics on Xbox 360
- Lack of innovation has staled the formula
- Charting of the notes is really poor; sometimes what you play doesn't even match the song
- Character customization and unlocks are poorly implemented and paced
- UI for star power/multiplayer is still inferior to Rock Band

The Guitar Hero characters are back and stupider than ever before

The Long


Let me get this off my chest first: I really like Rock Band. So if you think this review is just a huge biased mess I suppose I will admit there is some truth to that. That being said, I really like the Guitar Hero/Rock Band types of games. Something in me clicks with strumming plastic guitars, pounding on toy drums, and singing my lungs out for points. I don't really prefer the Guitar Hero circles over the Rock Band bars; I can read both and play both with about the same level of consistency. So when a new plastic band game comes out it really boils down to two things: the setlist and the improvements over the previous iteration.

Guitar Hero: Warriors of Rock fails on both these notes, taking everything that was innovative about Guitar Hero 5 in a lazy, weird turn.

I've been playing the series since Guitar Hero, and have played every single iteration of both the Guitar Hero and Rock Band games (except Guitar Hero: Van Halen. Screw that hunk of crap). From my standpoint, it's been interesting to see where each series diverged. Rock Band took a risky jump with the whole "band" thing, while Guitar Hero played it safe. Of course, Guitar Hero quickly followed Rock Band' s band style of gameplay, with the not-very-innovative Guitar Hero: World Tour. They really picked up the pace, however, with Guitar Hero 5. They added challenges for each song, an easier way to get directly to the game, improvements in the UI, and lots of other features. It was hardly as innovative as, say, Rock Band or Rock Band 3, but it was certainly welcome improvements.

Guitar Hero: Warriors of Rock drops most of these improvements for no reason other than to push it's stupid, Brutal Legend-knockoff career mode.

When all else fails, add Night Elves

Warriors of Rock is basically like Guitar Hero 5 only stripped down. The challenges are technically still there in quickplay, but they are less extensive and less important. They also return to having you "unlock" songs, which was the bane of last gen's music games. You unlock these songs (like Rush's "2112," which is awesome) by playing through their stupid career mode. Here, I'll break it down for you.

Basically every Guitar Hero character (who were, ironically, created by Harmonix as parodies of stereotypical genre rockers) has their own setlist. You have your typical punk rocker, your classic rocker, your nu-metal guy, your classic rock guy, etc. They also each have specific "powers" that are pretty much stupid: some people have higher multipliers, others get more starpower, etc. Once you play through that one song on their setlist you like and the other six you don't, you play an "encore." This is where you rocker turns into their "TRUE ROCKER FORM," which is basically the stupidest...you know what? How about you just watch it. I paired it with one of the few good songs in the game (Muse's "Uprising") to help dull the pain.

I will admit, I wish this song was on Rock Band. MOAR MUSE

That's it. Then they become stupider looking than they did before, and you repeat this like twenty times to unlock all your rockers. Luckily, they give you a break to play through 2112 back to back (which is cool...except it's on Rock Band now with harmonies and keys so...) which is pretty sweet. 

The story itself is just straight stupid. That's what I'm getting at. Some demigod of rock was imprisoned? Need the "holy axe" to defeat the "beast?" Really? This is only more funny given the history of what happened with Brutal Legend, a game that also took the idea of making a story based on the concept of heavy metal (except Brutal Legend was actually clever and hilarious) and Activision (Guitar Hero's company) first cut funding to the project and then, when Double-Fine (the makers of Brutal Legend) took it to a different company and then got killer reception at that years E3, Activision tried to turn around and sue them in some attempt to prevent the game from getting released. Sour grapes much? And then you have this, a poor-man's knockoff, and the whole thing comes full circle.

But hey, Rush. 

I'd talk more, but there really isn't much more. It's still the same Guitar Hero game they've been pumping out for years. Yeah, it has Queen's "Bohemian Rhapsody," but why would you play it on this when the Rock Band 3 version has harmonies and keys? Sure, if you are a metal-head (or a nu-metal head, rather) you'll find a lot to like in this setlist, but a vast majority of the songs were already available for download on the Rock Band platform. I'd much rather pick and choose the songs I want to play than throwing down full price for a disc that only has 7-8 songs I actually care about. 

But hey, it has this heavily censored version of NiN's "Wish," which Rock Band doesn't have (yet)

And that's where this game falls flat. They pushed their stupid "Warriors of Rock" part while completely ignoring the rest of the gameplay. There is nothing here that improves on the previous iterations, and in truth it's more of a step back than anything. This was further evidence by the fact Activision retired the brand shortly after this game was released. 

I really wanted to like Guitar Hero: Warriors of Rock. Like I've said, I get a lot of satisfaction out of these types of games, either alone or with friends. But nearly everything in this game was a misstep, and looking at Rock Band 3 there is really no competition anymore. You can't even export the Warriors of Rock songs to play on the better platform that is Guitar Hero 5. So unless you really dig this game's setlist, you'd be better off avoiding it completely.

And as an added bonus, lots of the first-run press of discs give unreadable errors on the Xbox 360 version. So I went through four discs before finding one that sort of ran, and then the game still ended up being horrible. Awesome. 

I got this game for free as part of a "buy one, get two free" music game deal on Gamestop, and I still traded it away on Goozex because I didn't want it in my game library anymore. If you really, really want to play the songs in the setlist I'd say borrow it from a friend or rent it. If you have to own it, don't pay more than $5. If I were to give it a star rating, it would be one out of five. This isn't the absolute worst in the Guitar Hero series, but it certainly isn't for lack of trying. 

Resident Evil 5

The Short


Pros
- Gorgeous graphics
- Dark continuation of the Resident Evil franchise story
- Co-op for the first time in the series
- Option for duel-stick aiming
- Roller-coaster of awesome setpieces and scenes
- The perfect length: not too long or too short
- Mercenaries mode has been improved and also has co-op

Cons
- Co-op with AI is atrociously unfun
- Takes all the "B-Movie" greatness of Resident Evil 4 and decides to be serious. Doesn't work.
- Sparked a bunch of racial controversy
- Everything that was even remotely hinting at scary is completely gone and replaced by straight action
- Some of the bosses are stupidly unfair on the hardest difficulty
- Breaking the game up into individual, selectable chapters (ala Devil May Cry) breaks the fluidity of the game
- None of the characters are particularly interesting like they were in Resident Evil 4
- Fixes a lot of control problems, but still keeps arcane ones for no apparent reason
- Violence and gore are considerably toned down, especially for character deaths
- Quick time events aren't as novel as they were in Resident Evil 4
- Zombies on motorbikes? Really?

Grab a buddy and shoot some not-zombies

The Long


In celebration of the Resident Evil 6 trailer that just came out today, I've decided to take a jump back into two years ago and review the previous game in the series: Resident Evil 5. I went into this game with lots of high hopes, and in all honesty I probably should have reviewed Resident Evil 4 before this one (all you need to know: one of the best games from last generation of hardware) since I'm going to probably be making comparisons between the two, but since pretty much 90% of the gaming population has at least heard of that game, I'm sure you'll somehow manage.

Resident Evil 4 changed both survival horror and the market for third-person shooters. Releasing at the end of both the Gamecube and the PS2's lifespan, Resident Evil 4 was graphically impressive, controlled fantastically, and ramped up the action to an unheard of level. Resident Evil had always been known for two things: it's B-Movie zombie horror and awful controls. Resident Evil 4 fixed almost everything by making the game better to control but still not superhuman, while jacking up the tension to white-knuckle level. It still plays quite well to this day, the HD remake popping up on most modern consoles (which you can bet I bought...which means I've now bought Resident Evil 4 on every system, and twice on the PS2). It paved the way for other amazing games like Gears of War, and changed the face of survival horror.

Also: extreme, gritty gore. Thanks, Resident Evil 4

So when I heard about Resident Evil 5 I was BEYOND PUMPED. When I heard it was going to have co-op for the first time in the series I was also totally floored. Co-op? Like...Resident Evil 4 but with two players? That would be awesome! I literally could not wait, and actually bought Resident Evil 5 on release day (something I don't do very often) and managed to convince my friend to as well, and we both ditched school to get on Xbox Live and play through the game together.

It was after a couple hours that I realized...Resident Evil 5 really isn't that great.

This guy begs to differ

It wasn't that it was bad per say, it just wasn't...exceptional. Following up Resident Evil 4 wasn't going to be easy and I knew that, but they had changed so much that I found myself no longer enjoying it as an experience. There are a few key issues I had with it, which I'll now address.

First, however, let's get something clear: this game plays pretty much exactly like Resident Evil 4. The over the shoulder shooting, the limited ammo, even the enemy animations when the not-zombies are hit is exactly the same. You have the same chainsaw guys that are tougher than regular guys. You still use herbs to heal and mix yellow with green herbs to up your max life. So I don't really have to go into much detail about the gameplay except it's a third person shooter that punishes you a lot if you get hit. Easy? Alright.

So here's my problem with Resident Evil 5: it wants really hard to be an action game without actually being an action game. What do I mean by this? Well, let's first see what the changed to make it an action game:
- The "tetris" inventory from Resident Evil 4 has been replaced with a more traditional, "four slot" weapon system
- The creepy shopkeeper is completely gone, replaced with a bland menu between chapters
- The chapters aren't really streamlined into the game like they were in RE4, instead they are deliberately broken apart like Devil May Cry. This really kills the flow of the story and the horror experience; how can I be scared if you keep jerking me out of scene?
- You man turrets to gun down zombies on motorcycles. What.
- Near the end of the game you have zombies with guns and you actually have to take cover (badly) in order to shoot them back. With awful, tacked on controls.
- All the cornyness and sillyness from Resident Evil 4 is replaced by "super serious action military shooter using words like 'extraction point' and other such nonsense."
- There is nothing scary at all in this entire game. Nothing. And if you are playing with a human partner with a headset, it's even less scary.

Pictured: Stupid

So that's some basic issues, but the ramifications from these design decisions run deep. I'm going to now complain about something that everybody who has played this game complained about, and I know it's overused but I've got to mention it anyway: you can't move and shoot. In an action game.


Now, RE4 didn't let you move and shoot and it turned out just fine. The reason this doesn't fly for Resident Evil 5 is the fact that your immobility means they had to essentially gimp every single enemy in the game to accommodate for you having to stand rooted to the spot everytime you wanted to fire a weapon or use your knife. So you have a game that really wants to be a fast-paced action game ala Gears of War, but your enemies (and character) lumber about like morons. It really kills both the "nonstop action!" bit as well as the "survival horror!" bit.

But I think the real problem with Resident Evil 5 is that it came out after Dead Space.

Not going to lie, Dead Space is one of my most favorite games ever. 

Dead Space was a game made by pretty much a bunch of no-names employed at EA who saw Resident Evil 4 and thought "dude, this game rocks, but what if we set it in space? With some of the scariest and most messed up enemies ever?" Then somebody was like "but what about moving and shooting? If it's an action game, wouldn't being immobile mean all our enemies would suck?" So guess what they did? They made their enemies insanely fast and horrifying and let you move and shoot. And made it so headshots didn't count for nothing. And about a hundred other fantastic things that really make Dead Space one of the best action-horror games ever made.

Anyway, getting away from Dead Space, this ball-busting masterpiece showed up the year before Resident Evil 5 came out. I'm guessing it was too late in development for anybody at Capcom to change their minds, but after playing through Dead Space (which really is almost a "spiritual successor" to Resident Evil 4 in terms of both scares and gameplay), everything in Resident Evil 5 seemed clunky and dated.

Pictured: A brilliant analogy. Chris is Resident Evil 5. The big badass is Dead Space. You can figure out the rest. 

One thing Resident Evil 5 DID have that Dead Space didn't, however, is co-op. You can play through the entire game online with a friend, or split-screen on the couch. It really is the only way to play and is loads of fun, especially since playing with an AI partner is the worst experience ever. She takes your ammo. She wastes all of her ammo instead of conserving or planning ahead. She wastes healing items. She dies constantly and for stupid reasons. She can't do anything on her own. The majority of Resident Evil 4 was essentially a huge escort mission (Ashley, the president's apparently helpless daughter, follows you around and complains) but it was never that annoying because she didn't steal your ammo or eat your herbs. This is not the case in Resident Evil 5. So if you play this game, you really need to get a buddy.

...except if you really want to play a co-op game, you could have just picked up Gears of War 2, which had come out the previous November and was not only a better action game, but played better in co-op. Yeah, it wasn't exactly horror, but to be completely honest Gears of War 1 had scarier scenes than anything I saw in Resident Evil 5. And hey, guess what, that had co-op too. And chainsaw guns.

This is why video games exist. So we can do stupid crap like this. 

So now that I've whined about how mediocre this game was, I'm going to back up and defend some points. The graphics are gorgeous. It was a good call to set this game in the light; you get to see all the nasty monster designs in their full glory and appreciate exactly how fantastic the art direction is in this game. The sound is also all great, as is expected from the franchise, though the voice actors sort of seem to sleepwalk through most of their lines. The story, while "super serious," does finally answer a bunch of lore questions that have been persistant throughout the Resident Evil fiction, and closes a pretty massive plot arc that has been around since the very first Resident Evil. It also loves to throw characters from previous Resident Evil games just to explain how it all fits together, and there are nods to nearly every game in the franchise, which makes a Resident Evil fan like myself very happy.

The game looks pretty dang sharp

The game also boasts a host of DLC, including competitive verses (why would you ever play this...?) and some other story elements that I unfortunately haven't played. Capcom does it's usual (and now apparently industry-wide) "release a game again with all the DLC at a cheaper price to screw over early adapters" thing, which I suppose is ok since I wasn't that invested in the game anyway, but if you were to pick it up I'm guessing you'd want that version (Resident Evil 5 GOLD) since it has all the extra stuff.

So...here is the hard part. The score and price. Because despite all my complaining, I actually beat the game like three times, and once by myself and twice with a buddy. I finished every chapter except two on the hardest setting (stupid bosses messing me up) and got every achievement except the one for beating the game on the hardest difficulty (so close!). So I certainly invested a hefty amount of time in it, even if I never really thought it was that great.

Probably my biggest hang up was it wasn't as good as Resident Evil 4, which really isn't a fair way to judge it. Still, they could have done better regardless, so my criticisms stay.

Anyway, score. You can get Resident Evil 5 Gold new right now for $20, which I think is a totally fair price. The game hasn't aged well thanks to not being able to move and shoot, but if you have any investment in Resident Evil as a series you you'd for sure pick it up (if anything to know how it ties into the forthcoming Resident Evil 6). I don't give half-stars in some attempt to keep myself from nit-picking the star rating, but I'm really hung up on whether to give this game two or three stars. So I think I'll give the game the benefit of the doubt and give it three out of five, if only because I had a fun time in co-op, and making my character shout "CHRIS!" over and over just to annoy my friend was kind of awesome.

Oh yeah, and this is still really stupid.

Zombies on motorbikes. Just...urrrrrrgh. 

Protect Me Knight (まもって騎士)

The Short
Pros
- Fast, fun four player defense game
- Four unique classes with differing abilities
- 8-Bit throwback style
- Sticks to the retro theme with awful Engrish translations
- Multiple levels of difficulty, including a survival mode
- More goblins than you can shake a stick at
- Only $3 on Xbox Live Indie Games

Cons
- Not a whole lot of depth
- For the best experience you need four players
- Harder difficulties are super tough

The Pig-ship cometh

The Long


Protect Me Knight is a game dedicated to being retro. From the opening screen where you literally press A to "blow on a cartridge" until the game boots up, it just oozes charm. It is clearly billing itself as some "forgotten NES gem," even though I'm pretty sure the NES would crumble under the amount of stuff that happens on screen at the same time in Protect Me Knight.

The premise of the game is simple, like most other "defense" style games: you have a princess in the center of the map you are trying to defend. Waves of monsters keep showing up, getting progressively harder, until you win a level. After you win you can spend your "hearts" (rewarded by the princess for killing stuff) in four trees of upgrades. Next level, rinse and repeat, until you kill the final boss and the game ends.

There are a few other additions that have shown up in more modern defense games that appear here. You can spend your hearts in-battle to build or upgrade barricades, essential in some levels where the monsters will just walk in and start bashing your princess over the head. You can move the princess (slowly) out of danger if necessary (or on accident if you aren't paying attention). You can upgrade your barricades into catapults and launch enemy crushing, friendly-fire causing rocks. And you can spend your extra hearts for a burst of AOE smash damage that murders all enemies around you.

Title screen. I couldn't think of anything witty to say about it.

The idea is simple, but surprisingly fun. You have four classes: a warrior tank, a DPS ninja, a carry Amazon, and a mage....mage. Each of them have four unique areas to dump their points in which, especially in the case of the mage, can completely change how you play the character. They also have a basic attack and a special attack (the mage's being magic) and each has unique combos for both. While playing as a different melee character isn't a completely new experience, playing as a mage is totally different. Trying to beat the game with a party of four fire-spewing mages is a new level of total insanity.

And four players is where the game shines. The difficulty ramps up the more players there are, making some of the later levels literally teeming with hordes of enemies. Death's only punishment is a few seconds of respawn (and a hit to your hearts),when the only real way to lose is if your princess takes too many hits. There are also a few bosses that can insta-kill her, meaning someone has to be on "princess duty" to make sure she doesn't get caught in the line of fire.

The total 8-bit chaos is a complete blast to play, even if the co-op is only local (it's an Xbox indie game; I don't know if those are online compatible aside from leaderboards). The harder difficulties only further force you to work together, the aptly named "Hell" difficulty near-impossible.

They even made a "crappy US version box art" for it. Awesome. 

On normal, you can plow through the game is maybe an hour and a half with four people. On the harder difficulties it'll take longer, and you'll want to replay it to experiment with different character combinations. Four mages? What about four glass-cannon ninjas? Or four tanks (boring!)? Or one of each? What about on hard? Since nothing carries over between sessions you start out fresh every time, meaning you can build your character different based on your preferences.

The game is $3 on the Xbox Indie channel, which is certainly worth it. All Xbox Indie games have six minute demos, so you can grab a friend (or three) and see if it is your cup of tea. For me, this game is a hilarious four-player romp, and well worth the price. As a fan of couch co-op games, it was an easy sell. 

If I were to give it a star rating, it would be five out of five. 

It is also worth noting it might not be under the title "Protect Me Knight." It's on the top rated, though, under "まもって騎士." 

Metro 2033

The Short


Pros
- Gritty, dark survival/shooting game set in Russia's subway system
- Guns look appropriately makeshift and old based on the theme
- Monsters are creepy
- Lots of really cool ideas
- Really plays the whole "struggling to survive" aspect better than most other games in the genre
- Fantastic UI
- Superb sound design, particularly in ambiant noises and voices
- Visual theme is uniform and fantastic throughout

Cons
- Console versions are extremely glitchy, PC version is a little better but still has issues
- PC version is poorly optimized; expect to play it on lower settings than other games
- Ghetto guns that have poor aim fit the theme, but make the game seem unfair
- Easy to get lost or stuck on glitches
- Shooting monsters is fun. Shooting dudes is bland.
- Game ends abruptly and with little explanation

The aesthetics in Metro 2033 are perhaps its biggest strength

The Long


Metro 2033 is an interesting game to review. At its most basic, it's a "modern" survival horror game, meaning you are given a large arsenal of weapons with limited ammo and are thrown into dark corridors with lots of beasties to shoot. If I reviewed Metro 2033 based solely off these qualities, I'd say it was a pretty generic, very glitchy, extremely Russian brand of that type of game, and really only for those really into the genre. Where Metro 2033 sold me, however, was it's incredible attention to detail and complete, unabashed dedication to making it a "survival" sim, even if that meant inconveniencing the player gameplaywise.

But I'm getting ahead of myself. Let me give you the general gist.

Metro 2033 is set in...2033 deep down in...the Russian metro. Yeah, you saw that coming. Following tradition the world has been nuked to the point of total nuclear winter, so everybody has to live underground in the broken metro tunnels to avoid the dangerous radiation, cold, and mutant monsters that reside on Moscow's surface. Pretty much par for the course, right? If you are getting Fallout 3 vibes, you aren't far off.

Well, something starts happening that nobody can control. These weird, shadow-looking monsters start popping up out of the woodwork and massacring entire settlements. Your home settlement is under siege by these believed "unkillable" monsters, so you are sent out to try and enlist aid from the main city in the area. Again, hardly anything particularly new in terms of plot.

There are also some of these guys. 

The game plays like a straightforward shooter. You are given a knife, one sidearm, one rifle, and one shotgun. You are free to buy alternate versions of the weapons that sport different upgrades and perks, though generally there are two types of rifles (one automatic, one pump-powered) and two types of shotguns (a high damage double barrel, and a lower damage but bigger clip battle shotgun). The guns start out completely horrible (fitting with the "we are living off the remnants of society" theme), and you'll be desperately scrounging for ammo and praying they actually aim where you point them. By the end, however, it's pretty much a traditional shooter, with all your weapons tricked out and actually functioning properly. The bad weapons at the beginning are a minor annoyance gameplay-wise, but they do a lot to fit into the game's theme and aesthetic.

Which brings me to the biggest part of the review: Metro 2033 reeks with style. It practically oozes it. The game is very Russian, with people speaking in heavy russian accents and referencing some things we Americans might get. But the biggest attachment to form is the whole "you have to fight to survive" aspect, which really sets this game apart (both for good and ill). 

Suffer not a beastie to live

Let's first address the basics: a light. In survival horror games, your light is really important. Often they throw you into pitch black places, letting you reveal whatever scary things they have hidden with the flashlight/candle/etc. they gave you. In every other game I've played, lights either have infinite batteries or magical recharging ones that fill up after you turn them off. Keeps the tension, but without breaking the gameplay. 

In Metro 2033, your light is constantly running out of juice. But in order to recharge it, you have to hit a special button and manually crank the charge. You don't even know what your current juice level is unless you hit this button and pull up the crank, which has a fogged-over meter attached. You can sort of tell because it'll start going dim at about half-empty, but having to pull out your light and manually crank it in the middle of battles (or walking around) is both annoying and incredibly immersive. 

IMMERSION.

Same goes for the gas mask. When you go to the surface on several instance, you have to bust out the gas mask or die. They make a note that your filters will run out after several minutes of use (and I think they run out faster if you get in a lot of fights/run a lot/ do stuff that would increase your breathing rate). Rather than throw a timer at you, however, your dude literally winds up an analog timer on his watch which you have to press a special button for him to check his wrist to know if the filter is running out. Also as it starts to die your mask will fog up, making it harder and harder to see. So then you have to make a choice: do I swap a filter early and risk running out, or wait until it runs out of time but risk losing all peripheral vision? 

IMMERSION. 

You can't even check your objectives (which your dude writes down in a notebook and has to pull up) if it is dark. You have to bust out a lighter, click to light it, and then hold your notebook up to see it. Also, if you do this while trying to hide in the dark/be stealthy, people will see you. So you are essentially being punished to check your notes (like you would in real life).

IMMERSION. 

I've already made a point about the guns starting off totally awful (and they all look like they were put together with spare parts; the gun design in this game is sweet), but did you know that in this game bullets are money? Yes, the normal bullets you shoot from your guns are crappy, "refurbed" bullets (much like my "refurbed" Xbox), but you can find special "good" bullets. These do loads more damage, but they also count as the only currency in the game. So you have to decide whether they are worth shooting at the boss or saving just in case you want to buy a new gun (protip: save them. This aspect of the game is clever, but poorly executed; there is literally no reason not to just use the crap bullets the whole game). But still...

IMMERSION.

This dude is totally immersed. Also, screwed. 

And that is where Metro 2033 sold me. The shooting isn't great. The story is interesting but quickly putters out. The game is glitchy and makes you shoot too many humans at the end rather than fighting against crazy subway monsters. It also gimped my computer and would only run at crap settings even though I could play Starcraft II at way better graphics, so I knew it was Metro's fault. But despite all of this, once I started it really sunk its claws into me. I just put on some headphones, dimmed the lights, and let myself be totally taken in by the game's style. It wasn't that scary of a game, and it was extremely linear and pretty short (six hours, maybe?), but I got so sucked in I didn't care.

Though that does mean that whenever some enemy started glitching out or I got trapped in the geometry, I was totally ripped away from the main reason I was playing the game, which sucked. Also, this game has a huge problem not telling you what to do, even with your stupid objectives list that you have to use a lighter to see. I got stuck in rooms simply because I was confused, or wandered around areas (that damned library still bugs me) for quite a while before figuring out where to go next. Obnoxious.

Cranking the light! ARE YOU IMMERSED YET?!?

It is also worth noting that, unlike most multi-platform next gen games, I didn't play this one on the Xbox 360. I've heard plenty of people say it's even more glitchy than the PC version, which would be pretty rough of that's the case. I actually started this game on PC, got mad because my specs were bad, and then ended up playing it on OnLive instead. Which technically had worse graphics than my PC, but I was so fed up with settings twieking that I really didn't care at that point. I played it on mouse and keyboard, which I honestly would imagine is the best way to play it, because there are so many stupid buttons for "checking watch" or "replacing filter" or "cranking flashlight" that it would be tough to map all that crap to a controller.

So that means I actually own the game both on Steam and Onlive, which also means I've technically bought it twice. Well, whatever. I paid something like $5 for the Steam version, but the $20 I paid on OnLive I would say is a fair price, if you have a PC that can run it decently. If you are into games that really suck you in, then plug in some headphones, dim the lights, and enter the (immersive) world of Metro 2033.

If I were to give a star rating, it would be three out of five, but I will certainly be picking up the sequel, Metro: Last Light when it comes out. It's a flawed game, to be certain, but a fantastic one if you are in the right mood. 

Parasite Eve

The Short


Pros
- Unique horror RPG from Squaresoft
- Good graphics for early PS1 era
- Innovative and unique battle system and weapon upgrade system
- New Game + encourages multiple playthroughs
- Fantastic soundtrack
- Interesting story combining science with fantastic elements
- Multiple endings
- You fight a re-animated T-Rex skeleton in the Museum of Natural History. Serious Dresden files vibe.
- Only $6 on PSN

Cons
- Short
- Story hits the usual JRPG unintelligible weirdness during the last act
- Set in New York while being made by people who have no idea what New York is like
- Aya walks stupid slow
- The linear gameplay doesn't offer much in terms of leveling, weapon collection, item purchasing, etc.

Aya shows some 32-bit leg

The Long


Parasite Eve came out during Squaresoft's "silver" era of RPGs. Releasing after Final Fantasy VII but before Final Fantasy VIII and Xenogears, it was touted as an "rpg novel," based on a book by the same name published in Japan. While the sequels would take a more survival horror approach to the series, Parasite Eve is very much an RPG, combining hybrid elements from both action RPGs and ATB (active time battle, like FF IV-IX) RPGs that Squaresoft was making a billion of at the time. Completely ignoring any party systems from their previous RPGs, Parasite Eve is an anomaly in more ways than one, and because of that there is really no RPG released - even today - that is comparable with it.

Parasite Eve's story is a weird mish-mash of science, religion, and just general oddness. Basically, the mitochondria in our cells, which are the part that provide cellular energy, apparently are considered independent beings in this game. This crazy lady, calling herself Eve, has gained the power to somehow cause everybody's mitochondria to go loco, the tiny bits of the cells rebelling against the body and killing or mutating everybody (turning people into weird gel and animals into random encounters). Aya, for whatever reason, is immune to Eve's influence, and as a member of the LAPD it's her job to get rid of Eve before she royally screws everybody over.

Pictured: What nobody on the Parasite Eve dev team read

Is it stupid? Yeah, a little. But when you think of stories in video games, especially JRPGs, it really isn't that far fetched. You get to go to real-life places in New York (though the fact that Aya is a blonde bombshell and her boss is the only black man in the world just screams "Japan's view of America") just moments before (or after) Eve turns all the animals into walking mutated experience points, and it keeps the tension high while still providing enough answers to keep things interesting. It's too bad that the last chapter gets so bat-sh*t insane that I literally still do not understand what happened (it involved the Statue of Liberty and goo, which reminds me of the ending of Ghostbusters 2. Oh, and some god-baby that was born and like...blew up a boat? Oh, spoiler warning and all that) even after having beaten the game 4-5 times. Still, there is really nothing like this...well, anywhere, and especially in Squaresoft's game library, and it isn't bad enough to turn people off (until maybe the end).

The gameplay is where I really got attached to Parasite Eve. It's a totally unique experience that can be a little hard to explain, so I will provide this handy graphic I stole from the internet for your reference.

These graphics are also emulator up-rezzed. The original game looks like this, but with more BLUR

Basically, when a battle starts the camera locks and you are limited to whatever specific area of the screen you were in. Parasite Eve employs the usual "pre-rendered backdrops with 3D characters" that were a staple of PS1 era Squaresoft RPGs, so you are stuck in place until either you run or kill everything. As your AT bar (upper right, in blue) fills, you are free to run across the battlefield as much as you want, either to dodge attacks or get in a better position to shoot. That's the "active" battle part.

After your meter fills you can attack. Aya primarily uses guns, which can be upgraded to increase ammo, damage, spread, and just about everything (You can also break down guns and apply their powers to different guns, which is pretty cool if you want to make THE ULTIMATE WEAPON). When you choose to attack, that small grid appears around Aya, indicating the current weapon's range. You can shoot at enemies out of that range, but you'll probably miss. You then choose how many shots to fire off (again determined by how upgraded your weapon is), and Aya is locked in place for a second as she blasts whatever number of bullets you decided on.

It's a really clever battle system, combining ranged weapons with action-RPG elements and turn based combat to make something truly different. Back in 1990-whatever when I played this for the first time I was completely blown away. Coming off of SNES and PS1 Final Fantasy games, where characters stood on one side of the screen and waited their turn before simply executing a command, this seemed far more interactive and innovative. It's really a disappointment that they never used this again (they completely dropped it in Parasite Eve II and The Third Birthday, making them more action-shooters).

Look! I'm actively dodging attacks! In a JRPG! What is going on?!

Despite me loving this system, even I have to admit it has its flaws. Aya runs just slow enough to be annoying, making failed dodges seem more cheap than fair, and she doesn't have any other evasive moves other than simply running (no rolls, crouches, etc.). The gun upgrade system is neat but not very extensive, though it does encourage you to cycle through guns at a pretty rapid clip (lol gun pun) as you keep mixing-and-matching powers. Aya also has some magic, which is usually reserved for healing, and the gun upgrade system also applies to the various forms of body-armor you find. A major niggle I have with this game is the really, really limited inventory space. You can move stuff to a storage chest, but it's a huge pain when I can't pick up the gun I want because I have too many potions, and the game is so linear you don't always know if you can go back to a chest you left behind and pick it up later.

Parasite Eve is also a pretty short game, and not particularly difficult save the extra "dungeon" that is accessible after beating the game once. On yeah, it has a New Game + feature like Chrono Trigger, which is great feature and should be in every game. It's probably for the best that the game is short, though, since the foundations for both the story and the gameplay are a bit shaky, and trying to drag it out over a 30+ hour experience probably would have resulted it in crumbling on itself. As it stands, the 10ish hours you spend in a playthrough are a delight, like eating candy. It's great for a while, but you can't eat candy for every meal without starting to get a little sick.

Parasite Eve's soundtrack is also quite good, fitting the bill with atmospheric tracks that also make great music. The battle theme is a bit...not great, but the various places you visit have great background music, and the boss theme is quite good.

The game also looks great. If you've played Final Fantasy VIII, this game is picked right out from that era. Characters are blocky but still look better than Final Fantasy VII, backgrounds are well rendered if a bit dull (though the locals they send you to are great: zoos, hospitals, etc.), and the CG stuff was really impressive at the time, even if it hasn't aged great. The enemy design in particular is worth complimenting, taking regular animals and adding a serious dash of "messed up." It all fits into a very complete package, which is consistent with Squaresoft's standard of quality for this era. 

There is that PS1 graphical fuzziness we know and love!

As you can probably tell, I really liked Parasite Eve, despite its flaws. It's a fun ride, providing a great hybrid of horror and RPG that sticks with you even years after you've beaten it. I even liked it so much I made a game that was basically a SNES/16-bit ripoff, back when I was making DOS games in high school.

It's currently available on PSN for download as a PS1 Classic for $6. Disc copies can be found on eBay for a little more than that, used. I'd say it's certainly worth $10, which wouldn't be too hard to find. If I were to give it a star rating, it would be four out of five. 

The Binding of Isaac

The Short


Pros
- Blend of Zelda, rogue-likes, and duel-stick shooters
- Hundreds of unlockables: items, characters, power-ups, levels, bosses, and more
- Dark, disgusting, and with a unique art style
- Incredible soundtrack
- Addicting and ideally suited for short bursts of gameplay
- Only $5 on Steam

Cons
- Can be incredibly difficult
- Success is often based heavily on luck
- Disturbing characters and themes might be too much for some
- No gamepad support
- Shooting is only four-directional rather than true eight-way

Welcome to hell

The Long


The Binding of Isaac is an indie game from half of the team behind Super Meat Boy (read: one of the two people, specifically the artist) and the creator of Gish, another PC indie game. At first glance it looks like a dark, more demented version of The Legend of Zelda but don't be fooled: beneath it's bizarre art style and gross-out, dark humor is an extremely competent rogue-like that simply screams for repeat plays.

The story behind The Binding of Isaac is...well, a more modern and messed-up take on the Biblical story of the same name. Isaac's mom, who spends most of her day watching Christian broadcast stations on the TV, hears "the voice of God" one day telling her to kill her only son, Isaac. In an attempt to escape her insane mother's bloodlust, Isaac makes his way into the basement, where plenty of dark secrets and horrible monstrosities await him.

Pictured: Horrible Monstrosities

The premise is one that many might find offensive, but it generally just serves as a background for the game's many levels of questing and item discovery. You find items that fit with the theme of a Biblical parody (or mockery, depending on how you take it) such as haloes, books from the Bible, and other weird connections. All the alternate characters are also named after Biblical "baddies:" Judas, Cain, Magdalene, Eve, etc. to further fit the theme. All in all, however, while I was a bit shocked at the game's premise at first, it is clearly taken more as satire than mockery, and again it really just exists to push the game forward.

And what a game it is. The Binding of Isaac is an extremely successful hybrid of three game types: The Legend of Zelda, rogue-likes, and duel-stick shooters. While this combination might sound a little weird, let me break it down for you.

For the Zelda aspect you have...well, a general Zelda aesthetic (as you can see from the screens). You collect silver keys to open secret doors and treasure chests. You get bombs to either attack enemies, destroy obstacles, or find hidden doors. You get your main attack an one "sub-item," and your life is measured in hearts. You collect pennies to spend at stores that have a distinct "Zelda" look about them. Because of that, you might think this game really is more Zelda than anything else, when it actually isn't.

The Binding of Isaac is a rogue-like, and it follows the staple of the genre where it has to be mercilessly punishing. Death is permanent. There is no save feature: quit and your game is over. Items like hearts, bombs, keys, and coins are dropped extremely rarely. Power-up items are given randomly (you are guaranteed at least one every floor, assuming you have a spare key to unlock the door), and a "bad run" is very much possible (i.e. getting all useless items so you are extremely underpowered by the end). It offers that weighty decision in games like these: do I risk clearing out a room for the hope of reward, or do I ignore that and simply take the path of least resistance? Once you are in a room you can't leave until all the enemies are cleared or you bomb a door to break out, and the difficulty means every room has the potential to kill you. This limiting of items and power-ups makes playthroughs of The Binding of Isaac short, but short enough that you don't mind starting over for another attempt. 

As far a a duel-stick shooter goes, that's generally how you attack. You control Isaac's movement with the arrow keys, then can either use the mouse (boo) or the WASD keys (yay) to shoot his "tears" (aka your only weapon) in four directions. Power-ups increase the rate of fire for tears, damage, range, and all sorts of other crazy things (my favorites include turning them into eye-lasers and a powerful charge beam).

And speaking of power-ups, there are loads. We are talking hundreds, and with more unlocking the more you play. The game practically throws unlocks at you the further you get, rewarding you for bombing stuff, exploring secret areas, killing certain bosses, and more. These power-ups don't make runs any easier, they just basically go into the grab-bag of items available when you find a power-up room. Which means later playthroughs won't necessarily be easier, but they'll certainly be different. 

Seriously, there are a lot of items in this game. 

While on that subject, The Binding of Isaac probably has the most incentive-rich gameplay of anything I've spent time with. In addition to items there are alternate bosses, characters, and even whole levels. The first time you beat the game is actually just a warm-up: after you beat Mom the first time it unlocks a whole new world past that (which you can get on your next playthrough) which is even harder and sports an even more difficult boss. Beat that nine times (which nets you more items) and you get an even harder ending boss, and beat that and you unlock a fifth world that is just stupid difficult and with one of the hardest bosses I've ever fought. Seriously, this game is totally packed full of stuff to get. 

Which is where The Binding of Isaac's appeal really comes from. The gross-out sections and questionable story will certainly turn a lot of people off (and many of the items are also lacking in taste), but at it's core this is just a really, really solid game. Had any one part of the game not worked - the Zelda-esque layout, the balance between difficulty and reward, or the controls - it would have been regarded as just a unique idea that failed. Instead, everything ties together perfectly and makes a completely unbeatable "quick-fix" game. I've sunk at least 10 hours into this game (with playthroughs running anywhere from 5 to 45 minutes) and I keep going back to it when I can't think of anything else to play, just to see if I can make it further than "that last run." Addicting can be a hard quality to make in a game, but like Super Meat Boy, The Binding of Isaac holds no punches. 

Items actually change your appearance; Isaac usually looks pretty messed up by the end

Before I forget, the soundtrack is absolutely worth mentioning. It's by dbSoundworks, the incredible team behind Canabalt and Super Meat Boy, the author of which (Danny Baranowsky) is widely regarded as the best independent composer in the business. The songs differ from his usual retro-throwback tunes, instead focusing more on being creepy, simple, and incredibly catchy. It's atmospheric while still being musical, with nearly every song (especially the one that plays during the opening prologue) sending chills down your spine.

At an asking price of $5 on Steam (or less if it's on sale, or part of one of the previous Humble Indie Bundles), The Binding of Isaac is a downright steal. If you can tolerate the questionable content you are looking at many hours of difficult, masochist gameplay that beats you over the head but you still love it. The amount of sheer content in this title is so far beyond even the majority of full retail video games I still can't believe they didn't try to charge $10 or more for it. Add to the fact that they have already added a massive Halloween update (and have $2 DLC chock full of more items, levels, and characters on the way)

If I were to give a star rating, I'd give it five out of five. The asking price of $5 is underpriced if anything, and you can bet I'm picking up the DLC the minute it hits Steam. 

Legendary Wings

The Short


Pros
- Two-player top down and side scrolling space shooter
- Uses regular shooting and bombs ala Xevious
- Has "State of the Art" and "High Resolution," according to the box
- Lots of good powerups and secrets
- Decent music
- The cover is a picture of an angel dude with one shoulder pad holding a future space gun

Cons
- Like every other space shooter on the NES
- The whole "cross legged pink guy" thing on the side-scrolling stage is a little weird
- Limited lives and continues

DARK, the world-ruling computer has gone rogue, and so it's time to send the angels

The Long


Legendary Wings is an NES port of the Capcom arcade game of the same name, and is pretty much another space shooter. However, where Legendary Wings differs from the multitude of others (Lifeforce, Gradius, etc.) is it's unique art style as well as the clever use of power-ups and mixing overhead with side-scrolling sections.

Legendary Wings is mostly played from a top-down perspective, where you play a some pink (or blue) angel...guy. With a gun. Enemies come in waves, and power-up enemies are specifically designated. As well as being able to shoot the air, you can drop bombs (like Xevious) to blow up enemies on the ground. Power-ups also double as extra hits, and every time you are attacked you go "down" a powerup level. The exception of this is when you get five power ups and turn into some big fire bird. Then you have a couple of hits before reverting back to sucky regular pink angel guy.

And you get to kill some dragons

The "trick" to Legendary Wings is the large number of secrets. Bombing certain area unlock caves where you can go and get bonus money, continues, and powerups. On the flip side, some of these caves are bad, which forces you to go through a challenging side-scrolling section before kicking you out exactly where you were. Rude.

Bosses recycle frequently, mostly being the "shoot the weak point when it is available" variety and then in different colors. You also fight dragons on the top-down view, which aren't particularly challenging.

What is memorable about this game is how silly the angels look in the side view stages. Seriously, why are they flying with their legs crossed? Why do their wings looked tacked on? Why are they lounging back with their guns like they are on some street corner trying to pick up ladies?

That just looks awkward. 

All in all, if you like these kinds of games, Legendary Wings is certainly better than the droves of space shooter garbage that came out on the NES. It is better than it's arcade counterpart, and can be a lot of fun two-player. The game also gets very difficult very quickly (it wouldn't be an NES game if it didn't), so it can take several tries before you finally beat it.

Plus, it's state-of-the-art and high resolution! It says so right on the box!

I snagged my copy for $3, but I usually see it from $5-6. If you are a fan of these kinds of games, it's totally worth it. If I were to give it a score rating, it would be three out of five.