Blog Posts from "MacabreDerek's blog"

3D Realms: Stuck in a Time Warp

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 10:34:42 -0500

Hello there friends,

It's been a while since I have written a new piece of work, but I really had to get this one out of my system. It has to do with a recent post on Kotaku.com.

http://kotaku.com/5434679/3d-realms-ceo-vows-duke-nukem-resurgence-in-next-few-years

Now, for the lazy reader I'll break it down for you. Scott Miller (Co-Founder of 3D Realms) is trying to assure the public that there will be a Duke Nukem Forever, and alot of smaller Duke games coming out, including a trilogy on DS and PSP.

I think it well past time we put Duke down, preferably behind the shed next to Old-Yeller. It's not that I think 3D Realms is incapable of making a good game, but in truth there is no anticipation from anyone who was a fan and no new fans are coming in. In order for the game to do well, it has to bring about something very unique and interesting.

Unfortunetly, so much time, money, tallent, and people have been wasted on the Duke Nukem Forever project that I really cant see any game coming out under the title to be anything but a brown and grey high-rez smeer across the screen.

Look Scott, you guys did very well earlier with the Duke games, it's definetly a notch on 3D Realm's belt no one will take away, but as a fan, I say move on. The teams you create to make these games are going to waste, the money you're using to milk your once prized cash cow is costing you more than you'll probably recieve at this point, and truthfully, do you think Duke still maintain's any of his former traits without becoming a true parody of himself? Heck, we already got Matt Hazard (EAT LEAD!) for that, and he does a pretty good job of it.

We're at a point now where the sequels are overlapping the new content, but it's quite clear because of this, any new IP that was done at least compidently tends to earn enough cash to validate a sequel.

On that note readers, KANE & LYNCH 2: DOG DAYS *****EZ!!!!

er...

Yea, had to get that out of my system.

...

Until Next Time,

- MacabreDer~Scampers out the window~

Final Fantasy 7: I missed you.

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:37:28 -0400

Hello there friends, This is one of those cases where I am forgoing my usual attempt at insight into games and development to simply express the sheer joy I am feeling right now. If you've been following my blog, you know that last month I picked up a PS3. Well, this month rather than pick up a new game I decided to look over the PSN Store to see what's available for download. Then my eyes met the most beautiful set of pixels I've seen in a long time: Final Fantasy 7. Quick blurb, FF7 is what made me decide to go after video games as a career choice. On my original PS1 I actually ran out the clock that keeps track of your game hours if that's any indication how much I loved this game(Thank you Gold Saucer and Materia Tweaking). Along with that I picked up Wild Arms, Wild Arms 2, Metal Gear Solid, and Final Fantasy Tactics. Literally enough game to fill my free time for the next three months. So I get to playing the game, and it starts sinking in. The fun I missed for so many years, and a spark most recent jRPGs have not been able to rekindle. It's a magical moment, it's a fun time, it's becoming a kid again, it's.... 7am and I've been playing for 16 hours straight. I am not sure if I should be proud of the mini-marathon or embarrassed that I almost missed work just by loosing track of time. (If it wasnt for a room mate waking up and going to work I would have never guessed what time it was and probably kept on playing). One thing I found is I changed how I use Materia (Little stones you can socket into weapons and armour that determine your characters abilities and magic) to tweak stats. Now that I am older, and have a lot of puzzle-solving background developed, Materia has taken on a whole new light. One of the early game materia that I've grown to love but never used was Cover. Particularly on early-game Barret. Barret sitting in the back of the party takes only partial damage, has the most HP per level, and doesnt have a damage penalty for attacking from the rear. Little things like this I skipped in favour of packing everyone with Magic-All setups. I also missed out on using Tifa in my party, particularly for her Limit Break which does almost double the damage of every other early-game limit break. I'm sorry I neglected you the first time around Tifa T_T. Seriously, the amount of sheer Damage per Second Tifa brings to the party is an early-game absurdity. On a closing note, I am glad to have missed some of the large and small subtleties of the early game. I heavily used leveled up materia but didnt have much of an appreciation for some of the early game materia. I am actually thinking I should ignore Knights Of The Round materia if only so I dont have a one-cast KO spell, which in hind-sight I think ruined some of the end game for me. After all, after you seen KotR cast for the millionth time, you can only think 'I could have beaten the game all over again with the amount of time wasted watching this 2 minute cinematic'. Ofcourse, we're still going to be a Chocobo in-Breeder Until next time, - MacabreDerek

Low Poly Count: The Unsung Art of Game Graphics

Tue, 29 Sep 2009 14:20:14 -0400

Hello there friends, I am going to take you down a bit of an introduction to myself, talk about the graphics in games today, and hopefully bring to light an unsung heroes of your gaming experience: The low-polygon 3D artists. For those of you who don't know who I am, or why it's relevant to the title, let me give you a quick introduction. My name is Derek Leduc, and I am an amateur 3D graphic artist and illustrator. I've always had a fascination with Games and as such have focused on carving myself a career. I've worked on a few indie games and films both as a 3D and concept artist. Yea, I know, compared to those talented people at Epic, I suck. It's ok, I will openly admit it lol. However, lately I've been focusing on low-poly (Polygon) art. Often times when someone talks about Graphics in a game, they talk about how much more texture resolution, how many polys they can push into a given scene, etc. But the key to most games is not how many polys they can put on a character, but in fact how many they can cut out. It's rare you find any object is used in a game only once. It's going to show up repeatedly, and it's up to the modeler to make sure these objects look good without taxing the system they are being run on. An obvious example is Real Time Strategy games. In Starcraft 2 you may run into a hundred or more Zerglings: Now, if we were only concerned with showing a single zergling in the game, even in an RTS, you'd probably give it a smoother shape by adding polies, but the wonderful artists at Blizzard know this is a unit who's going to be often 2-to-1 if not 3/4-to-1 in number for any other unit in the game, you're going to need to make it as efficant as possible. Now, admitedly, it's rare you'll get this close to one in the game, as with most RTS you have a bird's eye view of events, something this small runs into a few hickups. First off, you have to make sure you can tell what it is in a fire fight with hundreds of other units scrambling about and fighting. Now, yes you have colours and textures, but often those show what team it's on, not what it is. To know what it is, often you have to look at it's silouette. With such a low poly count, you're running the challenge of making it look as good as possible, without overtaxing the engine and system it's operating on. The Zergling does this wonderfully. Second of all, you cant start running into making this as detailed as possible with textures. More than polygons, textures (including Colour maps, normal maps, specular maps, etc) will start pushing your game engine harder. The more it has to work, the lower the preformance, so to save that, you are using very small textures. Now you cant give it mass amounts of detail, instead focusing on making it look as good as possible with broader detail. This can work for enviroments aswell. In Gears of War, you notice lamp posts, background buildings, wall textures, overgrowth of grass, etc are all repeated placements of the same object, yet still the game looks visually good for the grim future it portrays. I find all these elements literally make the game, yet get very little praise for the strong efficacy compared to the ability to see Marcus' stubble. It's somewhat disheartening, especially when you see how frequent these objects and creatures are used to be cover, eye-guides, cannon fodder, etc. Got a question for you guys: Next time you play halo, you ever consider how much harder it was to make the Grunt over a Hunter? Until next time, - MacabreDerek P.S: Currently working on a site revamp, which should be up in two weeks depending how much time I get to work on it, in case you were so inclined to actually go link hopping.

Halo Fans: An honest talk with the old guard.

Thu, 24 Sep 2009 11:30:54 -0400

Hello there friends, Let me get this off my chest. I am a Halo fan. I can see you guys reaching for the 'back' button already, so I am going to thank those of you who decided to stay and see where I am going with this in a time where ODST has clearly failed. If you browse the forums for a while, you're going to find the popular Halo-bash, claiming it's the most over-hyped pile to ever exit the warehouse. What you're not going to hear is someone actually willing to admit that at one time, running through The Covenant with an Assault Rifle and trying to decimate everything in sight within thirty seconds. However, like every FPS/Action that seemed to follow onto consoles, we're being over saturated by desaturated textures, gray and bleak backdrops, and your retooling of the standard pistol, shotgun, rifle, etc. There has been to my mind 5 FPSs I have enjoyed through and through, (Quake, Golden Eye, Halo: Combat Evolved, Bioshock, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare) but the more I see, the less I believe that we're going forward at all in the medium. It comes down to Money, specifically Yours. ODST will be a financial success, and that is entirely through brand name alone. I dare anyone to look through their collection, and be honest on how many games they own where truly innovative, be it in gameplay, story, visuals, concept, etc. Starting to see a pattern in your purchasing habits? What you get developed is going to be entirely dependent on what you have bought before. Sequels are always being pitched to a game that rakes in enough cash to justify milking it's fan-base one more time (Hence ODST and Reach). Your vote is with your dollar (Hell, I am still waiting for a Kane and Lynch 2 or Fragile Alliance stand alone game). To Halo fans like myself, who have not bought ODST, you already have the maps, give it a few months and you'll hardly hear about Fire Fight except through the inevitable Fire Fight Map Pack that will come out in a few months. If you are wanting Reach to turn out even a hair better than it's current production line was going to let it be, it's up to the guys who have been playing the series to tell Microsoft by the only voice they listen to, your wallet. It's not going to come from the new blood, it's going to come from the old guard. Lastly, I am going to tackle the whole 'Fanboy'ism thing just while we're here and I am sure I am gonna get a few comments about it. Yes, I am a fanboy. I think if you are stupid enough to buy into that idea makes my point of view some how less valid, grow up. No, seriously, grow up. To be a fan of something is simply meaning I am an enthusiast, I look forward to each release with the (Sometimes vain) hope that something new or better will come up. I loved how the Assault Rifle in Halo has evolved from iconic weapon, to dropped entirely, to returning as a main-stay for the series. I love the feeling of sticking someone with a plasma grenade or actually getting that 1/50 head-shot with a beam rifle. These are fun times. I look forward to see where the formula will be tweaked, and if it is or isn't a good thing in the long run. And that's what I am interested in here; The Long Run. Where will Halo as a series go? With such a large financial backing and being the apple of Microsofts eye, the direction lies with us, the fans. Until next time, - MacabreDerek

So I got the PS3 Slim...: First impressions of PS3 Slim, Batman: Arkham Asylum, Little Big Planet, and Killzone 2

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:39:16 -0400

Hello there friends, So I've been somewhat involved in going through the initial phase of gaining a PS3 Slim, I've had the pleasure of playing three games, two exclusives. I'll be discussing the system experience, the games I have played, and where I can, make the comparison from my years of XBox and XBox 360 experience. Well first off, yea, I wasn't really aware about the amount of noise my 360 makes until I ran the PS3 slim. Damn it's quiet. Also gripping the PS controller brought back memories of a happier time. Nostalgia kicked in, and all was awesome. Network and setup didn't take that long, and we're ready to roll. So after the setup phase, I looked over the three games available to me. Admittedly, I've been waiting for a long time to see Batman: Arkham Asylum come out, and buying the collectors edition set me back further than I originally planned, but some sacrifices into the grocery money need to be made, for being able to play the Clown Prince of Crime demands it! Arkham plays amazingly well. Jumping from the 360 demo to the PS3, it was amazing how easy the transition game. The game really only has two low points, but other than those (A record for most comic games I might add) we are blessed with easily the best Batman game to come out since Batman on the NES. Not to give anything away, let's just say the demo does not do this game justice. If there is any warning I have for 360 owners making the transition to PS3, you're going to find the X button. For you PS3 owners who never touched an XBox, the X button on a 360 is where the Square button is on the PS3 controller. Arkham requires quite a few spur of the moments where it asked for X, and I habitually pressed Square. Next on the list, the famed Little Big Planet. My first thought when the title screen opened was 'What the hell am I getting myself into?'. It wasn't until about the third scene (Wedding) that I found myself actually unwilling to part with the controller to answer the door for a pizza I ordered about an hour ago and forgot about. Then I made the biggest mistake of my life: I went to My Moon. After watching tutorials and messing around inside the level editor, I realized I've been goofing around for over 7 hours. I am not kidding when I say the only reason my attention came to the time was because the sun rise comes right into my living room, beaming onto the couch, predominantly into the eyes. So I got well rested after 3 hours sleep, and got back into it. Now, here's where I come across a difference of opinion with my room mate, as he's never really been into creation (He's a Halo 3 fan who has never touched Forge), so much as blowing things up. I am thinking it's unfortunate that he is in the majority because this kind of game is amazingly gripping and time consuming (Not to mention entertaining) experience. Hell, after I finish this write up I'll be back on My Moon just to finish a level I am working hard on to get published just to see people enjoy it. So, now I get to tell you about the last game I played before writing this. Well, I wouldn't be a 360 owner if I didn't have at least one First Person Shooter. It's almost as mandatory as owning a controller, so I just had to see what the PS3 could do with this game type. Enter Killzone 2. Never played the first Killzone, so I get an interesting With an opening involving one of the strongest speeches I've heard in most video games, I was ready. Two good games before this, and Killzone 2 was already showing to be a solid experience. Then the camera moved away and I find out we're going after this guy giving the speech on the monitor for whatever reason (Apparently these guys invaded 'our' planet in the first game). So for the first four chapters, we're finding ourselves in the same crap-brown and gun-metal location chapter after chapter, with only a few key set pieces and lighting changes to let us know some kind of time has passed. The reason I am writing this blog entry is because I had to put down Killzone. I might pick it up for later, but aside from finding some electrical shrapnel, there is no reason for me to press forward. No attachment to the characters in the game or the reason we're there in the first place. Yes, it looks very nice setting the usual colour scheme aside. Textures and visual set pieces are very unique, especially the weapons, but in the end I really have no reason to play this game that does not even entertain. Truthfully, I wish I was playing on the Helghast's side of this encounter, at least they have some degree of character on their side. And lastly, control scheme. To any other PS3 owner, are all the FPS controls using R1 to fire and L1 for melee? Again, 360 control has trained my hands for particular responses, but I'd like to know if Killzone's controls are typical for stuff like Resistance and other FPSs? Anyway, we'll close off here. Love the PS3, and 2/3 for good gaming expirences is always a plus. Gonna go back to Little Big Planet now. Until next time, - MacabreDerek

Changing Colours?: XBL addict looking into PS3.

Sun, 23 Aug 2009 01:04:14 -0400

Hello there friends, A lot has been happening this past few weeks. Particularly, the PS3 Slim and Price Drops for consoles. Now that my free-spending money has the chance to afford a PS3, I think it's about time to make that investment. I picked up XBox 360 on release, have been playing XBox since the original XBox (To the exclusion of owning a PS2). XBox provided what I was demanding at the time from consoles, good games, easy networking, online multiplayer. PS2 couldn't do that well, PS3 didnt have the social networking options of the 360, and Microsoft released their console first. Both didnt have any real compelling titles on release, but since 360 came first, that's where my doller went. However, consoles normal life-span has been more than doubled. Sony and Microsoft both see that it will take a lot longer before they actually require more powerful consoles, so the tool set for both are sufficient to warrant this 'extra life' as it were. Now PS3 is more accessible, we're not struggling to find launch titles worth buying because it has had years to develop it's library, the networking has improved substantially, it seems like an ideal time to buy. Now I am looking at the game library, trying to think what would be the best 'introduction' experience to the PS3. The games that have caught my eye: - Metal Gear Solid 4 - Little Big Planet - Uncharted: Drake's Fortune - Killzone 2 - Resistance - Resistance 2 MGS4 is tempting, but I have to confess I've played only MGS3 through, so for such a heavy-story game I am not sure if it's accessible for people who haven't played the rest of the series. LBP I keep hearing as an unsung hero of PS3, and it allows people to flex creativity on consoles. Uncharted is on because of the hype I hear of Uncharted 2, and I'd like to play the predecessor before trying the sequel when it's an option. Killzone and Resistance seem to be the big shooters for PS3, though I am not sure which is probably the stronger single/multiplayer. Primarily my 360 is there for multiplayer, the PS3 will be there for single-player focus games, blu ray, and exclusives. I am wondering if other 360 owners are in the same position, PS3 owners wanting to give their suggestions for first-pick titles, etc. Until next time, - MacabreDerek

The Second Chance: Bad Games or Withheld Potential?

Thu, 20 Aug 2009 12:11:23 -0400

Hello there friends, Recently I've been looking at a lot of the games I seen released a few years back, and I have this inkling to play the 'What If..' game. The particular apple of this conversation is Kane and Lynch: Dead Men. Kane and Lynch was by 90% of reviews, a bad if not horrible game. It was short, the combat including cover and squad commanding was dodgy at best, suicide at worst, the aiming felt very ridged, graphics look just shy of original XBox... You get the point. However, the concept has always held a place in my heart. You have two guys, one a medicated hallucinating schizophrenic, the other a materialistic sociopath with a death wish, who dispite being divorced and separated from his wife and daughter, still cares a great deal for them. To make it interesting, the dynamic between the two is built around their mutual survival, though they want nothing more than to see the other one dead and they both know it. They need each other to get through the game. There is great potential for this to evolve into a kind of buddy movie gone horribly wrong. There is a co-op experience that cries out for this kind of game, and it's been a proven formula to work (Army of Two, Resident Evil 5). There is also a tragedy in the Multiplayer game for Kane and Lynch called Fragile Alliance. For those who havent played it, I'll see if I can give you the run-down: You and a group of friends play as mercenaries trying to pull a robbery (Bank, Jewel Store, Coke Deal, etc). The cash at the end of each round is divided among the surviving participants who make it to the escape vehicle at the end. The person with the most money at the end wins. Here's the catch: If you have alot of money you dont want to share, all you have to do is kill one of the other players. This marks you as a traitor, leaves a marker that anyone can use to find you, and anyone who kills a traitor earns themselves a nice bonus. If you die, you spawn as a police officer and you can earn a percentage of the money you pick up off the mercs, and earn even more for killing the traitor that got you. What you have here is a game where you all know you cant get through this without each other, but you cant play it fair to the end and expect to win. You have to find a way to make sure you come out on top, and this requires a lot more finesse than you may think. You're on XBL, and you have messages, private chats, parties, and the game chat to try and make alliances. However, adhering to those alliances the whole way through wont net you first place. Your partner IS going to betray you, especially if he's in second (Or even first, depending on the dollar difference). It's a game that forces you to play on paranoia of other player's decisions. You're not gonna wait for someone to shoot you in the back, you're gonna kill them first to save your money and position, but doing so marks YOU as the traitor. I remember one game where I was promised second place as I was already dead and now a cop. He would give me half of what he picked up, raising me from 3rd to 2nd, letting him walk with the cash to take 1st from 2nd. What he wasnt ready for was me popping him off from a distance as he got to the van to get out, and me picking up the cash to leave myself in 2nd, but him becoming a new 3rd place, receiving no cash for the round. You can bribe players playing as cops, but they are just as crooked as you. Now, with this potential for an interesting co-op expirence, one of the most unique multiplayer game types I've ever played, and a bad game to learn the mistakes of the past, I guess I am curious if a sequel should come out, is it worth looking into? Kane and Lynch 2: Dog Days has been announced some time ago, but then fell off the map. My worry is they've committed the same mistakes, or even made a worse game than the first, burying this potential even further. I am sure if we all look back at some of the games we played, there is that potential that we can unfortunately say will never be realized. This however, is one of those situation where the potential is in limbo. Until next time, - Macabre Derek

Women's MMA

Thu, 06 Aug 2009 20:52:29 -0400

Hello there friends, It's rare I do a blog outside of the realm of competitive gaming or video game discussion, but I felt the compulsion to write about a recent discussion: Women in Mixed Martial Arts competition. With companies like the Ultimate Fighting Championship gaining more and more exposure to mainstream TV, it's not too much of a wonder that this primarily male dominated combat sport would develop a female counter part. I can understand a lot of objections that would stem from the idea of a female MMA circuit. Violence and Women in the same sentence becomes a political nightmare. I also know the competition is significantly less, not in talent, but in sheer number of competitors. The interest isn't there for main stream exposure, and we're still in disputes about the dangers of MMA as a whole. However, I can not help but respect the women who do participate in MMA. I doubt any of them are under any delusions about their position among the sport, and it's almost sad that political taboo tends to stop this discussion (And in fact, some events). These personalities have a passion for it, and do it because they love it. Little fame or wealth, but still they fight. But it's not like there is no presidence for this. Hockey, Football, Boxing, and even Rugby, all contact sports, have developed a female counter part. My own view of it as a sport, like any other, needs regulation, rules, and the competitors need to know the risks involved. This is how it is in most sports. There are reasons the athletes in UFC are regarded as Athletes, because it does take training, discipline, and adaptation. You're not going to find many street fighters in MMA, because most Street Fighters are not athletes. They're tough-guys with a chip on their shoulder who know they're mostly bigger than 90% of the people they run into. Probably the only thing going for Women's MMA is that they dont have to put up with street fighters coming in to compete and making a mockery of the MMA sport. The competition is so small that they have to be good if only to get a pay day out of it (I certainly cant remember a women's MMA pay-per-view, do you?)... Until next time, - MacabreDerek

Comment Rebuttal: Uh oh, Macabre's got his Scalpel again...

Wed, 05 Aug 2009 23:52:12 -0400

Hello there friends, This is a rebuttal to a comment I got in my first blog post. I'll withhold the name of the poster, if you feel the need to find them it's not particularly difficult, just understand this is me going after the post itself, the ideas, not the person. Now that we got the waver nonsense out of the way, let's get to it: The Comment in Question: To meet people, make friends, and socialize? That doesn't make any sense at all. To socialize you have to be in the same room. To make friends you have to meet them in real life. Online isn't real. And about the above comment about the Olympics. Sports are totaly different. Sports are real, games are fantasy. The original comment was made when someone asked why anyone would want to play against strangers in my blog 'Competition: You're only as good as your best opponent'. He is not a multiplayer fan, which I can understand. Not everyone has fun running around on Call Of Duty popping heads off. My reply how ever brought about this little gem. To start, I am an avid believer in this 'Global Village'. Cant say it's an original thought of mine, but in concept I agree with it whole heartedly. It's an interesting phenomena of the internet, where people all around the world gather ideas and discussion, and you'll find they tend to network with people of similar interests, with distance and boarders rarely becoming relevant. Pockets of people joining in on even the smallest things. This everyone knows in some way or another, but then we have to ask; Is it real? Well, let me tell you of my own experience in the past 6 months. I am working as a level designer and beta tester for the indy game Clones. I got this job via e-mail, as an offer sent to me by a guy who knows me by e-mail and videos of my work. My paychecks are sent online to my bank, I never get a check or dime in my hand, much like most of the commerce in North America. I am working on a comic I am hoping to get ready for a local comic-con, the script and support artists are all people I met over XBox Live! and I've had the pleasure of working with for years now. I am sure I can go on, but this is a good three points. I am gaining actual employment with no more contact than a final interview, I am living on money that has no real-world counterpart save for anything I purchase, and I am engaged in the exchange of ideas and discussion creating a digital story telling medium that can be shared and experienced by anyone with so much as a click. Now, if none of this is real, I am: Jobless, broke, probably homeless, and not engaged in one of the most exciting projects of my so far young and inexperienced life. I think I like the electronic socialization better. By the way: The Olympics are nothing more than games played in the physical. The only thing that's different between a game in the Olympics and the one on your computer or console is the rules and interactions are electronic. A game is nothing but an objective and a set of rules. I am going to leave this now with some words from Robert Anton Wilson, from a compilation video of his writings and speeches (Who is the master who makes the grass green? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY5r_zox-a "In the end of the valley of decision there is always choice. Reality is what you can get away with. If you cant get away with it, it ain't real." Until next time friends, - MacabreDerek

Some thoughts on Balance: Blazblue Day 1

Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:04:23 -0400

Hello there friends, Initially this was going to be a rant about Canadians getting the short end of the stick when it comes to the release of Blazblue, but after soaking my head and finally obtaining my copy, I thought I'd put my frustration to something a little more productive (As far as rants go). For those of you who play BlazBlue, there is a minimalist focus on the game where it decided quality over quantity, a rare find these days. It host 12 unique characters, and when I say unique, I mean in every sense of the word. Well, the character I've decided to pick up was Carl Clover, a boy with a tophat and a mean Automaton of a sister. You basically have to be consciously playing two characters at once, which already adds to the character's difficult learning curb. So I am told he was bottom tier, one of the worst characters in the game. Well, I made my fighting career on mid-tier characters, so dropping to low tier is no where near as crippling as some players who's character selection is based on said list. But then I receive an interesting note about a new tier list, and Clover jumped. I dont mean one or two spaces, I mean JUMPED, from almost (if not definitive) last up to #5 of 12. You see the controversy comes from one thing Carl has gained, which is an infinite, unblockable throw-loop. Here's a demonstration: The basics of this loop is you cannot block a throw, and the 'Clap' the doll does cannot be blocked. If you 'tech' the throw (Break the throw before it does any damage) you are caught in the Clap and Carl gets another free combo and back into the loop you go. So here's where the cries start. What you see clean as day is Carl has a win-condition that gives him a fighting chance no matter how badly he may be injured. He has a way to make every players worst fears come to life, a way to take the win if you so much as drop your guard for a moment. Here's the problem though. Before this, Carl was played by maybe a handful of players in the WORLD. He just wasn't viable once you got down to the game in higher level play. No health to speak of, easy to guard crush, stupidly hard to control, impractical combos which are reliant on his Doll's position, dependency of sandwiching the player between himself and/or the doll/corner. It was a unique character to be sure, but unlike the other 11 characters available, Carl was always going to be an uphill battle without any rest available. Typically, players will find a character that they increase their chances of winning with using the least amount of effort. If they need to learn one or two tricks or difficult situations, solong as the over-all effort is minimalized for the duration of the fight, you'll probably enjoy the game more and find the wins will come. Carl however, is very much a labor of love. You have to love this character to use him, because nothing about him is easy. His combos without the doll are barely a scratch, he has no zoning or pressure game without the doll, and his range, priority, guard and health are pathetic. He is reliant on his Doll to actually win, and controlling that on it's own is hard enough. Executing comboes with him is also difficult, because of a lack of consistancy. Most Carl players have set ups to teleport their doll back into a favorable position just to attempt a combo/chip/clap-trap, but never have the guarentee. The trap itself is difficult enough to hold on through a whole 100% kill as the timing is rediculous (Again, two characters at once) and many characters on the roster have an escape, though some slimer than others. So here's the question: Is Carl broken? Obviously from my point of view, I am bias to say No. The problem is consistency. Alot of characters on the roster are just more consistant, have alot more advantages to press on with, and may even be immune to Carl Clover's games. What it does do, is make a character who no one felt they had a chance to win with, suddenly have a burst of newcomers who now know it's not only possible to win with this low-tier jumped mid-teir saviour, but that suddenly every character has a solid chance of coming out the victor. I personally cannot do the aply dubbed 'Clap-trap', heck I can barely do some of Carl's sandwich combos or juggles, and I've been playing fighters for years. What I can do, is see the fun I had with characters like Urien (SF3:3S), Vice (CvS2) and I-No (Guilty Gear XX) having an opprotunity to shine again. To be honest, for as much as I love SF4 (And I do love Street Fighter), it was missing out on so much of my own amusement that BlazBlue becomes a welcomed breath of fresh air, and Carl Clover brings a whole new bag of tricks I get to learn and master. So if you're ever playing BB online and you come across a Carl player, drop him a line, tip your hat to him, because for him to even fight you with that character is a testament to patience, practice, and discipline of that player. And if he catches you in the Clap Trap, what you may see is your own demise, but what you might want to remember is the weeks spent honing that setup and combo just to pull a victory from you. Until next time friends, - MacabreDerek Blazblue Day 1: http://screwattack.com/node/25542 Blazblue Day 2: http://screwattack.com/node/25597 Blazblue Day 3: http://screwattack.com/node/25702

The Value of Sparring Partners: Blazblue Day 2

Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:56:56 -0400

Hello there friends, If you havent seen the previous article, I'd suggest you read http://screwattack.com/node/25542 before this one. It's the second day working with the character Carl in BlazBlue. Things are coming along slowly but surely, getting a few story arcs cleared and playing a great number of Player Matches (Non-ranked Matches). Now, another friend who picked up BlazBlue today started the day off button mashing with a few characters and took a shine to Noel. Now once he started getting a feel for what he was doing, I was actually having more and more trouble keeping him at bay. Soon enough, in a day he caught up and surpassed me in wins. Be it just a bad match-up or my scrubish Carl skills, he was putting a big hurt on me where I couldn't even get close to him without eating a 5-10 hit combo. It's been frustrating to say the least, but I knew what I was getting into when I chose to main Carl. Didnt make the losses any easier for my over-inflated ego to take. So then enters a person I played last night. This guy is a Carl player, through and through, to the point of not even having a secondary character on record. When he started taking names and whoopin ass left right and center, I had to throw out 'bad matchup' as an excuse. Took me a while to swallow my pride, but when I asked him to help me out, he started working the holes in my pressure strings, mix-ups, and even general approach. I am very much a zoning Carl. Zoning, the act of keeping control of the field is often considered more difficult to do that most of the end-game comboes, because all of your damage is made by pokes and prods, and all it takes is a single slip-up to run into a combo that wil take enough life to match things up again. So while I am playing, this other Carl player is screaming at me to go on the attack. Well, Noel was beating me out on every attack earlier, so at first I questioned this wisdom, but sure enough when I did put the momentum in my favour, the matches were coming to me. Not fully, but the wins were back, and the game was building up to be more exciting. The thing once I started seeing my problems for what they were worth, one of the key points I found is I am often unable to use Nirvana (Carl's 'Sister') effectivly when she is behind me. I try to reposition, but the second my opponent thinks I may be trying to sandwhich him between the two, he finds some way to get out of it before it becomes a problem. I also dont have any real good combo that can threaten a higher level player, so just by damage for damage it's a loosing fight. I continue to discuss it with my current player base and the conversation about the value of training mode came up. Ahh, the good old training mode, underused by scrubs like me since it's inception. After a long play session, I dropped into Training mode. I've been playing with Carls bread-and-butter juggle between 2C and 8D (Direction on your number keypad and the button pressed), but found I often times had no way to actually get it started. 2C comes out too slow to punish anything, and for Carl to really lay down the hurt he needs to put someone between him and Nirvana. Then I discovered 4B+C (Back-throw). I had not really took the time to learn Cal's throws, but once I ran into this move, I began to think about how often Nirvana is behind me rather than on the opponent's back. This throw changed that in an instant. Suddenly, they were tossed back, bounced, and stuck on the ground for a brief piriod of time. I also then found 2D (Down D) had an over-head hammer fist that launched people from the ground into the air infront of Nirvana, which incidentally is where Carl is. This alows him to land 2C to send them back up into Nirvana's 8D, which is the combo I've been trying to find a way to land. There are a few details that make this harder than it sounds, mainly repositioning Carl as the 2D is landing so the next hits flow into one another. Suffice it to say, with one move I managed to solve my two major problems. I am currently practicing my only setup for that combo, and getting ready to set up for my next round tomorrow. It's this competition, even if it is among newer players to any game, that can force the best out of you as a competitor. I hope to be introducing this new addition to my arsenal as a personal thank you to the most frustraiting Noel player I know. Until next time friends, - MacabreDerek Blazblue Day 1: http://screwattack.com/node/25542 Blazblue Day 2: http://screwattack.com/node/25597 Blazblue Day 3: http://screwattack.com/node/25702

Bored of Competition kids?: Blazblue Day 3+4

Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:56:08 -0400

Hello there friends, To those who arnt in the know, I've been dedicating some of my spare time to playing a new fighting game called Blazblue on the 360. I've been writing thoughts on the game and my own personal experience developing my ability to play the undisputed difficult Carl Clover, a character who uses a Mechanical Doll (Nirvana, Puppet, Marionette, 'Sister', Ada, Nee-San, and probably a dozen other names it has I forgot, but all reference to this doll). The first article should be found here: http://screwattack.com/node/25542 It's interesting to watch a lot of the other newcomer players evolve. Some are still character-hunting for a main to pick up, some have been researching endlessly to find the next combo, strategy, match videos, etc. The player base is interesting enough, but as with any game involving choice, some options will be taken more than others. Most notably are the characters V-13 and Jin. V-13 will be the quickest cry of 'cheap' you'll hear from newcomers to fighting games, as she's a mix-up from long-range character. Very much a zoning character when you first pick her up, she doesnt make it easy to get in on her. The second is Jin. Jin plays probably the closest to Ryu/Ken from Street fighter in that he has projectiles, is good at most ranges, has alot of options, and is an easy learning curve. It probably helps that alot of his moves freeze his opponents in place, and his mashing-'C' is akin to E-Honda's (Street Fighter) Hundred Hand Slap. Now, the most consistent reaction I get when my opponents see Carl is often a sign of relief. See, like in most fighting game communities, a lot of players fight against the same character from multiple people, and start complaining about how that's all they play against. I find this a curious comment. I mean think about this: If you're playing against the same character frequently, this gives you tons more experience against that character, so now you're less likely to run into something that can take you by surprise. You know the match up, so you should know how to win the fight right? Well, that's not how they see it. They see such characters as cheap or boring. It's odd to find this and not be forced to learn about the character you are currently playing. One thing I've come a bit more reliant on is that Carl's Doll when active absorbs projectile hits. It's wierd like that, but it makes cases against Jin and V-13 easier. Would not be thinking about it like that if I was running into Tager players (A character who is like the bastard child of Potempkin from Guilty Gear and Magneto from X-Men). What I find odd is a lot of my losses are to training with friends who deal with my Carl on a daily basis, while most of my wins are against players who I hop into random matches with. So I get a little praise for playing someone different, the occasional 'Wow, someone plays Carl!?', and admittedly the fuzzy feeling in my stomach comes. Leaves pretty quick by the second round though. That's because of the follow-up reaction post-match. Generally, it's Carl's cheap! That's right kiddies, Carl is cheap, even in the hands of a scrub barely able to link pressure combos together at the best of times. Why? Well, apparently the fight is 2 on 1. (~Insert Facepalm~) Truth is, most people coming into this game online dont have enough matches against Carl to know what to be watching out for. His Doll Nirvana can just clock you in the back of the head because it was behind you off screen, push you towards Carl, and if you weren't paying attention, that moment could be when you loose the match. Now don't get me wrong, I can understand the need for that win after you're coming off a 20-something loosing streak. We've all been there, and I am not exactly reputed to be the calmest player when I am getting me teeth put to the back of my throat. Such is the nature of the game, someone wins, someone looses. So when I get the comedian in a match, I cant help but need to pull out all the stops. A Comedian to me is a person who does pick a character who's over-used, moans that he always runs into mirror matches, complains when other people use his character/combos/setups, but for some reason these personal issues are only restricted to other people, because it's perfectly legit for him to land a 20-something hit freeze combo, but if someone else does it to him, oh will we hear about it. One of the things I've been working on in my own training is to become a lot more aggressive. To do this, two mental-barriers I am in the midst of tearing down need to be gone for good. 1) Carl and his Doll dont affect eachother's inputs for the most part. This is a point most fighters I am sure will run into when playing Carl. Most Characters once you input a move, have to go through start-up frames, hit frames, and recovery frames. This means there is generally some delays between button presses (Miniscuel, but it's there). However, since Nirvana's moves come out no matter what Carl is currently doing, it requires a little bit of brain re-tooling to understand if Carl is doing something, you can still work Nirvana while you're waiting and vice versa. 2) Carl is lugging X-tons of Metallic Sister around to fight. Even with teleportation, Carl is not designed to stay on a person who's running away from you. Taokaka is an example of a character who's designed to travel quickly, and running away from Carl makes it very uncomfortable with Carl. Rather than chase after them, I am coming to the conclusions of slowly letting their running get them closer to the corner. This is standard in alot of fighters, but Carl is unique on the basis of him needing to plant Nirvana as an artificial barrier to stop them from running while Carl gets in closer. Since Nirvana's as slow as the arrival of the Titanic, it means alot of moving up, teleporting Big Sister, moving up, while trying to zone the playfield in a way that keeps the opponent going back and forcing them to run out of space. It's amusing to watch how some players will panic if you put them in a corner and watch them struggle once Carl and Nirvana start laying down the pressure. To those who are low on health, burst, but if you're still good for life, dont waste the burst. You're gonna need it incase a more advanced Carl decides to try and get you in the famous Clap-Trap (Explained in first article), so you can stop it before it starts. Until next time friends, - MacabreDerek Blazblue Day 1: http://screwattack.com/node/25542 Blazblue Day 2: http://screwattack.com/node/25597 Blazblue Day 3: http://screwattack.com/node/25702

Magic the Gathering: Duels of the... Failing?

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:33:21 -0400

Hello there friends, If you're anything like me, at some point you played a collectible card game called Magic The Gathering. You saw some twisted art, a complicated system that took a few lumps and bumps to learn, and once you get the swing of it, the game takes off almost as fast as the money leaving your pocket for the next booster pack. So when I hear that someone released Another Magic The Gathering game, my heart cringed as I remember the horrible Battlemage game for the original Playstation. Aside from the single release from Micropose back in the 90s, there has not been a Magic video game that has not felt like a bastardized child of the game I know and love (Who's collection is 70,000+ cards strong since 3rd edition). But now comes a gleaming light, Magic The Gathering: Duel of the Plainswalkers. The game runs smooth, works with a lot of cards I came to love as the game evolved, and has a number of decks that start off with a good foundation for newcomers. It's relatively easy to get into, works in surprising detail for all the rules that can overwhelm a new player are brought into simple the understand phases. The visuals are a nice take and the pace is casual enough for you to get by calmly thinking your next move. I was falling in love with the game all over again... So what happened? Part of the heart and soul of Magic is making your own decks. Yes, there are a lot of deck-lists out there, and that's fine for those of you who need the absolute best min-maxed deck according to someone's research and genius (Or even tournament results). But there are a great number of us who look at the cards available and think 'How can I make a deck out of this?'. Those people who enjoy building custom decks and seeing how they fair are the foundation of the game. Duels of the Plainswalkers however, has a limited editing system for the pre-built decks it has, and you are only really adding cards. To those of you who dont know how this is significant, let me explain: The rules of magic say your deck has to of a minimum card limit (60 cards). Good decks are built with some consistancy, tending to favour only 60 cards and no more, because they want to increase their chances of drawing the cards they may need later on. The more you add to a deck, the harder and harder it is to draw a decent hand. This is particularly bad if you need a particular spell soon, you may need to draw through more cards to get it. And to be frank: The cards that were chosen to be in this game aren't far broken, in fact they are all pretty standard cards. Even the best players and deck builders arnt making 2nd turn kill decks, so why limit us to playing pre-made decks which we can only make worse? One of the key reasons people play Magic as a product is to deck-build, so why would you decide that custom deck building should be at the bottom of your development? This is one of those games that I mourn for. There was so much promise, so much effort and some true possibilities of greatness (Especially for an arcade title). So why would the development team bite themselves like this is beyond my understanding. - MacabreDerek

Less is More: Get Rid of Map Packs

Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:27:23 -0400

Hello there friends, Recently I've gone through a lot of thinking through today's developers, often times seeing practices that I heavily disagree with in practical, professional, and personal level. One of these I'd care to discuss with you today. Let's put it right on the table, Map Packs: I hate them. Why? Every time I pick up a game intended for multi-player, something really odd happens. The community lets just a handful of maps bubble to the surface, and the rest being skipped over repeatedly. Stop and think about it for a moment, and you'll find this is true for most multiplayer games, especially in shooters (Gears of War, CoD and Halo being the worst offenders). For every map-pack I have actually purchased, I can probably claim one map being used consistantly, and the rest fall to the side. They just dont stack up well enough to the rest of the options me and the group I play with have at our disposal. This is a waste of my money, to gain one playable map in a pack of content. Where it's advertised 'X New Playable Maps!', I get one. This is a waste of the developers time (which is money) because they've put time into content that is rarely accessed and fairly lack-luster, rather than making the content that is OK into something truly magnificent. This hurts the company's reputation and thus sales. So why do they do it? This seems to be the big question, and I think it has to do with the constant wanting of 'More', from the developer, the consumer, and everyone else involved. Unfortunately this has brought about a very bad tendency to churn out maps and content that just isn't going to be used by the communities. This is where I'd like to bring up an example of how I'd like it to be done: Valve. A lot of people been on a tiff about Valve since the announcement of L4D2, but Valve has always been one of the smartest developers I know. Looking at Team Fortress 2 and Left 4 Dead though, we get something unusual on their release. Both games only had a handful of maps. Why? I can only theorize that Valve reached a similar conclusion and realized it could make a few maps very very well, or make a lot which would eventually have only a few maps rise to the top. It's more cost-effective, and it doesn't waste the consumer's time in going through maps most players groan through. Most of the content added in L4D and TF2 was either free, or optional. Map Packs arnt optional, no matter how much you'd like to think so. If you enjoy Halo, you're probably picking up each map-pack. Rarely though are the maps give really worth the bang for your buck, and instead you're picking it up because some game modes will cease to function if you are not 100% up to date. Gears of War 2 is also very much in the same boat, though not as extensive. You get people who dont have the newest map pack, and the ONE map worth playing on it is no longer available if you want to continue playing with that person. I cant speak for everyone, but I know this is often given that player alot of ridicule, be it laughable or offensive. It puts the player base with a few options, none of which are enjoyable: Stop playing the map pack which everyone else downloaded, stop playing with the player without the map pack, or pressure the person without the map pack to pick up so you can play the ONE good map out of it. Not a choice I want to be put in, not a choice developers should put it's consumer base in. - MacabreDerek

Brutal Legend: Quick Thoughts on EA vs. Activision

Mon, 08 Jun 2009 12:53:16 -0400

Hello there friend, Gonna make this quick. If you've been following the development of Brutal Legend, or even Dustin's Hard News, you'll know where this is going. EA has picked up the publishing rights to the game in question, and once it started stirring up the buzz, Activision (Who was the previously lined up publisher who made the decision NOT to publish the game) decided to pursue legal means. I don't often want to go on a moral stance, but I tend to subscribe a bit more to the 'Games is Art' argument, and as such, I feel any game that can be made should have a fair chance to reach the general market. If you can make a game, for better or worse, it should be made avalible to the people. Well, Activision is taking the capitalist approach. They have NO INTENTIONS on releasing Brutal Legend, but they want to claim Publishing Rights. What they want to do is deny EA an anticipated title, get some money for EA in a lawsuit as salt in the wounds, and as a bi-product leave Double Fine left bleeding resources on the side. - MacabreDerek

Games and Careers: The Will to Act.

Thu, 28 May 2009 11:56:22 -0400

Hello there friend, I'd like to talk to all of you G1s, and bring forth a bit of a discussion. The topic? The game industry and you. First I guess I should explain where this is coming from. The term 'Everybody's a critic' is a good summery, because it's true. Everyone has some gut reaction, some insight into the games we play every day. I also see every day someone who could be such an amazing asset to the game industry that I am astonished when they tell me about a game they love, what they wish was in the game or how it could have been a little better, and then move on to complaining about their job at McBurger Queen-Way. There seems to be this fictional barrier between the consumer who may look to the game industry. Such a thing does not exist. If you have a head on your shoulders that's proven to be competent logistical problem solving, you might find some amusement in programming. Remember that C++ stuff you were doing in high-school? A lot of it still applies today, and let's be honest, because of the interwebnetz, it's fairly easy to find reference material if you ever wanted to take it in depth. Or how about the person who draws a lot in the spare time? If you can learn 3-point perspective, and render an image to show shape and form, concept artists are always being hired on. Maybe you wanted to take it a bit further than that and develop yourself as a 3D artist? Modeling, Rigging, Texture Artists, Animators, Lighting, there are many jobs in there if you're willing to just do a little research and get started. What about the musician who's looking for actual work? Music and sound make a HUGE difference in any game. If you got a ear for what sounds 'right', there is a need for your talents. There's video editing, filming, design, and hundreds of other jobs that need to be fulfilled all around. One of the things that really get people nervous is getting the foot in the door. Well, for those of us in a major city of any kind, believe it or not, there is probably a small independent company or even gatherings such are held by http://www.igda.org/. It's meeting the people, and showing them what you can do. Showing you have something to bring to the table, and want to push forward. It's the opportunity to get involved in the games that enthrall us on a daily basis. On that note, I'd like to leave you with the words of Ra's al Ghul/Ducard: "The Training is nothing! The will is everything!... The will to act."

Starcraft 2: Battle Report #2 Observations

Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:22:17 -0400

The video in discussion: http://www.gametrailers.com/player/48118.html Hello there friend, One of the big games released during my childhood was StarCraft, where the 56.6K Modem was still considered a decent connection and dispite the fact Battle.net was hitting it's stride, if you could get away with it, direct connect was the way to play. Well I have the opportunity to look over the StarCraft 2 Battle Report #2, the first in-action look at the Zerg beyond small clips to my knowledge. First off, the game looks really nice, but that's not what I want to bring this discussion to. Instead, we're gonna discuss the units and strategies observed in the Battle Report. The map is called Blistering Sands, a Dueling (1 on 1) map that seems built symmetrical. It features players starting in opposing corners, has an easy to defend natural expansion, two yellow-mineral expansions (Extra income as oppose to blue), and a pair of Xel'Naga towers in the center which alow for easy recon. The big thing that came to mind is there are two ways into your first base, one covered by rocks and the other open leading to your first expansion. The Yellow-Mineral expansions are blocked by the same rock-type, which take a fair amount of damage in early game. Matt Cooper (Blue Zerg) begins by getting his Drones to start gathering minerals and sends his overlord out to scout, making a direct hover towards the Red Terran base(David Kim). Meanwhile, David Kim (Red Terran) aggressivly churns out SCVs, sending one of his 10 out to scout. I would guess it was his 7th or 8th SCV manufactured as it was half way across the map when the camera came back to his base. He also has a Supply Depot already created. First thing is both players as is standard in most games of StarCraft are trying to get intel. Neither goes for a true rush, which we would normally expect as a staple RTS maneuver (Particularly Zerg during the early days of StarCraft). David Kim is the first to get his Barracks down, which gives him the early option to go on the offensive. Matt Cooper spots the on-coming SCV with his Overlord, and so decides to hide his drone going for the early expansion, just in time so the SCV doesn't sit on the ideal spot to plant a new Hatchery. The Drone evades just enough to plant down the hatchery before the SCV has a chance to turn around and slow it's creation. This is the first thing that came to mind from what I remember playing vs. what I am seeing in these Battle Reports. A lot of micro-management and using little things most of us use to macro-management never applied. But I digress. The SCV does manage to delay the creation of a spawning pool by about five full seconds. Doesnt sound like alot of time, but in games like StarCraft, early game manuvers effect the long-term gameplans of the players. In this case, the delay means a large hitch in the Blue Zerg's plans. The Red Terran SCV places itself in a position to make a bunker near the choke point of the Blue Zerg natural expansion. Because of those 5 seconds of delayed spawning pool, the marine and SCV that were making their way across the map managed to gain a lot of ground before the Zerg managed to make Zerglings to defend themselves. This strategy is pretty much Offensive Bunkering at it's finest. It's enough to delay and distract Matt and his Zerg for the Terran. What really caught me as interesting though was Matt using his Zerglings and stemming the damage by trying to stop any more terrans from getting into that bunker while he amasses forces, including a Queen to destroy the troublesome Terran foothold. Now one of the more interesting choices here is Matt turning to the offensive. He doesn't want to loose any of his forces, and uses his few zerglings to poke at David's base. David's marines backed up with a few SCVs make the diffrence to drive off the small zerg force, and no casualties ensued. Instead, he opts to go for Banelings, an explosive version of the SC1's Infested Terran. He uses the Zerglings to bait his opponent into getting farther away from his base and side-swiping them with the banelings. When the remainder of the Zerg Force enters the terrain base however, it seems all this amazing micro managment, Matt tries to finish the one marine rather than get his baneling in among the now VERY crowded resource gathering SCVs. This was a strong gain that was not taken advantage of, and for all the good micro management, this is the one area that makes it feel more scripted than anything. The Terran Reapers, a new jump-pack, duel-pistol wielding unit that tears through light infantry is produced and a few of them aid in defending the Terrain base. The Terran then place a bunker at their natural expansion, finally able to get a foothold and get the resources flowing, as it seems they are falling behind the Zerg in the mineral department. The Zerglings now outside the Terran base begin to rush back and forth between attacking the rock in place of the Terran's second enterance to his main base, and the terrain's natural expansion choke point. It's clear Matt doesnt want any of David's units to get out and decides to do what he can to keep him contained. David's Terrans create a Supply Depot on the edge of the rock defending his second enterance to keep an eye on it. The reason for this is the terrain also has trees, which actually do block Line of Sight and as near as I can tell, affect Fog of War (The area a player can actually see what is going on in the map). It's at this point I think Matt gave up something very important. He has the mineral lead, and control of his opponents movements. If he would have built one more expansion, there would be no way for David to get out of his natural base, and Matt would be given the opportunity to take full control of the map with impunity. Instead, this harasment leads to the Terrans trying a large assault on the zerg forces. The terrans are meshed together tightly, the zerg are surrounding them, and banelings move in. The Reapers use DHR Charges, from the look of it a huge blast that equals the Banelings self-destruction, leaving a grand spectacle, but nothing much left to speak of as far as forces. This is where the tide begins to turn. The Terran have enough forces left to continue defending, but the Zerg are still struggling to keep them contained. A single Roach harass the SCVs, eventually destroyed. David Kim brings his Marauders and Marines trying to get some Recon using a Zel'Naga Watchtower in the center of the map. This is needed since he's been contained for so long, and over all was a good move. Matt's Zerg were also impressive, as they caught the Terran force and crushed it as it was reaching the tower. At this time, David Kim is also building Starport, knowing the only way out of his base at this point is up. Terran Banshees are produced, and begin to seal the Zerg's fate, immediately looking for expansions that are vulnerable, and snuffing out Matt's attempt at an expansion in the north. After some innitial recon and harassment, the Banshee's are supplimented by Nighthawks, a flying caster/detector. Nighthawks using an ability 'Hunter/Seeker Missile' to devistate the few Hydralisks (Old Classic Unit) which were the Zerg's only real defense against the air assault. The real pity here is that the micro-managment we see in the early part of the game is no longer as prominent, and instead the game becomes more desperate. One interesting bit that comes up is when a Hunter/Seeker Missile is released on some Roaches who, after running a bit, decide to burrow. Apparently being under ground does not protect you from this particular attack. The rest of it is there to see, but with the air advantage, mineral advantage, and unit advantage, the Terrans do what is expected and inevitably sweep in the natural expansion of the Zerg, Matt throwing up the GG to finalize it. First thing that struck me between SC1 and SC2 is the pacing. Though it may be the players behind the controls, or that they are running off a scripted battle, the game went 20 minutes without end-game units like Battle Cruisers or Ultralisks. This leads me to wonder about the pacing change in SC2, and what this is due to? It would seem that the unit cap is alot lower as well, which I figure comes from Warcraft 3 and Blizzard's attempt to micro-manage RTS's vs. Macro-manage. There were a few articles by David Sirlin (http://www.Sirlin.net) discussing the old-school vs. new-school (at the time) way of thinking in the game. Unfortunately it's been so long since I played StarCraft I have no had the opportunity to apply the theories presented. I look forward to SC2's release. The big question: Is all the hype legitimate or just another empty promise from the industry?

Competition: You're only as good as your best opponent.

Sun, 19 Apr 2009 16:38:07 -0400

Hello there friend, Let me tell you a theory of mine in the competitive multi-player world of video games: You're only as good as your best opponents. It's an interest of mine to watch n00bs and scrubs climb out of there first few matches of any competitive game and see where their skill develops. Let me use two games as examples for this curious theory: Gears of War 2 and Street Fighter 4. Gears of War 2, as with most shooters, has a skill and a strategy element. Skill coming in the form of marksmen, maneuvering, evasion, etc. Many new players will often have difficulty simply because these skills are not precise. However, something interesting happens if we take a group of hard-core Gears players and throw in a n00b. Yes, the n00b gets trounced, but because of this sudden skill-jump in his environment you'll find s/he takes on some interesting characteristics. You'll often after extensive play, find this player becoming more accurate, a little more nimble, and ALOT more evasive. Why is that? Couldnt they got the same results by playing with a bunch of casuals? Simply No. The competition among casuals does not DEMAND the excellence in skill level. Often the attitude is in a casual crowd "If I go in a shoot-out, shot-gun battle with this guy, he might kill me, but I might kill him!". In the higher levels of competition, it changes into "If I go into a shoot-out, shot-gun battle with this guy, he WILL kill me". This forces the player to now also pick and choose his battles. Where before he would run in guns blazing, shooting anything that moves, such actions does not allow any chance for victory against the more skilled player. Now he has to choose his fights, keep his distance, and look for his advantages in a fight. Now he's thinking by putting the odds in his favor. This could be by catching an opponents back or flank, or jumping into a fire-fight between his team mate and an opponent. Such a player has evolved now to have an understanding of the game where he is now effective enough in the team to pull his own wieght. So what happens when we bring in an even higher level of play, where the opponents have a 95% chance of taking your head off with a sniper rifle while you're in mid roll? Where you cant poke your head up without at least two people firing on you? Where you cant grab the 'power-weapons' because you will be downed and killed for the attempt? Such a player is now forced to evolve. He has to become more accurate, he has to communicate with his team, he has to know the map and the lines of sight offered with the most cover available. Now, let's take that player we just discussed, and throw him back into the casual crowd of shotty-battles and whole-team rush. He's now the more accurate, more evasive, more tactical, flat out the strongest player on the board. He's coming out with double digit kills every match, and his K/D ratio is through the rough. What happens? He gets stagnant. He doesn't have to get better because his environment, his competition, does not require it. Let's look at another game: Street Fighter. To many people, Fighters in general are a button mashing game type, where there is a character who's just broken and it's just a free win every time (Kabal from Mortal Kombat comes to mind). However, to many, including myself, fighters are the best test of skill. It removes many of the random elements, such as environment and team mates, and boils it down to just you against a single opponent, with nothing but the tool-set (Characters) you select. I have a young Street Fighter Prodigy on my friends list, who for his age(pre-teens) is absolutely amazing as far as his skill (His combos, set ups, execution), pulling off combos I cannot, able to understand spacing and it's vital role, understanding the game mechanics very well, and over all just has more tools in his character selection than in my own. Yet his Win/Loss ratio against me is 1/9. Is this because he sucks? Is it because I button mash my way out? Is it an act of the divine?! No. He put the time into practice mode and learned his combos. He played against his friends and computer, bringing his ability to execute these combos and set ups like no one's business. What he did not have is the competition, someone who plays without giving him opportunities to land these large combos. Someone who can trick him into doing a bad Dragon Punch manuver and punish him with an ultra combo on the way down. What he didn't have was someone who made him think beyond just the combos and cross-up setups. Someone who will poke at him and bait him and force him to change the way he plays. Now he is exposed to that and I look forward to seeing how he does. Stop and think for a minute if you consider yourself a hard-core gamer, what ever your competitive game. Are you that dominant? Do you find your self unstoppable and able to rack up the wins without much of an effort? How good are your best opponents? - Derek Leduc