Resident Evil 5 Taking a Step Back?

Kube00 Says: I finally got a chance to play the Resident Evil 5 demo for the Playstation 3. I gotta ask myself, “Is the game going backwards? Is Capcom focusing too much on co-op play to try to make more money while isolating its dedicated fans?”

Originally, the game was made for you to play it at night—in the pitch black—surrounded by the moaning and shuffling of hungry zombies seeking your flesh. I literary screamed like a girl many times when playing this game when I was younger. The series is known for missing the run-and-gun along with complex puzzles, and find-the-piece and take it here quests. The non-existent run-and-gun creates a tense atmosphere, as you have to find a place to stop and shoot the encroaching enemies, making every shot count as they keep coming. If you want a run-and-gun semi-horror go play the one shot wonder, Dead Space.

I’ve played all of the Resident Evil games including Survivor, Dead Aim, and Outbreak; three games that even the most hard core fan has a hard time swallowing. Honestly, who uses a light gun to move a character? Some of my favorites have included Umbrella Chronicles and Resident Evil 3. By far the best Resident Evil is Resident Evil 4 (RE4), even though it moved away from the traditional zombies, it still kept the same story idea involving a twisting plot with characters of the past such as Ada Wong and Albert Wesker. Old fans and new fans alike hailed RE4 as a step in the right direction for the series, the inventory system was still the same, but players could upgrade the weapons throughout the game.

Now, here is Resident Evil 5. It takes place in Africa, and the zombies are now similar to ganados. According to the wiki, the game is about the origin of the virus and Albert Wesker makes an appearance. Chris Redfield, the protagonist of Resident Evil 1 and Code Veronica, is the main character, who is accompanied by Sheva Alomar. The game is supposed to take place after Resident Evil 4. The Mercenaries mini game, similar to the one in Resident Evil 4, is returning; which is one of the best parts of the game.

There are some big changes in store for fans, and I’m sure you’ve heard about a few of them. The inventory screen does not make the game pause, making shuffling weapons and using health a frantic game of trying not to die while equipping grenades. There is a big focus on co-op game play, as the main game can be played offline or online, with or without a human companion. If you are playing online, I hope both of you have mics, since there is little communication without them; just hand gestures and Chris telling me to move forward. Anyways, Sheva can be given limited direction similar to RE4’s Ashley, yet she’ll have more options to assist you in combat. Hopefully, she doesn’t get stuck in doors and blast through entire hand gun clips like in Outbreak, that game had some of the worst NPC’s ever. I’m going to guess the game has simple switch puzzles, most of them making use of the co-op, and as a whole the series is continuing to move away from the complicated key and item finds of the original games.

But what about playing it alone? Isn’t that what the series is known for? A game that scares the crap out of you because you are alone in your parents’ basement with the lights off and an empty bowl of ice cream and several cans of Mt Dew next to you. And what happened to the plot twists and quirky puzzle? I guess gamers of today’s generation crave action games. And since most consoles are no longer meant to linger as a solo player’s weapon, things change much. So along with Gears of War, and Halo, Resident Evil slowly drifts towards change. It will be an interesting final product.

For all of you who have played the Demo, what did you think? What’s the good? What’s the bad? Are you worried about the final product?

The Year in Review and Game(s) of the Year

The Goozex Report launched in late August of this year. The blog started with me writing posts about not wanting to pay for video games to an audience of maybe a dozen readers (if I was lucky). After some time, The Goozex Report caught the eye of Goozex, Inc., and is now listed on their Supporters page. A Goozex member even contributed a logo and some artwork. As time went on, The Goozex Report started attracting fellow gamer-writers. We now have six contributors who volunteer their time writing brilliant articles. We’ve also made some great new friends with game sites of their own and we owe a lot of our success to them!

Since August, The Goozex Report was featured on the front page of N4G dozens of times, other blogs and forums have posted links to our articles, and we can proudly say we’ve had over 40,000 visitors in four months time from 127 different countries. We realize that some game sites get that kind of traffic in just a few hours, but we’re still new and still growing. We just might continue on through 2009. After all, where else are you going to learn when Gears of War 2 starts dropping in value?

As for gaming in 2008, it wasn’t a bright year for unique and new titles. Using Metacritic as a scale, of the top 10 highest rated games, only two Xbox 360 titles were not sequels. And only three of the top 10 PS3 games were not sequels. Kudos to Sony for LittleBigPlanet: a unique and original game that received positive reviews. On the other hand, while Left 4 Dead and Dead Space are receiving favorable reactions, they do not exactly represent unique genres or ideas; but at least the titles are not followed by a 2, a 3, or in the case of Grand Theft Auto, a 4.

Has the video game industry run out of ideas? Or are they following Hollywood’s lead and simply pumping cash cows? In any case, it does not speak highly for today’s creative talent. 2008 desperately missed 2007’s BioShock (yes, I realize that BioShock released on the PS3 in 2008). I’m really hoping that for 2009, the big publishers reach out to some new, independent developers who are creating unique, and dare I say—intelligent—games of the future.

The emphasis developers have placed on creating a great story has killed the focus on improving game mechanics, which seriously hampered the playability of such games as Brothers in Arms: Hell’s Highway. Can anyone out there please tell me what the heck the storyline in the cutscenes
had to do with the actual game play? I shook my head in disbelief at the end of that game. To regain some credibility, game developers really need to prioritize game mechanics first, story second, and graphics third.

In choosing a Game of the Year, several factors must be considered: game mechanics, graphics, sound, characters, single player campaigns, multiplayer online game play, and yes, story. What games of 2008 fully delivered? What fell flat?

When I was first asked what my GOTY pick was, my gut reaction was to say, “Call of Duty 4.” (Before you start screaming, I fully realize the game released in 2007.) That’s the game I played and had the most fun with for the majority of the year. It certainly trumped Halo 3 in my opinion. As for a 2008 release, Grand Theft Auto IV certainly did not live up to the hype. If that game starts winning GOTY nods from around the web, I’m gonna puke, a lot. Over and over. Lots of puke.

With that said, as a devoted Goozex member, I’ve only played eight 2008 releases (I’m still waiting for GoW 2, Fallout 3, Fable II, CoD: WaW, Dead Space, and several others to show up in my mailbox). And only one of the eight games that I’ve played is in the Top 10 (yeah, GTA IV). Of the 2008 games I’ve played (GRiD, Soulcalibur IV, Madden NFL 09, Battlefield: Bad Company, Brothers in Arms: Hell’s Highway, Viking: Battle for Asgard, and Mercenaries 2), the only game I’d want to revisit and finish is Mercs 2. Does that make Mercs 2 my GOTY? No. Not really.

So, what is my GOTY pick? Judging by the game that I played the most, and had the most fun playing, I’d still pick CoD4 as the reigning champ two years running. Maybe my pick for 2009 will be GoW 2 or Fallout 3.

Maybe, just maybe, Goozex fans have to stretch the calendar year when deciding GOTY. After all, you can’t really pick a game until you’ve played them all.

For those of you feeling let down that I did not pick a true GOTY, here’s MrWeymes, who has a
solid lock on his PS3 pick. After you read his review, Grundy the Man has a solid lock on his pick for the Xbox 360.

The Goozex Report PS3 Game of the Year
Andrew Weymes (MrWeymes) Says: With 2008 coming to a close, it's time to reflect upon an excellent year in the video game industry. There are so many games eligible for Game of the Year that it's almost too difficult to choose. Every genre, for every kind of gamer, had a few excellent games to play over the past year.

However, every excellent game has its shortcomings. For instance, Metal Gear Solid 4 has an amazing single player experience, with a slightly above average multiplayer component; while Left 4 Dead is an absolute joy online but lacks an enthralling single player experience. There were so many excellent games this year, each with their own flaws, it is hard to compare them
directly with one another. Of course, Game of the Year should come down to a few questions. Which game will you remember long past the year it was named Game of the Year? Which game will still be better than the majority of games in upcoming years? Finally, which game figuratively made your jaw hit the floor?

That game (for me) is the Playstation 3 exclusive, Metal Gear Solid 4. Whether you are a fan of the stealth/action genre or not, there is no denying the beauty of Metal Gear Solid 4. For those unfamiliar with Solid Snake, and the rest of the Metal Gear Solid universe, the story may be a bit confusing, but with the help of the Metal Gear Solid 4 Database available for download on PSN, people new to the series can follow the story with relative ease.

The cutscenes that bring this excellent story to life are easily the best of all time. They help immerse you in the experience, because as soon as the cutscene ends, and the gameplay begins, everything looks the same: excellent. The cutscenes would mean nothing if the gameplay wasn't as amazing as the story, but that is simply not the case.

The gameplay is tense, addictive, and simply fun. Apart from a few key scenes, you can approach the game in a number of ways. For example, you can kill every soldier in the area in a very blunt manner, such as shooting them all in the head with a pistol. In that same area, you can find a way to proceed without killing one soldier. Finally, in that exact same area, you could kill a few soldiers, hide until they are no longer looking for you, and proceed through the rest of the area stealthily. That's what puts Metal Gear Solid 4's replayability through the ceiling. You can play it as a pure action game, or a pure stealth game, or a mix of both.

The chase scenes are among the best of all time. One chase scene in particular is probably the most memorable gaming segment of the year.

In addition to everything mentioned above are some excellent, and memorable, boss fights. Bosses are totally unique and it may take you a few minutes to figure out how to kill them. As fun as it would be to describe each boss battle in detail, The Goozex Report doesn't believe in spoilers, therefore this will be a spoiler-free article. What can be said is that there are definitely some "what the expletive" moments in some of the boss fights, making them very memorable.

That pretty much covers the single player aspect of Metal Gear Solid 4. With, or without multiplayer, Metal Gear Solid 4 is Game of the Year. Single player gaming is the essence of video games, and without a doubt, Metal Gear Solid 4 had the best single player experience of the year. However, Metal Gear Solid 4 did come with Metal Gear Online on the same disk. Metal Gear Online is a separate game, so it shouldn't affect the score of Metal Gear Solid 4 in a negative, or positive way. That's not to say that Metal Gear Online is bad. For fans of the stealthier portions of Metal Gear Solid 4, Metal Gear Online probably won't disappoint. It's multiplayer isn't comparable to the likes of Gears of War 2, or Resistance 2. It's more of a slow pace. Many of the players of Metal Gear Online will quick snipe you if you are too out in the open, or if you are taking cover in obvious places. The multiplayer is very competitive, and will probably turn off more casual players.

To summarize, there is no other game more worthy of Game of the Year than Metal Gear Solid 4. The story is too compelling, the cutscenes are too well done, and the gameplay is too enjoyable for any other game to win this year. Metal Gear Solid 4 didn't need to include Metal Gear Online on the same disk to win Game of the Year. It would have won regardless, but the inclusion just means that you are getting an even better deal. 2008 was an excellent year for video games, and while there were many games considered for Game of the Year, The Goozex Report felt that Metal Gear Solid 4 deserved it the most for the PS3.

The Goozex Report Xbox 360 Game of the Year
Grundy the Man Says:
My Top 5 List

5. Super Smash Brothers Melee (Wii)

4. Mega Man 9 (WiiWare)

3. Braid (XBLA)

2. Left 4 Dead (PC)

1. Fallout 3 (Xbox 360)

This year, many stellar games were released. I was hard pressed to shorten my list down to a top 5, but I did my best. It was almost a dead heat between Left 4 Dead on PC and Fallout 3 on the Xbox 360. In the end it came down to the immersive nature of Fallout 3’s storyline that gave it the winning edge.

Fallout 3 is the kind of RPG that Bethesda prides themselves on making. They resuscitated a franchise that was in stasis for over a decade and managed to make it more vibrant and alive than its predecessors. Not to say that it replaces the classic Fallout games, but it is very much a worthy heir to the throne of Vault 101.

A barren wasteland isolates the player in the middle of nowhere, with very little handholding. You are left to comb the wasteland in search of items, friends, and storyline. Bethesda even took huge risks by writing a branching story that is monumentally influenced by key decisions throughout the course of the game. One choice can wipe out an entire city worth of story progression and questing. That is the very definition of ‘ballsy’ and makes this one of the most amazing games of 2008.

With over 30 hours in and many more to come, I couldn’t imagine a title being more worthy of Game of the Year.

Monmin Says: The only 2008 games I've played are Left 4 Dead, Viking: Battle for Asgard, Viva Pinata: Trouble In Paradise, and GTA IV. That excludes a lot of major releases this year, but anyway, my game of the year is: Left 4 Dead.

Kube00 Says: Okay I would say my top picks are:

Metal Gear Solid 4—It has so much to offer, a great story with amazing cutscenes, it’s a PS3 exclusive, and has great multiplayer.

GTA IV—It re-invented the series. The game itself is long, at least 40 hours; and the multiplayer, although not too deep, is fun for quick games.

Editor's Note: Yeah, Kube00 just made me puke. But we still like him and look forward to reading more of his articles.

Multiplayer or Single Player?

Andrew Weymes (aka MrWeymes) Says: The Playstation 2, Xbox, and Gamecube era was primarily focused on single player gaming. Of course, Socom and Halo had many online players, but the majority of gamers were still playing games for the single player experience. However, it is apparent that multiplayer gaming is on the rise over the past few years and much has changed within the current generation.

Many games that have a solid single player experience—but no multiplayer—are often slammed for this alleged short coming; and even have points deducted in their review on gaming websites. An example of this is Uncharted: Drake's Fortune. While Uncharted didn't receive terrible scores, the inclusion of a multiplayer experience akin to Gears of War would probably have helped.

There are many gamers who don't enjoy multiplayer, and are concerned with this growing trend in the industry. Single player campaigns are getting shorter and shorter. While the quality of the campaigns is high, it's hard for a single player gamer to spend $60 on a six-hour experience; especially when developers focus their efforts on making the online run smoothly, having a good amount of maps, as well as weapons, and having a good selection of game modes. It's almost as if the single player experience has become secondary, which is backwards compared to previous consoles. Treyarch provided a prime example of this trend by releasing a Beta version of the multiplayer for Call of Duty: World at War as compared to a demo of the single player.

This generation is also seeing a rise in multiplayer-only games such as Warhawk, Socom: Confrontation, and to a lesser extent Left 4 Dead. While you can play Left 4 Dead by yourself, it's clearly made for cooperative play. If games like this become top games in the industry, developers will start to look at single player games differently. There is no sense in making an epic single player experience if it's not going to played by 1/3 as many people as this months multiplayer game.

There are pros to playing single player games, as well as multiplayer games.

Single Player Pros:

• Storylines can draw you in, and make you feel for the character.
• A good amount of single player games have a solid frame rate throughout the game.
• Texturing and lighting effects are always better in single player campaigns.
• Scripted moments that are shocking during your first playthrough.
• The feeling of beating a boss by yourself.
• Exploration.
• A good soundtrack.
  

Multiplayer Pros:

• Playing with people you know is usually fun. For people that live far way from each other, it's nice to socialize again.
• If there is no lag, competing fairly against people from all around the world, or just competing against your friends can be thrilling.
• Talking to real people during cooperative gaming brings a new level of strategy to the table when compared to AI team members.
• Replayability. Many people only play the single player experience of a game once. Multiplayer gives you a lot more hours for the money you spent on a game.
• Winning. It's always fun to beat someone else.
  

It's obvious that multiplayer is now a vital part of the video game industry. If you were to ask the average male, age 10-25 what Call of Duty is, he would probably know the answer, regardless of whether or not he plays that particular game, or video games in general. If you were to ask that same man what Lost Odyssey is, or Dead Space, or Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, he probably wouldn't know. The question is, what do gamers that spend their days playing video games, and talking about them on message boards think? Which kind of games brings you more satisfaction, single player or multiplayer? Which is more fun to play? Most importantly, where is the video game industry heading? Will single player campaigns become secondary to their multiplayer? Have they already?