Luxor 2

The Short

Pros

- Fun enough match-three puzzle game in the vein of PopCap's awesome Zuma

- Lots of powerups, which are obtained by matching three in a row, keep things interesting

- Absolutely insane number of levels and three difficulty levels

- Has an ancient Egypt theme. ANCIENT EGYPT IS AWESOME.

- Decent enough time to burn a few hours

Cons

- Speaking of Zuma, this game rips it off. Completely. 

- While ripping off Zuma, it doesn't do anything original like Zuma did.

- Seriously, Zuma's Revenge on iOS is my new addiction. This game just is the same thing over and over.

- A very limited number of stages that repeat way too often.

- Music is repetitive and gets obnoxious very fast

- Game also get unfairly difficult fast, with limited extra lives and continues making it a pain even on "Easy"

- Some powerups are completely useless

- Has achievement points that aren't divisible by five. That's just garbage. 

- Overall, this is just a piss-poor Zuma clone

S

Stop bustin my balls. 

The Long

Hey, have you heard of PopCap? No? Does the game Bejeweled ring any bells? How about Peggle? Or Plants vs Zombies? Point is, PopCap practically prints money with every game they put out. Bejeweled has been ripped off so many times because it's more addicting than crack, and honestly I'm surprised nobody's tried to steal the Peggle formula considering how quitting that game could require a support group.

Anyway, they also released a nifty game called Zuma. Essentially, you play a frog that spits colored balls at an incoming chain of colored balls, all set to a nifty Mayan theme. Match three and it blows up. Same colors are magnetically attracted, so you can make long chains if you are smart. Power-ups spawn, and the general goal is simply to fill up a "Zuma" meter (made my getting matches), which will make the ball-chain stop spawning and let you clean up. It's a clever, easy game that plays really damn good on my iPhone (seriously. Zuma's Revenge. It's like $2. Buy it.) and falls into that "casual but addicting" class of games.

Did you catch that? Because Luxor saw all the money Zuma was printing and ripped the game off completely, and somehow managed to make it bad.

As you can see, Luxor 2...hey wait, this is a Zuma screenshot! How did I possibly get these two games confused?

Everything here is the same. Instead of Mayan, we have Ancient Egypt (which I will admit is much cooler because nothing beats Ancient Egypt in "Coolest places ever."). Instead of a frog that spins in the middle, we have a winged...thing that can only go back an forth on the bottom to shoot balls. Instead of Mayan coins you can pick up ancient Egyptian looking...things that sometimes spawn from balls. And so on. In truth, the only real major change between these two is that you aren't spinning in the middle, and power-ups are dropped instead of randomly spawning on the chain. 

Oh, and that Zuma is way better, but that's not the point.

Little known fact about ancient Egypt: The pyramids were erected by BALLS. 

So you sit at the bottom and get color balls and shoot them at an oncoming chain until your Luxor meter is full and then you finish off the remaining balls and then you win, hooray! If you explode three match-three balls in a row a random powerup is dropped, and it's essential to exploit this to beat the later levels. Powerups are frequent but mostly really lame, unlike Zuma were they were all useful. Some really crappy ones include the "net" powerup (which just means you can catch more coins if they randomly drop...for a limited time) and the "aim" powerup, which is good if you really suck, I guess. There's a few decent ones like fireballs and lightning, but they hardly ever drop. I once was about to die and it dropped six nets in a row, dooming me to a catastrophic failure. Maybe I'm still bitter about this. You decide from the tone of this review.

So now that you get it, let me explain quickly why Luxor 2 is way worse than Zuma. In case you didn't get that point already.

Where the balls is this chain's path? It's about as intuitive as...something that isn't intuitive. 

Aside from the bad powerup spawning (which I mentioned already), the fact you can only go back and forth on the bottom is actually more hindering than you'd think. The reason is the stages aren't designed around this changed mechanic; instead they just seemed to put random paths. In Zuma, every sage was specifically designed to work with the frog at its location and with 360 degrees of aiming. In this it's like they just slapped it together, which means some later levels are damn near impossible.

Speaking of levels, there's an extremely limited number. You'll be recycling quickly and, while Zuma did it, this one has less stages than Zuma. Another big issue I had is that in Zuma the path is very obviously outlined. You know where the balls are going so you can plan ahead. In Luxor 2, they just seem to wind around at random. The background images (while of the Egypt variety) don't project where the chain goes. It's annoying. 

The whole game just feels like a cheap cash-in. Which is especially stupid considering this is the second Luxor game. Come on! At least have an original thought in your head that isn't "Hey, we could put it in EGYPT!"

Again, no hate against Egypt, but this game is balls. 

It doesn't help the game is ugly, especially the backgrounds. The rendering is really low and unappealing to look at, and while the balls animate well and the powerups are flashy it just looks like a cheap game (which is because it is). The music is also really obnoxious: same one song, over and over. And when the balls get close, same high-intensity song which is shorter. And you'll hear the latter a lot in the later levels, meaning it'll drive you insane as it's just the same few notes over and over. Ugh.

At least this stage projects where the balls are going. Lightning, away!

I got this game for free as a pack-in when I bought my Arcade 360 unit way back in the day, and for the brief stint of time where I only owned Ninja Gaiden 2 and Eternal Sonata, Luxor 2 was a decent diversion (at the cost of free). However, after I got better games (and found out Zuma existed), I haven't played it since. Added bonus that the game gets nuts hard near the end, and with the limited lives and really obnoxious continue system it's easy to get stuck in an infinite loop of suck. Seriously, I'm good at these games, I swear, and I still couldn't beat it. Maybe I'm just the worst Luxor 2 player, or maybe this game is just balls.

The fact they are still asking $10 for this game on XBLA blows my mind. And they haven't stopped milking their Zuma ripoff idea: They are at like Luxor 6 or 7 on PC. I see them when I go to Target, in the "paper sleeve crappy cheap games" side of the PC gaming section. Usually the pack like four of them together for $10, which is like getting 4x the suck for one not-so-low-price.

Point being: just pretend this game doesn't exist, and go buy Zuma's Revenge on iOS. Or PC. Or whatever; that game rocks. This game does not. 

Two out of five stars. 

Plus, they even designed some of their stages to knock-off Luxor. What goes around comes around, buddy! Also, balls. 

Silent Hill HD Collection

The Short


Pros
- Two of the best horror games ever made repackaged for a current generation
- Despite being quite old, both games still animate fluidly and have fantastic art direction
- For a new player, both these collections look great, play great, and still are downright horrifying
- Installed, there is virtually no load times in both games, keeping the game flow consistant
- Has a pretty awesome box

Silent Hill 2 Specific
- Silent Hill 2 still has one of the best crafted and told stories in video games, and it shines
- New voices for Silent Hill 2 are leagues better than the original, but the option for original voices is still here
- Includes bonus "Born from a Wish" scenario previously exclusive to the Xbox and PC versions of Silent Hill 2
- Indoor areas look downright stunning, maintaining the original game quality with improved visuals
- Enemies are well-rendered in HD, with that same otherwordly movement mixed with the "sheen" effect
- This is still one of the greatest games ever made

Silent Hill 3 Specific
- Silent Hill 3 dramatically benefits from the HD upgrade, making the game both scarier and funner to play
- Monsters look quite good and being able to see them and where you are going makes the game easier and less frustrating
- A few audio tweaks (footsteps, etc) make the game scarier and less annoying


Cons
- Both games suffer from being more washed out look and a less dramatic color pallet (blacks aren't as black, lights aren't as light, etc.)
- I played the 360 version, but the PS3 version apparently has some serious problems in crashing, framerate, and audio synch
- Radio in both has been altered to "hiccup" or "pulse" rather than give a steady horrifying screech when enemies are near, which is way more annoying (it's way worse in Silent Hill 3, though)
- Whenever you get an achievement the game drops to a massive slowdown crawl. I have no idea why this is but it is really great at kill the mood for first time players
- Sound glitches seem to happen every time you save (worse for Silent Hill 3)
- Complete omission of Silent Hill 4: The Room. Why not include it too?

Silent Hill 2 Specific
- Fog is toned down and more gray, but due to the fact the fog was there to hide the rendering you get a "wall of fog" effect that can look pretty bad at times
- Outdoor textures (ground, etc.) look rather bland and less ominous than the PS2/Xbox/PC originals
- Water (especially during the boat scene) looks so bad it makes me wonder if someone even playtested this

Silent Hill 3 Specific
- Frequent audio issues abound
- Right channel sounds come out of the left speaker, and vice versa. How do you screw that up?
- Many audio loops (including music, persistant sound effects) don't have a smooth looping transition, meaning music cuts out before restarting. That's just sad.
- Any large burst of sound (using the Unlimited Submachine Gun, etc.) will cause the game to spew massive amounts of sound static and essentially break the sound for a few seconds
- Audio synching of cutscenes gets off during the latter 1/3 of the game. It isn't horrible, but you will notice it during the final few cutscenes
- A few of the dirtier, uglier environments are slightly more washed out than the originals
- Shadows/lighting has somehow downgraded from the original
- New voice actors are not as good. Douglas is better, but new Heather is downright awful compared to the flawless original

Is this collection worth the return to the horror?

Note: My copy of this game is the Xbox 360 version. From what I understand, the PS3 version has all the same problems only to a greater degree. Konami released a patch that apparently did not fix these issues, so buyer beware. 


The Long


It should be known that I absolutely love Silent Hill 1-3 (and sort of like 4, even if it is hard to love). I consider them to be the finest and scariest horror games ever made, and absolutely necessary for anyone who wishes to write, design, or just has an affinity for horror. These games are absolutely fantastic, and should be played by everybody at least once (at least Silent Hill 2) anyway.

I reviewed the games in this collection already, so I'll refrain from gushing too much about them and save that for their respective reviews (Silent Hill 2 and Silent Hill 3). I will say this though: After playing both games back-to-back, my opinion on what my favorite Silent Hill game is has changed. Originally I said Silent Hill 3 was my favorite (probably because I played it first and it was the first game I ever played to give me nightmares), but after experiencing Silent Hill 2 from beginning to end for the first time in about six years, I must say it is by far the better game, and solidifies itself as my favorite. While Silent Hill 3's story ties in with the first game (and because of that gets kind of bananas), Silent Hill 2's narrative (aided by the improved voice actors) remains strong from beginning to end, giving you just enough to go off of without spoon-feeding you information. It's sort of a beautiful catastrophe, a depressing experience that requires you to think and continue to dig deep to fully understand exactly what is going on in James' head.

As a blend of atmosphere, narrative, and psychological horror, I have yet to find a game equal to it. And I said I wouldn't gush, so that's it.

I still love you, Silent Hill 3, but you really don't compare. 

This review is going to mostly be for those who have played the PS2 originals (or on Xbox/PC) and are looking to buy this collection out of nostalgia. So if you haven't played these games and aren't interested in reading about me pick apart the differences between the originals of these two games an this HD re-release, I'll save you a lot of time with the following blanket statement:

If you haven't played Silent Hill 2 (or 3, I guess) and own an Xbox 360, buy this collection. Despite my laundry list of complaints up in the Cons (and forthcoming), the experience is still authentic. Both games are chilling and must be played. So go pick it up, and you can come back and read this review when you are done.

The rest of you, hang on, because I have a lot to say about both games. I'm going to break it up between the two, and I'll also try to be a light as possible on spoilers if it's been a while and you want to experience the games as "fresh" as you can.

For many people, this is the game they are getting the collection for, and with good reason: it's a fantastic game. However, does it stack up to the original? After release a lot of crap went down on message boards and all over the community complaining about how they'd "changed" Silent Hill 2. Reviews were all over the place, from IGN's 9.0 to Destructoid's 3.0. What are the problems? Is this game really as bad as people say?

Well, let me start with another blanket statement: As the Silent Hill 2 experience, it still works just as well as the originals (hence why I can recommend this collection to newcomers). The game is still extremely atmospheric, claustrophobic, and gets under your skin. I played from where you first meet Maria to the end of the game in one sitting, from 8:30 am - 12:00 pm (in the morning, with all the lights on) and when I hit Toluca Prison I actually couldn't take the suspense anymore and had to take breaks (same as during the Hotel). So, as it stands, this game still completely works. Angela's final scene is downright heartwrenching, the story still stands up strong, and it's still a great game. So in that regard, it's fine.

Now...the problems (HD on left, PS2 on right)

The biggest issue people have been going about is the reduction of the fog effect. Originally the fog served two purposes: providing a claustrophobic feeling even when running down wide-open roads, and hiding the fact they were rendering stuff right in front of your face because the PS2 lacked the power to render beyond just a small distance in front of James. It worked because before the "wall of fog" (which was essentially where they were actively rendering the world) they masked it with tons of white fog before it that made it look less awkward. Some person thought it would be good to take away the white fog (or most of it) leaving the wall there to...look bad. So when you run there's like a visible wall of fog moving with you, which is sort of how the PS2 version felt, but this is more obvious.

For those looking for it, it will annoy, and the lack of claustrophobia (and inability to see enemies until they are right on top of you, requiring reliance on the radio which was an important part of the PS2 original) is disappointing. It is also gray fog instead of white for whatever reason, though it makes the game feel more dreary than it did before which I actually sort of like (it looked a bit like snow in the PS2 version). However, the point is this: it isn't that bad. Do I miss the wispy tendrils of fog dancing about me and hiding tons of nasty beasties? Yes. Does it ruin the game? No. 

This, however, is unforgivable. 

It does, however, culminate with another factor to completely ruin a certain scene in the game. There's a part where you have to row towards a light across a lake near the end of the game. In the original, the wall wasn't obvious, so it didn't look completely awful when you were rowing towards the light. While I was fine with running around town, this scene looked horrible, and as an added bonus somehow the water got rendered completely wrong (see above...that's supposed to be water. Yeah.). I guess it looks kind of like a fever dream or something...who am I kidding, it looks like total crap. Luckily this is just one two-minute scene, but holy crap did you not playtest this?

There are only a few very minor additional graphical issues I found. Outdoor sidewalks and environments are less "dirty," with the HD up-rezzing losing a lot of little marks and dirt on the sidewalks and essentially rendering it much more boring looking. It wasn't a huge deal, but while the original obviously had a lot of work put into its art design for the limited system power, this just feels really lazy.

The start of a horrifying adventure. 

However, it is worth noting that aside from these issues, the rest of the game looks really, really good. Indoors looks fantastic, with all the rust and dirt and grime that permeates James' interpretation of Silent Hill showing up in exquisite detail. While Silent Hill 3 suffers from muted color pallets, Silent Hill 2 seems to mostly avoid this. Dark areas are pitch dark, shadows are long and intimidating, and overall it just looks straight up perfect. Character models are also improved, and I found they look much better. The night scene (after you leave the Hospital) and wander around Silent Hill in total darkness is still one of the scariest and tensest moments in games. It still all works. 

Unlike Silent Hill 3, Silent Hill 2 manages to dodge almost all the audio issues the other game on this compilation seems riddled with. Sound effects are mostly as you remember them (a few monster footsteps are slightly changed, but it's fine) with one rather large exception: the radio has changed. While it still has its signature static-mixed-with-whistle sound, when enemies are just a small distance away the radio has a sort of "pulse" for some reason. It's not nearly as noticeable as in Silent Hill 3 (making me wonder if this too is actually an audio bug and not intentional), but it isn't as good. However, it still invokes that sense of tension and dread when you leave a room, think you are alone, but the radio is screaming its head off...so there you go. 

Oh, and the new voice actor is really really good. All the new voice actors are really good, I should point that out. People sound like they are actually having conversations rather than just talking in a sound booth, and I prefer the new voices for everybody except Eddie. Eddie in the original you could feel the tension rising throughout. This one feels like he's trying too hard to be a psychopath so...alright then. 

One last audio thing: the new "panting" sound James makes when recovering stamina is awful on the new voices. It's like a half-second loop playing over and over that doesn't sound natural at all. Again, a little thing, but how did they not catch this? 

The film grain, grit, and grime of Silent Hill 2 are all intact. 

Ultimately, I was wholly satisfied with the port of Silent Hill 2. Yes, it was maybe a bit smoother and less gritty, and that "wall of fog" thing sucks, but it still looks great, runs in HD (and widescreen), and plays exactly as you remember it. So for this fan, it passes, and I can't wait to play through it again (gotta get that "Dog" ending...)

Oh, it also has the "Born from a Wish" side-mission from the Director's Cut/Restless Dreams version of the game. This side-story is...um...actually kind of garbage. You play as Maria, only go into one unique area (a mansion, which has hardly any monsters and reminded me more of Resident Evil than anything) and then...it ends. It's about 45 minutes long at most, and adds nothing significant to the story. But hey, it's here, so that's nice I guess. 

It's funny when comparing these two games, because I know Konami could have done this right. While Silent Hill 2 has graphical issues but no audio bugs, Silent Hill 3's graphics are near-perfect but the game is an audio glitchfest. Clearly they needed to swap teams or fire some people or something and that would have made everything better.

Anyway, let's get to the point here: Silent Hill 3 looks pretty good. The game was already better looking than Silent Hill 2 in terms of environments and simple graphical prowess, which I'm assuming made the HD conversion easier. It also uses a pallet of more red, yellow, and black compared to Silent Hill 2's emphasis on brown, black, and gray, which means the HD graphics are noticeably more vibrant simply due to color choice alone. Several areas (specifically the Otherworld Hospital and end-game Church) were completely indiscernable due to blurriness on the PS2 version (I'd like to think the game's art design bit off more than they could chew), and they look much better here. The improvement is substantial because it effects both gameplay and graphics; before I had no idea what was a door amongst the pulsating wall of gooey blood and flesh, but now I can sort of tell! So good on that one. 

The monster design isn't as consistant as Silent Hill 2, but it works. Except the dogs. I'm never afraid of dogs in horror games. 

The is one rather massive, glaring oversight that people who played the original will notice right off the bat: the game's contrast has been significantly muted. In the original Silent Hill 3, the game got super dark. Many areas were completely pitch black, with the only thing you could see being the very bright light of your flashlight beam. This contrast made the game horrifying, because you could literally only see what was directly in front of you for many parts of the game (it also made it disorienting, which is kind of a minus, but whatever). In the HD version, the brights have been toned down and the darks have been lit up, making the whole thing more uniform but also less stark. Which kind of kills some parts of the horror.

Now it isn't all gone. There are still many areas that are pitch dark (much like Silent Hill 2, which somehow this didn't get messed up on) and evoke the same feeling...but why only some parts? It's like one team did some areas and other teams the others...I don't get it. 

Luckily I really only noticed this for a few parts of the game. Since the game was so dark already, it still is super creepy in the later areas (though the Amusement Park, my favorite Silent Hill location, is a bit muted too). 

It's easy to see the difference here. Granted, the light isn't on, but still...

But the absolute biggest problem in Silent Hill 3 (and, on that note, probably the worst problem in this HD compilation) is the persistant audio glitches and problems. There's really too many for me to list in any detail, so here's just a quick wrap-up. 

- Audio cutting out randomly (only happened twice and restarted when leaving the room)

- Transitions between repeating tracks not being smooth, same with several repeating sound effects

- Audio channels switched (left/right) which breaks the part of the game where you rely on monster sounds to avoid them

- Radio is similar to Silent Hill 2 only much worse and much more annoying

- Glitchy gargled static mess when saving, every single time (only happened once in Silent Hill 2)

- Audio voices going off-sync during cutscenes (only happened badly during the last 1/3)

- Sound effects (gunshots, etc.) just not happening

- Footsteps disappearing or being really quiet on one terrain and much louder on another

- Using any secret weapon causes the audio to glitch so badly it's a horrible sounding mess

These won't ruin the game for you, but considering how much of Silent Hill games rely on their audio to freak you out, it's a stupid oversight. Again, it just makes the people who ported this look stupidly lazy. It's not like they did this on purpose, but it is like they didn't care. 

Overall, though, the game looks much better graphically. 

The new voices are worth mentioning. Rumor has it they couldn't find the original voice actor for Heather anywhere to confirm the renewal of rights (and therefore give her the cut for her work on this re-release), so they re-recorded all the voice. The script is still as bananas as ever, but unlike the Silent Hill 2 voices I fell this batch is much worse. Douglas is a bit better, as is Vincent, and I guess Claudia is...sort of? But what straight up sucks is the new Heather. The original's voice actor was spot on, conveying the sarcasm, worry, and genuine annoyance a teenager would have in this situation. It wasn't the best voice acting ever, but it was surprisingly endearing. This new voice actor just sucks, like she's trying to sound like a teenaged girl and totally failing. Really lame. 

Also, they rewrote a few lines of script but didn't bother changing the subtitles, resulting in a weird dissonance if you have both going. Usually it's just one or two words (and all for the better) but come on...you couldn't even change the subtitles? Seriously?

The lighting is also a bit weaker, with duller shadows, but I might blame that on the pallet color-muting. 

While still totally playable and still evoking the same sense of claustrophobia, dread, and fear that the original release did, Silent Hill 3 really took a bad hit in the audio department. Here's hoping, since these are technically really minor issues, that a patch is released that can fix most of these problems. As it stands, the game is still fine, it just feels cheaply done, much worse than Silent Hill 2. Which is too bad, because this game is pretty freaking creepy (despite having a really slow start). 

So...what are my final comments? "RUN FROM PYRAMID HEAD" might work. 

A few other problems: one of the biggest issues is the fact that whenever you earn an achievement (on the 360 version; don't know about PS3) the game goes into a massive, system-wide slowdown. Like I can't even open the Xbox menu because the slowdown is so bad. It'll resume as normal after a cutscene ends (or if it's just in-game, it'll only last about a second) but it straight-up ruins several scenes in Silent Hill 3, as it gives achievements after each boss and then fades to "boss dying" cutscene, which can take like an hour. After killing that stupid worm boss, it's 10 second dying animation took almost five minutes. I am not even kidding. 

Lastly, just some stupid annoyances: Why isn't Silent Hill 4: The Room in this collection? If you were going for all the PS2 games, why not include all the PS2 games? It wasn't that bad of a game, not at all! I'm guessing it's because the Xbox 360 disc is completely full (based on install size) and they didn't want to ship on two discs for that version so they abandoned it. Or they are just lazy. Also, the PS3 version should have a download code for Silent Hill 1, since Silent Hill 3 makes a crap-ton more sense after playing through the first game.

 

Dark and creepy. Just the way I like my Silent Hill. 

As it stands, if you are a fan of the originals, it's very hard for me to say whether or not to jump on this (unless it's the PS3 version, than don't bother until a patch). I still genuinely loved my experience with both these games, and I think the ports' numerous flaws can be overlooked if you are willing to take a deep breath and just accept that this is a sub-par HD remake. I think the ultimate issue fans have is that almost every other HD re-release (Metal Gear Solid, ICO and Shadow of the Colossus, God of War, etc.) have been significant improvements over the previous games, while still retaining everything that made those games classics (and worth re-releasing). This one does some things right, some things wrong, and just feels shoddy overall. Again, since the original games are so good the collection holds itself up well, but as a token of goodwill from Konami to its fans after all the awful Silent Hill crap its been putting out...this just seems more like another insult. 

I'll repeat what I said at first: If you own a 360 (and not a PS2) and haven't played these games, get this collection. If you do have a PS2, are a long-time fan, or are basically anybody else...I still suggest it, but only if you can swallow your anger and just roll with the games. If it's been a while you might not even notice, so in either case dive back into the horrifying world of Silent Hill and enjoy some late-night scares in the dark. 

But...man. I really wanted this to be so much more.

Three out of Five Stars.

These games are like an older woman who is naturally attractive, but she pours so much makeup and other crap on herself she ends up looking like she's trying too hard. Actually, they aren't now that I think about it. ANALOGY FAIL. 

Kirby's Adventure

The Short


Pros
- Fun, colorful, energetic Kirby game that solidified his power-stealing abilities
- Beautiful 8-Bit graphics are some of the best on the system
- Airtight controls
- Levels vary from being completely linear to being open-ended
- Autosave feature was unique for the NES, and does it better than many modern games
- Music is straight up fantastic
- Strikes a good balance of difficulty, even if it is a tad easy
- Tons of fun and silly minigames to play
- Lets you replay any level to find alternate paths/unlocks
- One of the best NES platformers

Cons
- ...I actually can't think of anything. Huh. It's...a little easy? Is that actually a con?

It's Kirby! And he's ready for an adventure!

The Long

Kirby's Adventure is the NES game that solidified Kirby as the pink, monster-sucking guy that he is now. While Kirby's Dream Land on the Game Boy was technically the first Kirby game (and he could suck enemies up), this was the first one where he could steal abilities, which has since become a staple of his gameplay (with the exception of Kirby's Epic Yarn). So how does Kirby's first real big adventure on the NES play out? Well...really, really good, actually.

Kirby's Adventure is just an all-around solid platformer.

As far as the game goes, it's the same Kirby stuff you've played since. Kirby can jump, or suck up air and float if you prefer that. He climbs ladders, swims, and does it all with airtight controls. But the real pull of this game is that now-staple: the ability to suck up enemies and steal their powers.

There are lots of abilities in the game, all shown in a charming picture on the bottom of the screen when you acquire it. You can dump a power at any time, or if you are hit it'll fly out of you as a star. You can suck it up and recover it if you are fast, or if you aren't it disappears and your awesome sword power is gone forever. It's a very simple mechanic, but it opens up an absolutely massive wealth of options.

Pictured: Wealth of options. 

While some are better than others (that Wheel is freaking useless), you can easily swap out if you just see an enemy whose power you like. While you could technically just stomp everything with the Sword, if you mix and match you might find yourself better suited for various situations. Again, it's a very simple mechanic, but it is executed very well.

And the parka on Kirby for the "Freeze" power-up is just freaking adorable. There, I said it. 

Things start simple, but get crazy fast!

You don't have to just eat powers. You can suck stuff up and spit it back out if it's "useless" (many bosses require this mechanic) to damage enemies, and you can do a quick suck-up for air and blow it out which also does damage. The options here are many and all are unique, and while plenty of games have ripped off Mario, I can't think of any that have successfully mimicked Kirby's unique abilities.

The stages accessed via a variety of hub worlds, represented by doors on each individual world. You can replay any world anytime, and as a cool feature you can also quit out anytime (something that Mario didn't develop until Super Mario World). You also keep whatever power you currently have when you quit, so if you are stuck on a boss you can just jump into a world, suck up the sword guy, and bail and keep the sword. Pretty sweet!

The game also sports auto-save, something that wasn't really adapted (especially by Japanese games) until way, way later. It saves your progress automatically after each stage, and while lives and powerups are reset on a load (back to three lives), the simple fact that an NES GAME AUTOSAVES is mind blowing, especially since many modern games can't figure out how to do it right. Like Silent Hill Downpour which literally came out last month and still has awful autosave positions. Kirby's Adventure: 1. Silent Hill Downpour: 0. 

And yes, I know I just compared Kirby's Adventure to a game that is literally on the other end of the spectrum. Whatever. 

Kirby as a wild-west gunman in a quick-draw minigame might bet the most awesome thing ever. 

Since most levels have branching paths, secret exits, and tons of new things to explore (hence the reason it lets you replay them), you'll also unlock a variety of minigames to play. These range from a crane game like the ones you pump quarters in at Wal-Mart in an attempt to get an Angry Bird plushie, an egg-eating game where you eat eggs and avoid bombs, and a totally hilarious wild west quickdraw game where kirby blows enemies away leaving only their hats. So good.

The amount of content in this game is actually pretty significant, and it never once feels frustrating or unfair. Bosses happen after beating every stage, and while it's true you can breeze through a lot of them with the right powerups, lose it and many become a difficult challenge. All of them usually involve sucking up something they throw at you and spitting it back, but they have unique patterns and all look so different I didn't mind the fact that it was essentially the same mechanic. Plus I could just go get the sword and slash 'em up if they really annoyed me.

TREE, YOUR TIME HAS COME. And look, Kirby's blue! And has a parka in the picture! I love this game so much. 

This game is graphically gorgeous. While you could argue the pixel art in the Castlevania games is deeper and more complex, Kirby's Adventure finds its aesthetic of cuteness and sticks to it all the way through. I seriously couldn't believe this was just an NES game at times at how clean the UI, menues, stages, levels, and backdrops worked. When I was walking around a giant rotating column that moved so smoothly it would fit in well enough on modern games, I was completely blown away. The art direction for this game is insanely well done, using the contrast in colors to present a very clean look with a touch of cuteness. Perhaps the only complaint I could issue is they really like their browns, but that might also just be because the menu underneath is brown (which is also easy on the eyes, so I'm fine with it).

The music is also incredible. Again, you could argue the Castlevania games or Mega Man games really present catchier and better tunes, but everything about Kirby is just so...happy. And bouncy. Even on the darker levels, the music is just so cheerful you can't help but smile. Really good stuff, and the Green Greens version is probably the best out of all the games. Even the Kirby's Epic Yarn version with the pianos. 

So good. It's all just...so good. 

So...is there anything bad about thsis game, aside from being ahead of its time in nearly every area? Um...it can be a little easy, which is weird considering it's an NES game and they are notorious for being, well, not easy. As it stands, I'm totally fine with it being not as ball-bustingly hard as most other platformers of the day. It showed a refinement of style, that Nintendo was beginning to figure out how to design games that were both fun and challenging, rather than just the latter. It makes sense, considering this game was released in the US just a few months before the SNES came out. That's also why it isn't as well known as other NES platformers, since most people were rearing up for the SNES rather than still buying NES games. Too bad, because this game is damn near perfect. 

When that thing in the back starts spinning, you'll forget you are in an NES game. 

Kirby's Adventure is a must have. Unlike many NES games, where nostalgia is the main reason people can go back to them, Kirby's Adventure is still an excellent, fair, and well designed platformer, even today. You can get it for the extremely low price of $5 off the Nintendo Virtual Console on the Wii, and I highly suggest doing just that. If you have an NES carts can range from $10-20, which I'd also say is a perfectly fair price for it. It's a must-have for collectors, and a fantastic game in its own right. 

So what are you waiting for? Go buy it!

Five out of five stars. 

THE END. 

Magic the Gathering: Duels of the Planeswalkers 2012

The Short


Pros
- Ten new decks with new styles and variety of play
- Multiple single-player and a three player co-op campaigns
- Improved deck customization that is at least a little more robust than its predecessor
- "Archenemy" mode is fun and very, very hard. Get two friends, not bots!
- Unlocking cards can still be just as addicting and fun as before
- Small UI changes make for a faster and smoother experience

Cons
- Though the load times are better, they are still way longer than they should be
- AI seems dumber in this game for some reason, at least when they are on your team
- Only one background to play on. The original had like four; what gives?
- DLC decks are still here, even though this game was released only a year after the first one
- I really don't like the idea of making this an annual thing, especially since the Green and Red decks aren't that different from the previous game's.
- It's still "just Magic."

Here we go again. 

The Long

Magic the Gathering: Duels of the Planeswalkers 2012 (heretofore referred to as Magic 2012 because good grief why is that title so long?) is the follow-up to last year's iteration because it sold really well and if there's anything Magic: The Gathering fans enjoy it's spending more money. It touted a list of improvements before release, claiming to have better deck customization, more decks, and general improvements. 

I honestly kind of find this game hilarious, for these reasons: The original wasn't exactly groundbreaking or anything. They tried to make it sound cool, but it was just Magic. Which, again, is fine, but it's still just freaking Magic. Then this second game comes out and they are like "we are ramping it up!" and it's the exact freaking game as the first game, which in turn is the exact freaking same thing as Magic: The Gathering.

These guys are like the most ambition-less people I've ever seen. 

Three vs one. The mighty fight battle begins. 

So...what is different? I could just sum up this review by saying "not enough, but if you like Magic you bought it already so..." but that would be a cop-out. So I'll briefly (yeah right; you've read my other reviews, I'm wordy as balls) go over the changes between Magic 2012 and Magic: The Gathering DOTP. 

First, the load times are better. My biggest complaint from #1 has been...not fixed, actually, but at least improved. Load times are still longer than they should be, but 15-30 seconds is a lot better than a freaking minute (I timed it the first time) so...good on them. At his rate Magic 2013 might actually load in a normal, reasonable amount of time. Hey, off subject, remember God of War? Or Gears of War? Those games with way better graphics that had no loading times at all after an initial one? Why did I bring this up? No reason, just thought it was interesting.

Second, there is very slightly better deck customization, and unlocking cards is a lot faster. You unlock cards in clumps now (rather than one-by-one; thank goodness) which means you get to the good ones quicker. You can also swap out any cards including ones in the "core" set out and even land to better customize your deck. I guess this is an improvement, but still not being able to pool all my cards and make my own decks is freaking stupid. That's like the main point of Magic. How did they miss this?

That's a lot of pizzazz for a freaking Magic card.

Third, there's a new mode called Archnemesis, which is pretty cool. You play 3v1 (with you as the three) against a computer who, every turn, draws a special card that gives him a powerful ability that round. These include summoning powerful creatures for free, forcing players to destroy permanents, and so on. It can be frustrating if you have a run of bad luck, but with friends it can be very fun. It's a pity that actually playing as an Archnemesis is locked behind paid DLC. Of course. 

Lastly, you got ten decks instead of eight, and I like these decks a lot better. They are tighter knit, and several actually play completely different than each other. Still no Sliver deck (which was my favorite deck ever and the only one I actually bought cards for) but whatever; they're all fine. They are also more complex this time around, and they do a good balance of making it so they start off relatively easy and the unlockable cards add depth to the deck. It's cool and works a lot better than in the original, and the better decks mean the game is funner. 

That is all the major changes I could think of. The rest of the game is exactly the same. There are still a few things carried over from the original that suck though, so here we go again (in very brief). 

Put this deck in the game. I command it. 

Attacks still look stupid. Why are the cards just slashing each other? Yeah, you can turn it off, but it still seems real lazy. 

While the original at least had variety and choices on what background you could play on (the "table" if you will) this game only has one. Why? Why would you remove options? You could have at least ported the original ones over!

Still have to zoom in on all your cards in order to see what they do. Controls still default to simple, and on advanced it has difficulty determining which card is directionally relative to the one next to it, meaning you can hit "right" to go to a card on the right of the board but instead it goes down. I don't know how you could release a second game without at least streamlining this. I bet it works way better on computer, though. 

DLC and the ability to buy cards is still here. Hopefully people who bought DLC for the original Magic learned their lesson; nobody is playing that game anymore because they decided to make yearly iterations. It's like buying DLC for a certain year of Madden. That's stupid. Don't do that. And don't buy the DLC for this game. 

AI is still clever but somewhat oblivious when you are playing against it, and dumb as a sack of bricks when it is on your team. They never coordinate, ever, and several times we could have won if he'd just attacked but since you can't directly order them to do anything (why not?) we ended up losing. Thanks, buddy. You freaking suck. 

Still heavily based on luck a lot of the time, but that's an inherent flaw in Magic: The Gathering, so I can't really pin it on this game. 

Aaand, we're done. 

Despite my complaints, there is certainly a lot more content here than the first Magic XBLA game. More decks, longer single-player (including a "Revenge" campaign that keeps kicking my butt), more options, and a faster game. It's a pity they still haven't done anything imaginative at all with this, simply sticking to the basics on nearly every level, but now that both this and last year's version is out I can say to ignore that one and get this one. It isn't a big improvement, but it's enough to render Magic 2011 or whatever redundant.

...until Magic 2013 comes out, so don't go buying this game yet. Hey, on an unrelated note, how about you do what Harmonix does with Rock Band and let us export decks? Maybe for like $1 (total. Not a deck. You greedy bastards.) since you have to monetize everything in this stupid franchise, but it would essentially add eight more decks and would make the game a lot funner.

Who am I kidding; then they couldn't sell three decks as DLC for like $5 a pop. My mistake. And as much as I hate this aspect of the game, it's how the Magic TCG has worked since its inception, so I'm preaching to the choir here.

Still, if you dig Magic, this is a decent run of it. If you hate Magic, you know what to do. Avoid and make fun of anybody who plays it's hygiene.

Three out of five stars. 

Now do this but with the Pokemon trading card game. Oh wait...

Magic the Gathering: Duels of the Planeswalkers

The Short


Pros
- Solid video game representation of Magic: The Gathering
- Online and offline multiplayer and co-op are a lot of fun
- Does well teaching the rules and providing tutorials so you are never confused
- Graphics look decent and fit well enough for what it is
- The core Magic: The Gathering is still here, and it is very solid and fun
- Unlocking cards can be addicting, and you don't have to buy boosters!

Cons
- Absolutely abysmal load times.
- The fact that attacking is just the cards next to each other with weak animations feels like a cop-out. Why not make sprites of the monsters fighting? That would be cool.
- Only eight decks with limited customization. Nine more can be added via DLC, but it still seems sparse
- Microtransactions will unlock full decks, which feels very lame. I bought this game so I wouldn't have to spend more money on cards, gosh dang it.
- Again, the lack of deck customization removes one of the most key elements of Magic: The Gathering
- Controls can be picky and the most important feature (being able to anytime look at enemy's cards) isn't on by default
- Music gets annoying really quickly. Why does Magic need "sick" guitar riffs?
- It's really just Magic: The Gathering with limited decks and load times

ARE YOU READY TO MAKE SOME MAGIC?!?!?

The Long

Do you like Magic: The Gathering? Have you played it? Do you want to learn? Do you hate buying $4 booster packs and getting a mandatory number of land and then a bunch of cards that don't fit in your deck? Well, luckily I have the solution for you!

Magic the Gathering: Duels of the Planeswalkers is a downloadable title available on Xbox 360, PS3, and PC. And I don't want to spoil the surprise for you guys, but here it is: It's pretty much just Magic: The Gathering.

Gotta catch 'em all! Wait...

If you haven't played Magic: The Gathering then here is the most basic idea. It's essentially a turn-based strategy game with cards. The goal is to build up your "mana" (of which there are five times: Green, Red. Blue, White, Black) which can then be used to purchase/summon monsters, spells, or enchantments. You duel someone else who is doing the same thing, and that's the game.

One of the biggest draws of Magic: The Gathering is deck building. Each element mentioned above also employs different strategies. Green creatures and spells tend to be more expensive and more powerful, meaning they have a slow start and strong ending. White focuses a lot on healing and flying. Red does direct damage to your opponent and gets weak creatures out quick, stronger ones out later. Of course these are generalizations (and you can make hybrid decks) but the core ideas are still there. Buying new cards (randomly determined in boosters) is why Magic: The Gathering has made Wizards By The Coast an estimated Crapzillion Dollars. That's a technical statistic, and therefore a fact. 

Anyway, enough about regular Magic. How does this "game" version of Magic: The Gathering hold up?

You can zoom in on any card to get more information, and if you are confused it also has a tutorial for various abilities built in. 

It probably won't come as a huge surprise, but Magic the Gathering: Duels of the Planeswalkers basically plays exactly the same as the card game. Probably because all this game is is the card game. You take turns, the game giving you a limited time on each "stage" or "phase" of the battle (Main, Combat, Block, Main) and then the other player goes. You summon, battle, and unfortunately can't cheat and stack the deck (which was my ultimate unbeatable Magic: The Gathering strategy). 

That is actually pretty much 90% of the game. It's just Magic: The Gathering. If you are a newcomer it has a fairly decent tutorial that gets you up to speed, and starts you with decks that are very easy to use. As you play through the single-player you'll unlock more and more complex decks, which will help you get deeper and deeper into the game. It's a good technique to help those who might be just starting out, but as somebody who already knew how to play Magic: The Gathering it felt a little slow. 

But enough about that: what makes this game better or worse than actually playing Magic: The Gathering? And I realize I essentially did this in my "The Short" above but shut up it's my review. 

You can decide which cards go in your deck, but you can't make your own. 

Good Stuff!

Probably the biggest draw would be that you can play Magic alone. Some people really enjoy the card game (I'll admit I find it fun) but it can be hard to find like-minded people, and even then to find people with balanced decks. Since Magic the video game has a limited number of decks and unlocks, you never feel like your dumpy rich friend just gets a bigger allowance and bought better cards. Playing by yourself allows you to develop new strategies and experiment, and can be fun (unless you think too much about it and realize you are playing Magic: The Gathering by yourself)

Secondly is the online multiplayer feature, which is also a bonus. As stated, finding people to play Magic with can be hard, but this streamlines it. It's relatively easy to get into a game, and playing with friends is fun too. Up to four players and duel at once, which is pretty much impossible in real life unless you are at a convention or something.

Also, not having to buy boosters is awesome. You unlock cards by simply playing matches with the deck you want stuff to unlock on. It does have the option to pay $1 to unlock all the cards from the get-go (sleazy...) but if you do that you're a toolbox who shouldn't be playing games. 

Finally, it's a decent representation of magic. The boards you battle on are cool looking and can be interchangeable. The game is a bit slower than real Magic but has the benefit of actually knowing all the rules, something my friends and I have issues with. The transition is relatively painless and, as I've said a hundred times before, is pretty much just Magic. 

Watching cards smack each other with crappy canned animations is...awesome?

Bad Stuff!

My biggest complaint is the loading times. Yeah, that's a stupid thing to be my biggest, but trust me: they are really bad. How on earth does it take 45 seconds to a minute to load a single match? Look at these graphics: is this really so high-end it should take that long to boot up? It's mostly just text on a screen! Somebody sucks at optimizing their code. 

My second biggest complaint is the complete and utter lack of customization. You get eight decks of various colors (but no Black/White deck, boo) and abilities, which might sound like a lot but it really isn't. You do unlock cards which is nice, but and you can pick if you want the unlocked cards in your deck, but that's really all you do. Why not put all the decks and cards into a big pool and let me make my own deck? You could even do it like Call of Duty where you have custom classes/decks and unlock more by playing online. Perhaps the biggest draw (as mentioned above) to the Magic: The Gathering TGC is buying boosters and tweaking your deck to be the baddest of them all. Nerds get all excited over that stuff (myself included). Taking that out was a huge mistake. And I get it was probably to better "balance" it or whatever, but they completely negated that too by adding nine more decks you have to buy and making it so you can also just buy all the cards for them. So really it's just like Magic: The Gathering in real life: he with the most money will always win. 

A few other minor issues are here, but most are just me being picky. The card "attack" animations are really stupid. At least in like Yu-Gi-Oh the cards become holographic monsters that battle. That's cool. Just putting cards alongside each other with numbers and corny effects feels like a wasted opportunity. The art on the cards is one of my favorite things; why not render the monster and have 'em bite or something?

The controls are also finicky. By default the ability to pan around the battlefield on a whim is off, so be sure and turn the "advanced control" on right of the bat. But even then it can have problems determining which card you are going for. It's annoying.

Also, unless you have the card memorized, since this isn't real life you can't just look down and see what each card says; you have to highlight it and hit RT to zoom in and read the details. I get that this is because not everybody has a 70 inch plasma TV, but it still just adds another step to simply looking at my cards.

Hey, war elephants! I love these guys!

Graphically this game looks ok, if a bit boring. Again...I'm saying this a lot but here it goes again: It's just Magic. That's the whole game. It's a method to play Magic: The Gathering on a screen instead of in real life, and for that it works. It isn't particularly inspired, but whatever. 

Music is kind of stupid. I think they were trying to prove Magic was badass or something with bad electric guitar riffs in the menus and in battle. But it isn't good enough to actually get me excited about playing Magic, so it just feels like a lame attempt to show how "hardcore" Magic is. Alright? 

I hate playing against Blue decks so much. 

As it stands, Magic the Gathering: Duels of the Planeswalkers is for a specific crowd. I think they tried to widen Magic: The Gathering's appeal by releasing this game, but in truth I only think the hardcore Magic people will buy it. And then they'll be disappointed by the lack of deck customization and poor optimization. For what it is it's passable, but the low deck count, somewhat stilted control, and the fact that the majority of the decks are locked behind DLC is disappointing. Again, at its core Magic: The Gathering is fun, especially when playing against an opponent of comparable skill and a balanced deck, and for that this game is fine. There just isn't anything particularly inspired here, at all. 

It's just Magic. 

Two out of five stars. 

And yet I still played it for lots of hours. I guess for $5 is wasn't all that bad...