Regular readers of this site know I’m a sucker for strong narrative in my games. When I think about narrative driven games, Uncharted, Bioshock, and a select few others come to mind. Now, I can add To the Moon to that list, albeit in a totally different kind of way. To the Moon is a small indie game released on PC, and is an excellent piece of storytelling in digital form. I played through the entire game in four hours last night – and enjoyed almost every minute of it.

To the Moon is at its heart a science fiction story. The main characters are two doctors, Dr. Roselund and Dr. Watts, working for Sigmund, a company that dives into the memories of people on their deathbeds to give them one final, wonderfully memorable experience before they go. To do this, the story blends elements from Inception, Memento, and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. It’s a testament to the game that it doesn’t feel like plagiarism at all – it’s created it’s own world and set of science rules that make sense in context.

The doctors have a patient named Johnny, who wants to go to…you guessed it. To get him there (in his memory), the doctors get inside his head via technology, and take small steps backwards through his memories. They travel backwards in time by identifying different mementos that are important to Johnny. The game does a great job of telling the story from end to finish – with a few twists along the way.

What resonated with me the most about To the Moon was the ease with which I could identify with the characters despite never having experienced what they go through. To the Moon is an emotionally rich story, touching upon themes of life, death, love, and a whole slew of others in the middle. It also asks questions about how one values their memories, good or bad, joyful or painful. The game does all these things in a subtle way – it rarely spells anything out, instead allowing the player to make connections between his or her own emotional experience to better understand what’s going on in the game. I loved every minute of the story, and its greatest feat was I immediately wanted to spend quality time with Mrs. cmfl3x after. When does that usually happen when playing games?

The game looks like a classic 16-bit SNES RPG. The characters emote via pixels, yet they convey quite a bit of feeling all things considered. The game looks great and has a lot of artistic style, but Skyrim this is not. It’s more like Final Fantasy VI. I didn’t mind it at all, but I’m sure there are some people who would like to see a more technical product. The music more than makes up for the graphics, it’s a beautiful piano driven soundtrack that fits what is going on screen perfectly.

You’ll notice I haven’t said much about the gameplay. To be honest, I’ve been avoiding it because there’s not much of it, and hopefully by this point you’ll want to play the game enough to overlook that fact. The game is mostly pointing and clicking to make the narrative progress, with some light puzzle elements and a badly timed shooter portion. If you’re looking for a game to test your gamez skillz, To the Moon will not fit the bill. I’m not even sure it had to be a video game, but I respect the developer’s desire to use the digital medium. Also, on balance, it’s way more enjoyable than other narrative game/non-games (I’m looking at you Heavy Rain and L.A. Noire!) I’d rather have a game where there is little or no gameplay than a game where the gameplay gets in the way of the story. For the record, To the Moon has a better story than both the aforementioned.

In the end, your interest in To the Moon will probably boil down to your interest in heartfelt stories via video games. For me, the experience was near perfect – it was tragic, uplifting, funny, and meaningful along the way. Right now it’s only available via Freebird games ($12) but supposedly it’s going to Steam too. I totally thought it was worth the money – it felt like a narrative experience, almost like going to a movie or something. If you’re low on cash, you can always wait for a Steam sale! Either way, I loved To the Moon, and I hope you will too.

Final Score: A

Almost a month later, I’ve managed to make my way through Modern Warfare 3′s campaign, hit the first Prestige in Multiplayer, and spent some limited time with the Special Ops. I can finally write up a review for the biggest game of the year. Considering how much time cmfl3x and I have been spending with Modern Warfare 3 multiplayer, it’s a wonder if we ever get a chance to play anything else. Hit the jump for my thoughts on all three sections of the game.

Campaign
The Modern Warfare 3 campaign takes place right after Modern Warfare 2 leaves off. The baddie is still Vladimir Markarov, and you assume the roles of a few characters that accompany Captain John Price and Soap as they hunt down Markarov.

In comparison to previous the previous Modern Warfare campaigns, I felt that Modern Warfare 3′s campaign came up a little short. It’s still an adrenaline rush from start to finish, but I guess it just felt to me like it was trying too hard to top the “epic-ness” of the previous games. The first game had the nuke go off, then the second one had the United States under attack, and in Modern Warfare 3, we find ourselves across various countries around the globe all under attack by Markarov’s men. Does this mean if there’s a Modern Warfare 4, Earth will be attacked by aliens? Just seems to be the trend as the scope of the game’s epic-ness continues to grow. I guess the next one may just be called Future Warfare, and not Modern Warfare at that point.

Stuff blows up, buildings get destroyed, it’s all crazy and it works. It’s Modern Warfare through and through; you get to play a variety of missions – stealth, snipe, assault, and you get to assume command of various gadgets and vehicles that provide for some innovative ways to kill your enemies. For fans of the Modern Warfare franchise, Modern Warfare 3′s campaign seemingly closes the trilogy off pretty well, but it just doesn’t reach the same highs that Modern Warfare 2 did. I guess for us American gamers, it’s not easy to beat the idea of fighting enemies in the White House and in suburban neighborhoods similar to where we grew up in.

Special Ops
The special 1 to 2 player co-op missions from Modern Warfare 2 return with Modern Warfare 3. Again, they are contained to 2 players at most, and are varied enough to be enjoyable and interesting. Leaderboards help make it more competitive, and allow for friends to try to beat each others’ scores. New to the Modern Warfare 3 franchise in Special Ops is a Survival Mode, which allows up to two players to take on infinite rounds of various enemies on any of the multiplayer maps. You earn money by taking out enemies and beating rounds, and you can use the money to buy weapons, gear, Perks, etc. It’s a pretty enjoyable diversion and I would even go so far as to say that even without Modern Warfare 3′s multiplayer, the game is probably worth picking up just for the Campaign and Special Ops modes alone.

My only real peeve with Modern Warfare 3′s Survival mode is that it is limited to 2 players. In this day and age, 4-player Survival mode is the norm, and even the zombie mode from Treyarch’s Call of Duty games featured 4-player support. It’s disappointing that 4-player is missing here, but on the bright side, I’ll admit that it’s nice that Modern Warfare 3′s Survival mode is playable solo.

Multiplayer
Even though half of Infinity Ward has jumped ship since the release of Modern Warfare 2, I am happy to see that the remaining members of Infinity Ward and the new studios that helped with Modern Warfare 3′s multiplayer kept the Modern Warfare feel and excitement. I thought that perhaps I was getting tired of Call of Duty after not really enjoying Black Ops multiplayer, but I am relieved to say that it was not the case. Once I got into Modern Warfare 3′s multiplayer, I couldn’t stop and I still want to play it all the time even after hitting my first Prestige. It’s as addicting as ever, and sadly for other games, I just don’t have time to play them anymore because I’m enjoying Modern Warfare 3′s multiplayer so much.

The minor addition of allowing a setup to allow for killstreak rewards to carry over even after dying as well as objectives counting towards streak rewards definitely helps the game out for players that aren’t young and can’t devote several hours a day to compete with the kids. Even little changes like getting points for taking down enemy air support and being able to pick up and move your claymores are all welcome refinements to making the gameplay even more enjoyable. For the most part, I am entirely happy with the Modern Warfare 3 multiplayer, and think it’s good enough to be worth the price of the game alone.

The only real issue with Modern Warfare 3′s multiplayer is the map design. While there seems to be more maps out of the box compared to previous Call of Duty games, Modern Warfare 3′s maps just don’t stack up to Modern Warfare 1 or 2′s. Nothing seems particularly memorable; there is very little height on maps, and there aren’t really any sniper friendly maps. Having put in over 24 hours into the multiplayer already, I got the maps down but I still don’t really enjoy them too much compared to past games.

Final Thoughts
Outside of a short campaign, a lack of a 4-player survival mode, and relatively bland map design for multiplayer, Modern Warfare 3 is amazing. It may not seem as phenomenal today as Modern Warfare 1 and 2 did back when they released, but it carries the torch well and is definitely worth your time. What makes the Call of Duty series so fun is its control and speed; no other FPS moves as silky smooth or feels as great as Call of Duty – especially the Modern Warfare series.

Don’t tell Activision I said this, but Modern Warfare 3′s multiplayer is good enough that I would pay a monthly fee to play it. In a sense, I already am since I signed up for the Elite service in support of the game (and to get access to all of the DLC). Despite the few negatives that the entire Modern Warfare 3 package has, it’s still the best FPS multiplayer game out there and thoroughly recommended.

Final Grade: A

Let’s start by calling Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary what it is: a cheap money grab playing off the tenth anniversary of the Halo franchise. With that business out of the way, let me point out what else the Anniversary edition is: a beautiful looking re-enactment of the classic that kept the Xbox alive. Surprisingly, the game still feels relatively fresh all things considered, although things that were annoying ten years ago still are annoying now. Is it worth checking out, or for die hards only?

The Highs
For starters, Halo looks great in HD. There is a neat feature where you can hit the select button and switch between the original graphics and the remade ones and the difference is stunning. I guess it should be expected considering the new hardware, but it still is a sight to behold.

Halo remains an excellent game after the last ten years. There are some great moments that still hold up after all this time. Looking back, I think Bungie did a great job – splitting Master Chief and Cortana before the Flood reveal, the various twists and turns in the plot, and other moments throughout the campaign.

Another high is the combat itself. Halo’s subtitle was combat evolved, and it really did change the face of gaming in a lot of ways. First of all, it proved that first person shooters could work on a console, of course, now they are a dime a dozen. More importantly, the combat is difficult and challenging, even annoyingly so at times. I played through the entire campaign on Normal and died way more than I should die at that difficulty level. It was a different time back then, and games have definitely gotten easier. Still, playing through Halo again made me realize how fresh and unique the combat was at the time.

Overall, the presentation is great. The music has been remastered, so that sounds good, and everything looks good as well as I said. In general, if you are a Halo fan, this is probably worth having, if only to be able to play the original game again. Of course, if you’re a Halo fan, you also know some of the series’ problems.

The Lows
I’m not sure if they were working off the old engine, but my only fault with the redesigned look is that the mouths don’t always sync up to the audio. It generally isn’t a problem because of Master Chief’s helmet, but it still should be noted.

The real lows are the things that have annoyed me about the original Halo since release. A lot has been written about the amount of backtracking in the original game, and it’s mostly true. It’s annoying! By my count, at least 5 of the 10 levels take place in the same areas. Not only are you backtracking a lot, but a lot of the levels look exactly the same. Also, I remember hating the Library (which is still awful and awfully hard, for what it’s worth), but I didn’t remember how much I hated the level AFTER that. It definitely got a little tedious in some of those middle chapters.

Since everything looks the same, it’s also relatively easy to get lost. The game has compensated for this with some markers on the ground with the new graphics, and they are VERY welcome. I think it cut down my getting lost by like 75%.

What may or may not be a low for you is the sheer difficulty of the game. As I mentioned, the combat can be quite unforgiving. Check points occur at random times, they don’t always pop up and if you miss one it can really suck to lose a significant amount of progress. Also, I’m not sure if it was due to my playstyle or due to the game itself, but I found myself very low on ammo a lot of times. It kind of made the game survival horror-y, which was cool, but it also could get frustrating. Your mileage will vary depending on the type of game you like.

Final Thoughts
All in all, I enjoyed Halo Combat Evolved Anniversary more than I thought I would. It was a nice bit of nostalgia, and the game still shines all these years later. After I finished the game I found myself on Wikipedia just reading up on some of the lore and stuff like that (it can get confusing!) Is this remake a cash grab? Most definitely. But is it worth the cash? I’d say so – and I didn’t even bother to go online to get killed by 10-year olds on Hang Em High. Actually, come to think of it, they weren’t even born when this game came out. Maybe I’ll go find them and frag them after all!

Final Grade: A-

Amidst the flurry of major release titles this Fall and Holiday season, I’ve still been working on my backlog and the most recent backlog game I’ve beaten is Ratchet & Clank Future: A Crack in Time for the PS3. I wasn’t a huge fan of Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction since I felt like it was too similar to the other titles, but I think that A Crack in Time does bring some interesting new gameplay elements to the series and I found myself enjoying it more (maybe even more than Batman: Arkham City!). Hit the jump for my “retro” review on this 2009 title…

The Highs
Outside of bringing the variety of weapons to level up, humor, and adventure platforming that the series is known for, A Crack in Time introduces several new gameplay features to breathe some life into the aging series. The first new feature comes straight from the game’s title: A Crack in Time features the element in certain parts of the gameplay. The time gameplay isn’t anywhere near as puzzling or maddening as titles such as Braid, but it does add a little bit of intellectual thinking to the mix. Throughout the game, Clank will find himself in “puzzle rooms” where he will have to record multiple copies of himself to go hit buttons. At the end of the puzzle, all of the buttons must be pressed by all his recorded copies so that he can continue. Figuring them out gave me the sort of feeling I would get from figuring out Portal room puzzles, but luckily here, if you don’t feel like solving them, you can just skip them (and not get the monetary reward for solving them). I would have liked to see the time element explored further, but because this is a family friendly game, I’m guessing Insomniac decided to just keep it all relatively simple.

Another gameplay element introduced by A Crack in Time is the use of the hover boots. With them equipped, Ratchet can travel quickly across a map, and often times it feels like Tony Hawk skateboarding gameplay has been added to the mix. Unfortunately, while you can’t do flips and twists for point multipliers, there are ramps on certain levels as part of “hover boot” paths.

My favorite new aspect that A Crack in Time brings to the table is the entire meta element of the space gameplay. In previous Ratchet & Clank games, they would fly from planet to planet, and in the previous title, sometimes you would go through Starfox style shooting levels from one planet to another. In A Crack in Time, you now have the freedom to explore several different solar systems with your own freedom. Think Mass Effect 2′s systems + Super Mario Galaxy style presentation and that’s pretty much what A Crack in Time’s space traveling plays like. You can fly to various planets (big and small) and land on them to find various upgrades, collectables, etc. It reminded me a lot of Super Mario Galaxy’s star collecting on various planets. My favorite part of it all (and maybe it’s just because I haven’t played a game like X-Wing or TIE Fighter in a while) is how you fight and take on enemy starships throughout space. It’s funny – I don’t like sandbox gameplay, but for some reason or another, I really enjoyed A Crack in Time’s space sandbox. You could fly to the large planets to continue the storyline, or fly to smaller planets and asteroids to help other inhabitants out or engage enemy fighters in space.  It’s a great “lite” space-combat sim metagame, and certainly hit the spot for me since I hadn’t played one of those in years.

While Clank’s puzzle solving elements were enjoyable, the general action segments were flat

The Lows
Unfortunately, this game does have it share of lows. The first low that I wasn’t a big fan of in the game was how Ratchet & Clank were split for nearly the entire game. You would play each of them separately, and it just felt off playing as Ratchet and not having Clank’s gadgets. Clank’s gameplay was even worse. Outside of the interesting time-based puzzle rooms, Clank’s enemy encounters were quite soporific due to him only being able to melee attack.

I also was not a big fan of the weapons this time around. Every Ratchet & Clank game always has new and interesting weapons, but I found that A Crack in Time’s weapons were not too enjoyable to use. I realize that with so many titles in the series, it’s getting tougher and tougher to come up with new weapons (just like the Mega Man series probably stretched the boss variety quite thin), but all I can say is that I love Ratchet & Clank games for the weapons and I wasn’t really feeling it in this one. What also was annoying was the aiming; it wasn’t quite accurate as I would have liked. Using weapons like the shotgun were just difficult to use in 3rd person when the auto-aim wasn’t working and being unable to move while aiming in first person also made it just annoying.

There were also some frustrating platforming elements, and it was almost more so because the aiming and movement were sometimes unresponsive due to how the platforming was designed. There was one area where I kept dying after landing from a ramp with my hoverboots, and for some reason or another, as soon as I would land, the system would turn my character 180 degrees and have fly off the ledge and into the lava to die. This happened several times and I could not understand why it was doing it. Fortunately, the game does have frequent checkpoints to reduce the frustration, but I must admit that I did get frustrated from time to time.

Hoverboot segments added an interesting new skateboarding style gameplay element

Final Thoughts
I basically forced myself to start playing A Crack in Time after not being too impressed with the previous game, Tools of Destruction, but ultimately once the game got underway, I enjoyed it a lot. Fans of the traditional Ratchet & Clank games may actually not like this game as much due to the less interesting weapons and the addition of new gameplay elements that are not typically Ratchet & Clank. I believe they added some much needed variety to the series, but am slightly disappointed that the core gameplay (weapons and platforming) weren’t as spot on as in previous games.

Final Grade: B+

I was able to hunker down and beat Batman: Arkham City this past weekend, and for those wondering – it really is about an eight hour game if you avoid the sidequests. Now that I’ve gone through the primary storyline, here’s my abbreviated, yet “debatable” review.

Highs
The first thing that hits you when you start Batman: Arkham City is how spot on the presentation and feel for the game are. The game is dark like the more recent Batman flicks directed by Christopher Nolan, and the overall tone, graphics, music, etc. are all quite impressive. I believe Batman: Arkham City is still running on the same Unreal engine that the previous title utilized, but the scope of the game has increased dramatically and being able to grapple and fly across the rooftops as Batman would is one thrill that any superhero fan will enjoy. Being able to hear conversations from thugs throughout the city also gives it quite an immersive feel and is a nice touch.

One of the biggest criticisms I had about Batman: Arkham Asylum was the lack of unique bosses; nearly every boss encounter was pretty much 1 or 2 of the big guys that would charge at you. Thankfully, this time around in Arkham City, there’s a little bit more variety and the bosses do feel like bosses. They were a little easier than I expected, but I am happy that at least Rocksteady Studios decided to design some bosses this time around.

If you are a fan of sandbox gaming, Batman: Arkham City does it well. There’s basically always things to do, whether it’s side missions that deal with other enemies in the Batman universe, helping people, or even just going after all of The Riddler’s hidden collectibles – a fan of sandbox games can spend dozens and dozens of hours just sandboxing it up.

The Ridder seems to hog most of Batman’s sidequest time in Arkham City

Lows
Unfortunately for me, I’m not a fan of sandbox gameplay, and therefore I didn’t enjoy the game as much as I expected to when I bought the game. felt like most of the sequel’s actual gameplay outside the sandbox was not that different from Arkham Asylum, so it didn’t seem very innovative or interesting to me. Batman: Arkham City compared to Arkham Asylum feels like BioShock was given a sequel and made sandbox. While the sandbox in Arkham City was done well, I just didn’t think it was necessarily better for the game (just like I don’t think a sandboxy BioShock sequel makes for a better game either). As I mentioned in my impressions, the now “open world” field makes things more of a hassle to get to, and it results in a loss in the tightness of the first game. Of course, I’m probably in the minority when I say I don’t play Grand Theft Auto games to mess around with the city. For fans that do enjoy superheroes and sandbox, Batman: Arkham City is the ultimate superhero sandbox game.

I also felt that in this sequel, the storyline was not that interesting. It wasn’t focused enough and there were too many characters running around. I liked how the first one was primarily Batman and Joker going at it in Arkham Asylum; in this sequel you got all sorts of random characters showing up here and there and they almost feel forced in at times. In a way, the inclusion of so many characters in Arkham City reminded me of why I don’t really enjoy playing games that are licensed titles: things feels forced, there’s not enough development, and the licensing handicaps original creative ideas.

There was also just too much of a focus on Riddler content. Hundreds of hidden collectibles, Riddler riddles in every zone, hostages that you had to rescue from him, etc. Conversely, some of the other licensed characters you’d fight for just one battle and that would be it. For those that don’t care much for riddles and collectathons, you’ll be disappointed that it feels like outside the primary storyline, most of the optional stuff is chasing after Riddler’s “question marks” for hours.

Catwoman is playable in parts and you can take out enemies that look like Soap MacTavish

Final Thoughts
Batman: Arkham City is the first game I played in a while where I felt really impatient to want to have it end. To be honest, I don’t know if it’s because it’s not a good game, or because I’m starting to feel like I’m outgrowing gaming in general. Personally, I think it’s the latter. (It’s for this reason alone that I am a little concerned with my current gaming reviews and how I rate them.)

With Batman: Arkham City – I’ll simply put that if you like superheroes, Batman, and sandbox games, this is basically the perfect game for you. If you enjoyed Arkham Asylum but don’t really care much for superheroes or sandbox games, this is not a must-play game. Outside of the sandbox gameplay and mini sidequests, Arkham City doesn’t really bring enough innovation as a sequel. At many times, it felt too drawn out as you are forced to travel around the city to get to different objectives.

Final Grade: B+

As a gamer who preferred the 360 over the PS3, it’s always been kind of odd that I could never get into the 360′s most important IPs: Halo & Gears of War. With Halo, I warmed up to the series some after spending time with Halo: Reach, but I eventually sold that game because it still wasn’t enjoyable enough to me. Gears of War 3 finally succeeded in not only getting me to really enjoy it, but it has drastically changed the way I thought I would play the game. Hit the jump to see why I love this game so much.

Campaign Mode
I touched on the campaign some with my initial impressions of the game last week, but now that I’ve completed the game, I can confidently say that it’s the best campaign mode of the entire series so far. Gears of War 3′s campaign is positively epic – and what’s more, it’s beautiful. Nearly all of the game’s levels are outdoors, brighter, and more colorful than the first two games. While I don’t want to spoil the storyline, I will say that it is the most engaging of the series. Again – I adore that there are so many Gears characters in the game; it makes the game’s scope seem huge and it is. The new enemy types also make the campaign much more varied; it feels like Left 4 Dead/Resident Evil at times and that’s a great thing.

Gears of War 3 is worth it just for its single player. The campaign mode is a meaty thrill ride from start to finish – but even once you’ve beaten the campaign, there’s a lot more. Gears 3 is the first time the series has incorporated an Arcade Mode, and I’m getting really into it. You get score multipliers the longer you stay alive, the higher the difficulty you play on, and the more mutators you turn on. It’s all been done before in games like Halo 3 and Halo: Reach, but it works very well with Gears of War 3. I love that there are still checkpoints in the Arcade Mode, so if you die, you can still keep going. Conversely, I don’t think the Call of Duty Arcade Modes allow reloading of checkpoints. Another addition to Gears 3′s campaign is the long sought after 4-player campaign mode. Gears of War 3 FINALLY did it! You can play through the entire campaign with 3 other friends, and one exceptionally cool feature introduced in Gears of War 2 I believe is also present in Gears of War 3 is that each player can set their own difficulty so you can play with friends of varying skill levels and everyone can still have fun. In short, everything about the campaign is perfect; I had no negatives and think the game is worth it for the campaign alone. But wait – there’s more…

The Gears 3 campaign takes you through a variety of levels, including Cole’s old stadium

Versus Mode
I never got into the competitive modes for Gears of War 1 or 2. I tried, but with everyone rolling around shotgunning each other due to the absurd number of Lancer assault rifle bullets it took to kill opponents just turned me off of the game altogether. Fortunately, this time around, the developers really retweaked the weapons (and continue to do so). While the Gnasher shotgun is still responsible for the most kills in Unranked play, it’s interesting that the Lancer rifle has the most kills in Ranked play. The Lancer assault rifle is now a viable weapon, which means that players are actually using cover and getting into firefights instead of just rolling and shotgunning. In fact, all of the starting weapons have their uses for different maps making for a more varied multiplayer experience.

Gears of War 3 also introduces a couple new multiplayer modes (in addition to keeping several of its classic modes): Capture the Leader and Team Deathmatch. Capture the Leader revolves around both teams trying to capture and hold a person for as long as possible, while Team Deathmatch is the first time the Gears of War series gets a Team Deathmatch mode. Suffice to say, Team Deathmatch is the most popular gametype online and rightly so – it’s quite newbie friendly for players like myself that are finally playing Gears multiplayer for the first time. In Team Deathmatch, each team has a total of 15 extra respawns that are used by the team. When a team exhausts those respawns, each of the five players on the team will no longer be able to respawn once they die so the objective is to deplete the opposing team’s respawn count to zero, and then kill each player for good. The mode is great for new players because even if they die, they can continue to play while there are extra respawns available.

Bots return as well for offline practice and play; it’s good to go against them to learn maps or practice weapons when you want to get better. I practice against bots often when I want to try new stuff.

Gears of War 3′s multiplayer maps are generally symmetrical yet tight for more action

Horde Mode
Gears of War 2 introduced a popular mode that other games such as Halo and Call of Duty had for players: a co-op survival mode where you and up to three other friends took on waves of increasingly difficult enemies while holding out for as long as you can. The interesting thing about this Horde Mode from Gears of War 2 is that the developers noticed that gamers would play the Gears of War 2 Horde Mode by trying to set up a base and fortifying it with enemy shields and whatever else they could find. In Gears of War 3, Epic decided to just go nuts with Horde Mode and add in base-building into the game.

Horde Mode has evolved in Gears of War 3 – for the better. It’s now even more enjoyable than the previous game’s Horde Mode, since each player earns money for killing enemies, and the money can be used to buy weapons, ammo, and base enhancements. You can spend your money to buy walls, turrets, decoys, etc. Players can pool their money together to buy advanced equipment as well. I haven’t had a chance to play this mode with friends yet, but from what I’ve played so far – it’s a lot of fun. The mode really feels like a cross between a shooter and tower defense, as there’s a great balance of action, strategy, and teamwork.

Gears of War 3′s Horde Mode introduces currency and the building of defensive structures

Beast Mode
On top of  the perfect Campaign mode, the more newbie friendly Versus modes, and the much improved Horde mode is a completely new mode to Gears of War: Beast Mode. In Beast Mode, players actually play as the enemy units in the game so it’s basically Horde Mode in reverse. The enemy AI are humans that put up fortifications, while the players spend money to play as one of many different enemy units that try to break through these fortifications and kill the humans in a minimal amount of time. For anyone that has wanted to play as units like a Ticker, Kantus, or Berserker, this mode is for them.

I personally feel like Beast Mode is interesting but the weakest of the four primary modes in this game. It can be fun but because you’re playing as the enemy units, the skills you gain within this mode aren’t as translatable to any of the other three main modes in Gears of War 3. Plus, it’s relatively short in comparison to the other modes. However, it’s a great diversion nonetheless for those that want something different in the game.

Gears of War 3 brings the trilogy to an epic end, but hopefully the series continues…

Final Thoughts
I initially played through the Gears of War 3 campaign on Casual and Normal difficulties, but after I beat the game, I enjoyed it so much I wanted more. I’m now replaying through the game on Insane, and replaying it through on Arcade mode to see how high of a score I can get for each level. I thought I would just play Versus for a few rounds and skip it altogether. Instead, I’m watching strategy videos, reading guides, practicing against bots – all to get better at the multiplayer. As much as I wanted to play this game as my new “casual gamer” self, every aspect of Gears of War 3 has been executed so flawlessly that it has pulled out my old hardcore gamer shadow and hooked itself onto this game. Gears of War 3 is not only the best Gears of War game, but one of  the best 360 games I’ve ever played.

Gears of War 3 is all that is on my mind right now, and all I want to play. Gears 3 is the first game in a while that I think about when I’m at work. I want to play this game with others – any of the four modes: Campaign, Versus, Horde, and Beast. They’re all exceptionally well done, enjoyable, and support multiple players. How can a game give you so much goodness in one box? I actually grow a little concerned now since Modern Warfare 3 is coming out in less than a month. What will happen if Gears 3 still hasn’t let me go at that point? I guess I’ll hold off on pre-ordering Modern Warfare 3 for now since I’ve finally fallen for Gears of War…

Final Grade: A

Valkyria Chronicles is the next game I hit up on my slowly shrinking backlog. For those that don’t know much about this game, it’s a Japanese “turn-based strategy game” that Sega released on the PS3 back in 2008. Since then, it’s been popular enough to have spawned two sequels on the PSP, an anime series, and a manga series. I had picked up the sequel on the PSP months back, but having wanted to play through the original game first, this was the next game on my backlog. Hit the jump to see if this older PS3 game still holds up today.

The Highs
In the intro, I put “turn-based strategy game” in quotations because it’s not quite that. I love turn-based strategy games – Final Fantasy Tactics, Jeanne d’Arc, Civilization, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, etc. Valkyria Chronicles is a turn-based strategy game like nothing I’ve ever played before and really feels like a turn-based strategy game for the current generation. Its gameplay contains an innovative and refreshing mix of turn-based strategy and shooter elements. The game takes place in a fictional world, but your squad has access to rifles, machine guns, grenades, etc. – it almost feels like it takes place in World War II, but in a fantasy anime-based setting. One of the most mind-blowing things about this turn-based strategy is that there is no grid. When you decide to control a character to have him/her move and attack, the game zooms into a 3rd person view for the character, and from there, you directly control the character with a limited movement bar. You can control the character just like playing a normal third person shooter, and as you move, the movement bar goes down until it fully depletes. You can perform one action in that turn: generally either attacking an enemy or healing. However, the shooting mechanic of the game follows more of an RPG design; you can’t just aim for headshots like you would out of Call of Duty. The RPG element determines whether your shots hit the mark or not and combat itself is still turn-based.

Valkyria Chronicles also has an interesting leveling and upgrade system. Completing “stages” yields experience points and currency – based on conditions such as how quickly you beat the stage, how many enemy units you destroyed, etc. In other Japanese turn-based strategy games, I remember having to use some characters more than others in order to level them to catch up, etc. This is not the case in Valkyria Chronicles – there isn’t any leveling at the per unit level. Characters in your squad of 20 (although only 10 can be deployed to the field per stage, on average) consist of basically five classes in the game: scout, assault (SMGs), lancer (antitank rockets), engineer (tank repair, medic, utility class), and sniper. You earn experience points for your entire squad in one huge pool, and between levels you can decide which class you want to dump experience points into, raising levels for all characters in that class. Therefore, it’s possible for all characters of one class to be a higher level than characters from another class, but not possible for characters within one class to be different levels. Gear is also similar; you can spend money and upgrade weapons for everyone in a particular class, but you also earn unique and more powerful weapons that you can outfit specific characters with if you wish.

Being a turn-based strategy game, it’s quite a good length. It took me about 25 hours to make it through the game’s 18 chapters, but even after beating it, there’s plenty more to do for those that can’t get enough. For example, there’s a New Game+ mode that allows you to bring your squad into a new game with their levels and gear all in tact so you can try to get an A ranking on every stage. There’s skirmish stages for you to play in to earn more money and experience points so that you can max out your squad’s experience levels and gear, and finally, there are often new characters you can find and recruit to your squad. While the campaign is not as long as other Japanese developed turn-based strategy games I’ve played in the past, it’s certainly long enough and there are lots of extras for increased re-playability.

The primary villain, Prince Maximilian, is assisted by Selvaria, a Vakyrian with immense power

The Lows
Valkyria Chronicles has a lot of innovative gameplay elements that were a breath of fresh air for the genre. However, there were certainly some things that I was not a fan of. The first and most major annoyance I had with the game is that it just felt too slow at times. There are so many cutscenes before and after each level, to the point where I almost stopped playing because I felt like I wasn’t even really playing anymore. I didn’t exactly want to skip them either since I didn’t want to be lost in the story, but I just felt like there was a bit too much “watching” and not enough playing in this game. On top of the concept of the game feeling too slow, I also grew tired during the stages themselves when my turn was up and I had to wait for the AI to move all of its units. I would have loved a “fast forward” feature when it switches to the AI side, since the combination of watching cutscenes and the AI control its forces meant that I was only actually playing the game maybe 30-40% of the entire game. This was the first game I’ve played in recent memory where I actually needed to surf the web and do other stuff as I played it just because there was so much “non-gaming” time in the game. That 30-40% actual playing time could have been easily increased if a fast-forward for the AI side was implemented like in Western strategy games.

There were also several minor gameplay aspects that I got a bit annoyed with. The first is that you have no idea what the board looks like or what enemy types are present when you are choosing which units to deploy on a stage for the first time. Are there enemy tanks? Snipers? I had no idea so I would just deploy random units. Then after the stage loaded, I would see what I would be up against and then have to reload the game because then I knew what to deploy. All of this could have been easily avoided if the player was presented with the enemy info on the board during unit deployment. There also isn’t quite enough diversity in the classes – I felt like many of the stages were similar because it was the same unit types fighting each other throughout the entire game. Games like Final Fantasy Tactics have over a dozen different class-types, so as the game unfolds, more powerful and diverse unit types begin taking the field. I wish there was something like that in Vakyria Chronicles. Other minor issues I had with the game included the annoying controls of the tank units and a cheap and annoying end-game boss. Also, since the game is older, it does not have Trophy support.

There are plenty of cutscenes throughout Valkyria Chronicles – perhaps too many

Final Thoughts
When I first started playing Valkyria Chronicles, it blew me away with its innovative gameplay. I was so bored of the current games I had so when I started playing Valkyria Chronicles I was surprised by all the new things I discovered when playing the game. The “high” came early for me when I played this game, but as I continued to play it, it decreased as I started encountering some gameplay elements that were kind of annoying. It got to a point where I just stopped playing it for a while, but I eventually returned and got into it enough that I was able to get through it (even though I almost gave up on the last boss).

If you’re a strategy-game fan and also enjoy anime, Valkyria Chronicles is definitely a title to pick up. There’s a lot of storytelling through anime cutscenes and the strategy/RPG elements of the game are very unique. It’s just unfortunate that some gameplay decisions were made that could have easily been fixed to make this game even better.

Final Grade: B+

I loved the Dreamcast. When I think back to my favorite consoles prior to this generation, my first thoughts are the SNES and the Dreamcast. The Dreamcast was beloved by many a hardcore gamer, as it featured an amazing library and one of these hits was a little known gem called Rez. As a prequel to Rez, Child of Eden was definitely on my radar, but like basically every other game released these days, I didn’t think it was worth picking up on launch day. But when Best Buy had it on sale briefly for $9.99 prior to Labor Day weekend, that was more than cheap enough for me to check out so I drove to my nearest Best Buy right after work to snag myself a copy. Hit the jump for my thoughts now that I’ve played through it a couple times.

The Highs
Child of Eden comes to us courtesy of Q Entertainment, the studio most famous for Lumines but also consisting of several Sega members that worked on Rez and the Panzer Dragoon games. While the Panzer Dragoon series, Rez, and Child of Eden all have similar gameplay (rail-based shooter with the ability to lock onto multiple targets), Rez & Child of Eden ditch the fantasy elements of Panzer Dragoon and focus more on overloading the senses with both audio and video. Fans of Rez will most likely totally dig Child of Eden, as the gameplay is quite similar since it’s a prequel to Rez.

For those that have never played Rez, Child of Eden can definitely be enjoyed without knowing anything about it. The gameplay in Child of Eden is relatively straightforward: it’s a rail-based shooter where you travel across several levels along the same rail, and your goal is to score as much as you can while avoiding dying. “Weapons” at your disposal include a lock-on targetting system where you can lock on up to 8 targets at once before firing, a rapid fire shot, and a screen clearing “bomb” should too many enemy projectiles be heading your way. One of the interesting aspects of Child of Eden is how different enemy types will take increased or reduced damage depending on their color. Enemies in purple and pink tend to resist the lock-on targeting, but will succumb quickly to the rapid fire shot, while enemies in orange or blue take equal damage from both the lock-on targeting and the rapid fire shot. However, the lock-on targeting does more damage in general, especially because it can lock onto the same target multiple times, making it the better option.

I’ll say it again – Child of Eden is definitely a game for the senses. While the storyline is pretty “out there”, you’ll find yourself traveling through all sorts of colorful locales shooting plants, jellyfish, whales, butterflies, etc. From a visual standpoint, it’s a lot to take in but very enjoyable – I can’t even imagine what this game would be like for someone that was high on something that increased their sensory stimulation.

My favorite part of Child of Eden though, is hands down the soundtrack. It’s a vocally trance type soundtrack from the Japanese group Genki Rockets, and it’s so perfect for the game. This is the first game I’ve ever played where I actually prefer to play the game wearing headphones than listening to the game out of my speakers just because the music is so stimulating and perfect for the game. Unfortunately, if you want to score very well on the levels, you have to have a sense of rhythm because you get multipliers for firing your lock-ons in time with the musical beat. Feedback from taking on targets also plays interesting audio that meshes with the soundtrack, so it’s all one crazy audio-visual experience.

In the not quite fleshed out storyline, you’re trying to save dear Lumi from a virus attack

The Lows
This is one of the first games released on the Xbox 360 that states “better with Kinect sensor”. However, after playing through the game with both my Kinect and on the controller, I will have to respectfully disagree. The game is passable on the Kinect, but it is still much better on the controller. While the Kinect can handle the game by having your right arm control where you are aiming your lock-on cannon and pushing forward with your right hand to fire, I found it annoying that you had to switch to your left arm to use the rapid fire shot. The process of switching is just not smooth because when you put your right arm down and lift your left arm up to enable the rapid fire shot, the aiming reticule follows your right arm down to the bottom of the screen so when you want to rapid fire with your left arm, you’re no longer aiming where you originally wanted to aim. The controller never has this problem, as your targeting reticule doesn’t have to “leave the screen” when you want to change weapons – you just push a different button to fire the other weapon. Due to the Kinect mode not being as detailed in your detection and movement, the game compensates by giving you a larger targeting reticule for the rapid fire shot so you can hit things easier and the lock-on process is faster (you can get 8 lock-ons in the Kinect mode significantly faster than on the controller mode). At the end of the day though, most fans of this game will try it out on the Kinect, but then spend the rest of their time with the game mastering it on the controller just because the Kinect version, like the Kinect itself, is just too gimmicky.

Besides the lack of it being a truly awesome and mind-blowing Kinect experience, the biggest issue that the game has is its extremely short length. The game has only 5-6 levels total, and you can clear through all of the levels in about an hour and a half. While I can see how this sort of game expects you to replay the levels over and over to improve, get higher scores, etc., most gamers these days don’t have that sort of drive or dedication to devote themselves to perfecting a solo skill-based game – especially in such a small number of levels. For those that do love the ability to challenge oneself by replaying levels over and over until they can perfect them, this game is probably right up their alley. For the rest of us more casual gamers, this is one game that you’ll play through a few times at most and then move onto something else.

Passion, the fourth of five levels, is by far my favorite with its mechanical theme and beat

Final Thoughts
It’s very difficult to come up with a final grade for this game. On the one hand, it’s a great follow-up to Rez and there’s really nothing out now that is anything like it (aside from the original Rez on the Live Arcade marketplace). But on the other, it’s just so short that its current retail price of $39.99 is far too expensive. This game is better suited as a Live Arcade title with that sort of pricing: $10-$15. I thought it was a great game at the $10 price point I bought it at, but could never recommend this game to anyone at its full price since there’s just not enough content there to justify it. It helps that Microsoft is going to include this game for free with the Kinect bundles starting this Fall, but the problems are: the Kinect is a hardware device for casual gamers, Child of Eden’s Kinect mode isn’t too great, and casual gamers aren’t the ones that will put in a lot of time into this game.

My recommendation is if you are at all curious about this game, you definitely don’t need a Kinect to enjoy it – and in fact, you shouldn’t really bother playing it on the Kinect. Wait for the inevitable price drop, as it feels more like a Live Arcade title than a retail game, so if you can find it anywhere south of $20, it’s a good game. Anything more is highway robbery!

Final Grade: B-

Most of my gaming time over the last couple of weeks has been devoted to one game on the PS3: Yakuza 4. As someone that loves Japanese culture, I was a bit disappointed with the previous iteration in the series, but still decided to pick up the most recent Yakuza title once I found a good deal on it. I’m glad I did – while Yakuza 4 looks very similar to Yakuza 3, it’s thoroughly a better game. Hit the jump to see why.

The Highs
The biggest difference between the previous Yakuza games and Yakuza 4 is that in 4, you get to play a total of four different characters over the course of the game. Each of the characters has their own backstory – one guy is a money lender, one guy is a detective, another a prison inmate, and finally, the 4th is the protagonist of the series: Kiryu Kazuma. Being able to play as four different characters throughout Yakuza 4 injects a lot more variety into the game as each character has his own fighting style, his own missions, and his own base of operations. Eventually all of the characters come together as the storyline progresses, but each character’s “storyline” is enough to really be its own game. I clocked in at about 50 hours completion time, with about 10+ hours per character.

Unlike Yakuza 3, Yakuza 4 is completely uncensored and is exactly how it was released in Japan. The Japanese voiceovers remain with English subtitles, and the sub job that Sega did is really good – managing to keep the humor from the Japanese voiceovers while still using contemporary English jokes and puns. In short, this is the definitive open world game on the current systems for fans of Japanese culture.

In Yakuza 3, I never bothered to spend much time playing the mini-games, but I enjoyed several of the mini-games in Yakuza 4 a lot. Two lengthy mini-games new to Yakuza 4 are managing a hostess club and managing a dojo. I didn’t really enjoy managing a hostess club too much since I had a hard time figuring out how to dress the women to draw in the big bucks, but I spent many hours managing my dojo for the underground fight club. Each day I would work with a student and raise attributes that I felt he needed to improve upon, and then would send him to the fight club and watch from the audience as he battled opponents. Winning brought in money, which allowed me to improve the dojo’s facilities for more efficient training, etc. I would have probably bought that mini-game as its own game if it were released!

While not as good as Yakuza 3′s storyline, Yakuza 4′s storyline does have some punch

The Lows
Compared to Yakuza 3, I have to admit that Yakuza 4′s storyline wasn’t as interesting to me. Even though there were four characters, the storyline didn’t have as interesting a premise and even the ending boss fights seemed a bit “forced”. Unlike Yakuza 3, I enjoyed Yakuza 4′s sidequests and mini-games more than its main storyline. However, the storyline is still entertaining and substantial; it just didn’t resonate too much with me.

The only other primary low about the game is that the game does have a lot of recycled material. This time around, Yakuza 4 takes place exclusively in the fictional district of Kamurocho, Tokyo. This is the same city that I’m guessing the first two games took place (as well as part of the third game), so to return to it with the same city layout in every sequel may not be too exciting for fans of the series. The gameplay itself is also still quite the same: run around collecting locker keys, get attacked by random NPCs on the street asking for your money, and chasing/running away from other NPCs as you move towards finishing the storyline.

Beware hostess clubs, where beautiful women sweet talk you into buying expensive drinks

Final Thoughts
Yakuza 4 is probably the best Yakuza game released to date. There is a lot of gameplay in being able to play as four different characters each for a quarter of the game. Then once all four storylines are complete and the characters are brought together, you then have the option to switch to any of them to tie up any sidequests/mini-games for them before moving on to the finale. Mini-games are more fun this time around and Kamurocho, Tokyo is a lot more interesting than Yakuza 3′s Okinawa setting – even if nearly every Yakuza game takes place in Kamurocho. Unfortunately, the lack of gameplay innovation and a storyline that isn’t as interesting as the previous game hold this game back a bit. Japanese culture fans probably own this game already for good reason, and for others that are curious about it, I definitely recommend checking Yakuza 4 out.

Final Grade: B

Even though I’m not a sports game fan, surprisingly, the two games that have occupied most of my PSP gaming time for the last several months are two Hot Shots games: Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee 2 and Hot Shots Tennis: Get a Grip. I had never played a Hot Shots game prior to these two games on the PSP, and have now discovered how addicting the Hot Shots combination of sport and RPG can be. Hit the jump to see my quick reviews on both titles.

Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee 2 adds an enjoyable extra layer of gameplay on top of golf

Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee 2
The last golf game I played prior to Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee 2 was probably Golf on the original NES. It’s literally been that long. Golf games have never really interested me, as they seemed too slow, but I decided to check out Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee 2 after enjoying Hot Shots Tennis: Get a Grip.

In Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee 2, you play golf across several different courses, competing in various tournaments and even against yourself as you try to improve – all typical golf stuff. The “Hot Shots” part adds in zany characters, gear, and an RPG system.

You start the game with two novice level characters, but as you win more tournaments, you eventually unlock seven more characters to use. On top of that, an additional 9 characters can be discovered on the various golf courses. So for example, if you’re on Hole 7 of Golf Course X, you may suddenly see someone sleeping by a tree or something. If you zoom up to him, you will “unlock” him and he will join your team. Items are the same way – you can find hidden items like afros, clothing, accessories like dogs, cars, and planes – either on the golf courses themselves or as rewards for winning tournaments. The ability to unlock and play as so many different characters and equip them with funny attire such as a Santa beard and a samurai outfit just adds another level of entertainment to the game. It’s almost like the whole hat craze for Team Fortress 2.

Finally, there’s also an RPG leveling system where the more you use a character, the more that individual levels up. Leveling up unlocks additional abilities for the character such as more powerful hits and more precision shots. The completionist in me now has to not only try to unlock and max out every character, but hunt for the various equipment and accessories for them too. It’s a game that definitely held my interest for months.

Here’s how much I enjoyed Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee 2. I think Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee 2 is probably the game I would keep in my PSP if I could only have one forever. After all, I’ve already been playing it for over two months now. The amount of enjoyment and the ability to keep challenging courses to try to do better just keeps on giving. I liked the game so much I went out and bought Hot Shots Golf for PS3. On top of that, I now tell people I would love to learn how to play golf, but just don’t have the kind of time to play it since there’s so much downtime between each hit. And why bother learning to play for real when I can get my golf fix by playing an entire 18-hole course in less than an hour with Hot Shots Golf?

Final Grade: A

Hot Shots Tennis: Get a Grip gives tennis the Hot Shots treatment, but does it work?

Hot Shots Tennis: Get a Grip
Like Hot Shots Golf, the Hot Shots team has decided to inject the collecting of accessories and characters as well as the RPG elements of the Hot Shots brand into the sport of tennis. In Hot Shots Tennis: Get  Grip, your tennis team travels the world and takes on opponents in both singles and doubles matches. Beating these opponents unlocks money that you can use to buy new accessories to equip your character with. The more you use any of the characters, the more their experience level grows which unlock more advanced abilities.

The quest idea actually reminds me a lot of Pokemon & shonen anime such as Hikaru No Go. You basically walk around a stage and go up to another person and challenge them to play tennis. Do that for every character on the stage basically and then you get to take on the “boss” of that stage. Beat him or her and they join your team as a selectable character in future matches. It works, but it can also seem very childish in comparison to the quest modes seen in other tennis games like Top Spin.

As someone that enjoys the real life sport of tennis more than golf, Hot Shots Tennis: Get a Grip was the first game that introduced me to the Hot Shots franchise. I enjoyed the game for its tennis, but now that I’ve beaten it and also played through Hot Shots Golf, I have to admit that Hot Shots Tennis: Get a Grip, while enjoyable, simply isn’t as good as Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee 2.

The biggest negative about Hot Shots Tennis: Get a Grip may specifically be more a negative for tennis games in general when compared to golf games. After playing against dozens of different opponents in Get a Grip, I felt like there simply wasn’t enough variety in the gameplay even though the single player campaign itself was quite long. I was just hitting winners left and right or lobs and dropshots every match and that basically constituted the entire game. The locale never really mattered, the players I played against never really mattered, and yet in Hot Shots Golf, I was playing on various golf courses where the locale did make the courses more interesting and I enjoyed simply competing against myself. At the end of the day, the Hot Shots formula does add some fun to the game of tennis, but maybe video game tennis just can’t beat video game golf? Regardless, if you’re a tennis game fan, Hot Shots Tennis: Get a Grip is definitely worth checking out, but if you’re considering it as a Hot Shots Golf fan, keep in mind that it probably won’t be as fun.

Final Grade: B